I'm sorry but first the guy spends 787 billion on a stimulus bill that everyone on the right said wouldn't work and it didn't. Then he spends 2.5 trillion on a health care bill everyone on the right said wouldn't lower health care costs and now experts agree. That same bill which CBO says is going to cost more then they projected, probably over 10 trillion once it's up and running. Now a federal reform of the financial industry which will cost who knows, another 250 billion and soon a carbon cap and trade bill to cost what, maybe another trillion? So first Obama takes what is a bad situation and then proceeds to make it multiple times worse and then has the nerve to say we have have to act to fix it!!
I swear it would be funny if it wasn't true!!!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100427/ap_ … commission
Does that fine print below say Speaker of the House?
And isn't the Bureau of Labor Statistics a part of a government controlled by Obama and Co?
Trustworthy sources I'm sure
The Dow this month cracked 11,000.
From Bloomberg - Business Week - April 25
The Commerce Department’s advance estimate of first-quarter GDP is due April 30. The world’s largest economy grew at the fastest pace in six years during the last three months of 2009 after expanding at a 2.2 percent rate in the third quarter.
For all of 2009, the economy shrank 2.4 percent in 2009, the worst single-year performance since 1946.
Consumer spending probably increased at a 3.1 percent annual rate last quarter, almost double the 1.6 percent pace of the previous three months, the GDP report is also projected to show."
If you bother to look at objective facts, we ARE turning it around!!!!!!!!!!!!
That proves absolutely nothing about the stimulus. Economies naturally cycle.
The post was about cutting the deficit and the national debt blah blah blah
No one can argue that Obama didn't grow both factors more than Bush blah blah blah
Do you really believe gov't statistics? Wasn't it Obama that said; we had no real idea of the situation when we got into office. They were privy to everything previously.
You cannot give credit merely to a person being in office. You have to able to cite economic policies of an administration that affected the economy. For example, if you believe the economy is turning around, then you must give credit to the TARP programs that were started under Bush and continued by Obama. It's incorrect to blame Bush and then praise Obama. Of course, it may be too early to really know if TARP was good, or did it start a "lost decade" in the U.S.
Bush made many mistakes (the Iraq war being the foremost), but I don't believe you can blame him for the economic meltdown. It was Bill Clinton who repealed the Glass-Stegall act that everyone seems desperate to re-enact. Congress failed to regulate CDO (credit default swaps) after the collapse Long Term Capital Management (LTCM) in 1998 (we bailed them out too). Freddie and Fannie forced lenders to take on subprime loans. We have many contributing factors, and nothing that can be laid squarely at the feet of the white house.
I agree with Ron! He is completely aware of what he is doing to our Country!
It's not rocket science! Anybody that has to support a household knows what it takes. If your income goes down you have to cut spending or find a way to make more money.
Now after Obama launches trillions in new entitlements he decides we have to cut the deficit and the only ways to do that are cut spending which means entitlements, or raise taxes, which means another one of his promises will be broken and in doing so he will injure our already wounded and fragile economy.
Really what a dope! Did it EVER occur to him before we spent all that money that we couldn't afford to spend it? What was the point of the tax cuts and new entitlements if you knew you would only have to cut entitlement later and raise taxes?
Obama took a bad situation and made it worse and then the gutless coward hired a commission to tell him what he surely must have already known to begin with! And you liberals want MORE government???
Isn't it a bit ironic that "conservatives" claim to want less government but, in reality, want plenty more of it (beefed up military, police & criminal justice, drug enforcement, surveillance, etc.)?
Your replies are too deep for me, and I don't have the time to read them.
Maybe republicans do but conservatives DON"T!
Its not that Ironic, the Federal Government is SUPPOSED to provide for the nations defense!
I don't want surveillance of anyone or anything!
Was the $1 trillion Iraq War a defensive war?
Depends on how you look at it, had Saddam Hussein ever threatened any of our allies? Yes! So in our allies defense we took him out.
How much would it cost to take out all the dictators that have threatened an ally? (And how much does that work out to per US citizen?)
If Congress wouldn't blow a head gasket and the liberals looked the other way taking out dictators would be relatively cheap.
State sanctioned assassinations couldn't cost that much!
History lesson: who forbade political assassinations? What party was he?
You have a discomfiting pattern of shooting your own arguments in the foot.
I believe it was Reagan. I didn't say anything about Democrats I said Congress as in both houses of, Congress in general!
