jump to last post 1-10 of 10 discussions (33 posts)

"Obama concedes poor economy threatens Democrats": Yahoo!

  1. fishskinfreak2008 profile image60
    fishskinfreak2008posted 7 years ago

    Web-site/URL: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100909/ap_ … _elections

    Ultimately, this is what causes people to lose their jobs and therefore HEALTHCARE, Obama's top domestic priority

    1. dutchman1951 profile image62
      dutchman1951posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Why does this president equate Job loss to Political Parties and Politicians? Do his concerns extend only to his rich in office, with a job friends, or does he see real people at all.

      Human beings (Real People) or a Political game. Hist statements reflect his outlook.  What a loss to America he has become.

      1. weholdthesetruths profile image60
        weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        The president equates jobs to government action.   Having no understanding of, nor experience in business, private sector productivity, nor economics,  he believes it all runs by authoritarian fiat, where he speaks, people hire.    Obama's life has been one of adversarial relationship to productivity.   He's unable to change his mindset, he still thinks that the bad guys are the guys who write the checks, and if he can beat them down hard enough, things will improve. 

        Moronically stupid, but that's his every action.   All he's ever done is criticize and threaten industry.   And hire people who are adversarial to busienss and economic prosperity - or at least anyone who has it.

        1. profile image54
          ecriderposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Do you understand what deregulation did for the economy ?   Did you notice any tax cuts for the rich created any jobs ?

    2. lady_love158 profile image58
      lady_love158posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I'll be happy when Obama concedes that it's his policies that are the problem and only freedom and capitalism will get us out of this!

      1. Ralph Deeds profile image63
        Ralph Deedsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        The "problems" were handed to Obama by Bush. And the Party of No! has fought his every proposal for dealing with them.

        1. lady_love158 profile image58
          lady_love158posted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Oh god! Still singing that old tune? LOL Yup it's Bush's fault, so I guess the democrat that controlled congress since 2006 jsut passed everything Bush wanted?

          Please everyone knows the republicans can't stop anything! If they could do you think we'd have the socialist health care bill?

          1. Ralph Deeds profile image63
            Ralph Deedsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            The health care reform bill and the economic recovery plan would have been better if the Republicans had cooperated.

            1. Jim Hunter profile image61
              Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this


              1. Ralph Deeds profile image63
                Ralph Deedsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                There would have been a single payer plan and the stimulus package would not have been inadequate to do the job.

          2. Jim Hunter profile image61
            Jim Hunterposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            "Oh god! Still singing that old tune?"

            They will sing it as long as they are told to.

            The problem they face is no one is listening anymore.

            Government is the problem not the solution.

        2. profile image50
          joe scaliseposted 7 years agoin reply to this

          Ralph is right not only was Obama handed the problem it was done strategically by the Bush admin. so that it would become Obamas' bailout and the denyers that Bush was the worst president in the history of this country can say "still singing that old tune".

          1. Ravaged Nation profile image60
            Ravaged Nationposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            For the sake of argument lets just say that Mr. Deeds and Mr. Scalise are both correct in their statement "Bush handed Obama huge deficits." What Obama has done is to spend more than all the other president's from Washington to Reagan combined. For the record, there were plenty of Republicans screaming that George Bush was spending like the proverbial drunken sailor. Spending to the tune of trillions cannot continue. It has kept the economy depressed. Businesses operate in fear of what is next. Is it Cap and Trade? Lord help us if it is. We will be a nation of 20% unemployment for generations as countries like Korea and China continue to disregard the environmental policies the west wants to impose on itself.

            1. Ralph Deeds profile image63
              Ralph Deedsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

              Bush not only handed Obama huge deficits, but also an economy falling into a bottomless pit of a recession, the worst since the 