Didn't shoot anything in the foot!
Most liberals would be against this sort of action. I was simply addressing the question of cost.
It wasn't something we should have done. We should never stop ruthless dictators from killing their own people!
Really? $1 trillion to depose a dictator that has either threatened an ally or killed his own people. Sounds like a bargain! How much more will taxpayers have to shell out?
I don't know, perhaps another trillion before we're out of there. It's amazing to think half of the total of all the military spending by every country in the world is made by the USA. Something like 30% of that is spent as foreign aid. I'd say there's plenty of room in that budget to eek out some savings, and it could be very big savings if we close all our bases and bring our military home.
Was your reply to me a few posts prior sarcastic, or do you not support using the US military to depose dictators?
If Saddam killed his own people, then so did Abraham Lincoln during the civil war.
Saddam gassed and bombed the Kurds. These are a people who want to take part of Eastern Turkey and Northern Iraq and form a new Kurdish country. Sound similar to what happened in 1861?
And FYI: Turkey is not happy with the U.S. government providing aid to the Kurds, because the kurds have stepped up their plans in Turkey. And that is a shame because Turkey is one of the few (if not only) Islamic states that supports the U.S.
Don't believe the nightly news the political machine. The Kurds are not helpless victims portrayed on TV. They were painted that way in the media because it served the political agenda.
Turkey is almost exactly the same as Saudi Arabia, except that the women don't have to wear the chador and they can drive cars. The people of Turkey LOATHE the US and Americans as much as Saudis do, and in both countries, only the government cooperates with the US.
About US the country: http://pewglobal.org/database/?indicator=1
About Americans: http://pewglobal.org/database/?indicato … mode=chart
(Turks rate the lowest among all surveyed countries)
Considering the Turks' decades-long violent suppression of Kurdish autonomy, then yes, I'd imagine they have reason to worry now that Iraqi Kurds want to secure their own homeland.
" The people of Turkey LOATHE the US and Americans as much as Saudis do, and in both countries, only the government cooperates with the US."
That is a gross and ridiculous generalization.
Did you ignore the Pew poll, or are you dismissing its conclusions because you have access to better statistics?
No, I have 'access' to dozens and dozens of both Saudis and Turks who I have known personally who harbor anything but hatred for the US.
You know, real human beings. Remember those?
Dozens eh? I would think more likely 1 or 2!
You don't have to act so boorish. We're having an online discussion. You need to learn how to be civil with people you disagree with.
If you have several Saudi and Turkish friends who have a favorable opinion of the US and/or Americans, then apparently they're among a small minority among their countrymen.
That's not what they tell me. In fact, from what these many, many fine people have told me the people in their countries - as in mine - hold a range of opinions on a range of topics. Apparently they are actual human beings and not one-dimensional 'extras' for your political bias.
No one has the balls to tackle the real issue. The Central Bank.
Just sit back and watch the EU implode. Then if there is time at least we will have a model of failure to emulate.
The people who control the money supply control the "Debt Slaves".
And there is a huge push to remove personal liberty and freedoms so that when the collapse comes the people will be under military control... that is if they are successful at removing guns from the people.
Anyone who thinks that the debt can be repaid is fooling themselves. It's now just a matter of time until the big crash.
Mike thinks we are going back on the Gold Standard which we quit in like - 1910 - because he thinks the experiment of the Federal Reserve System (now 95 years old) obviously hasn't worked. Right????
I'm felin' sorry for that dead, dead horse he keeeeeps beating.
Gosh, Ron, you're awfully loquacious today. Hope you're well.
Obama is clueless about the things that are important. I'm still waiting for the economy to truly turn around and substantial jobs to be created. I also am wating to see an effort to pass the energy bill (more jobs here...)
What a waste of energy and money on heath care. Good god!
When will the Republicans become true republicans? Me thinks the libertarians are on the right track. Enough with Obama's government spending tactics. (our money)
Before 1950 Americans saved and owned. Since then they have fallen into the Debt trap where everything is owned by Bankers.
If you look at the problems in the world economy they can all be tied to borrowing without the ability to repay.
This CAN NOT occur without Fractional Reserve Banking. There are 110 Central Banks in the world. And those select few bankers own everything.
Citizens of the World are nothing more than Debt Slaves feeding the Wealthy Elite.
Obama works for the Wealthy Elite. His agenda is their agenda. And what they fear most is autonomy and personal freedoms. Controlling people is their agenda. They want to keep everyone as debt slaves.
I keep hearing the 'debt slaves' tripe. The bankers are not out to *get* us. Becoming obsessive about a single group as the sole source of all problems be it Mexicans or bankers prevents objective analysis of what IS happening. That's why I prefer a good argument with a citation to facts rather than an unnamed source or a wild rant that isn't woth the electons sacrificed to display the characters on the screen.
If Mike has thunk up a new monetary system - or if he thiks we should go to barter, he should propose a solution. If Mike has some suggestion what group (other than bankers) should run the Federal Reserve (which is the national bank) I would like to know what group that would be.
William R. Wilson and Doug Hughes
The chart that you posted ‘’ America is on a path to Economic Recovery ‘’ was interesting because it really exposes the results of the Democrats taking control of Congress. From Jan 2008 to Jan 2008 job lost was at it highest.
The Democrats took over Congress in Jan 2007 and it only took a year for the economy to go in the dumps. Economist have said that the recession began in Dec 2007 .
Wow! What happened.
1.Freddie and Fannie forced lenders to take on sub prime loans
Result start of future mortgage crisis
2.In Nov 1999 Bill Clinton Congress repealed the Glass-Stegall act that everyone seems desperate to re-enact. Hedge funds speculator investments in oil speculation prices.
Note When the Democrats took over in Jan 2007 they were confident that permits to pump oil would not be approved hence oil prices shot up to $4.00 a gal ( oil speculation ).
3.Democrats approved legislation to start ethanol production which created a corn shortage in the food chain. Result was that food prices escalated.
The results of the above in a failing economy resulted in the start of the great recession.
The blame was placed on the President and 8 years of Republican control of the economy.
To be fair ,both sides need take blame. The last 2 years of the Bush administration and the Democrat controlled congress did not do a good job.
In Jan 2009 the Democrats took over super majority of our government. As of today, unemployment is close to 10% a lot more than 4.6% when the Republicans were in control.
Bush left office with a $ 625 billion deficit ( excluded the $700 billion tarp only because the funding has been repaid )
After 16 months of the Obama/Democrat Congress the deficit for the first year was $ 1.3 billion, the 2nd year the results are similar.
We can only hope for a better future for our nation.
We don't need a new monetary system. We simply need to remove the secret bankers from the equation. Control of the United States Money Supply should be out in the light of day and in the hands of the People. The congress should be making monetary decisions based on the will of the people good or bad.
And if you are not a debt slave... then answer this.
Do you own your home free and clear? Do you own your automobiles free and clear? Do you have any credit cards?
Americans are debt slaves working month to month. Everything they own is purchased on time and owned with "monthly payments".
This is where there is $26 Trillion in personal debt.
When you are in debt to any institution you are a slave to that institution.
The average guy is clueless about compound interest and debt in general... they is why Commercial Banks can rape the public with 17+ % Interest on Credit Cards.
So again... anyone here own their home outright? The Car? Free and Clear and not using any credit cards?
Without Fractional Reserve Banking there would be no Financial Crisis and the people would own their assets. Title to everything of value wouldn't be sitting in Banks. It's really that simple.
by shazz01109 10 years ago
Any people who are part of the TEA Parties here, what is your issue/complaint with either or both of the major Parties?
by Alexander A. Villarasa 6 years ago
The close to $450 million website, and the chaotic rollout of ObamaCare only re-enforces the now common perception that the president's major domestic governmental intervention is a massive failure. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.And like the iceberg that sank the Titanic, ...
by OLYHOOCH 9 years ago
No comment from me, YET.https://picasaweb.google.com/dcxweb/201 … 2929246946
by Jack Lee 3 years ago
This question is addressed to the TDS crowd. What do I mean about this question? Suppose Trump achieve even 50% of his goals in the first two years.Suppose the economic policies lead to more jobs, better pay and increased wealth for all people both at the top and the middle and even the bottom of...
by SportsBetter 7 years ago
Freedom of choice or government entitlements and regulations?
by SparklingJewel 9 years ago
I truly want to know if these are valid reasons...or are they perspective on what "could" happen, or just totally absurd possibilities. If you have proof to validate or deny these reasonings, I genuinely would like to hear them?Here are just some of them, from a conservatives view: ...
Copyright © 2020 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|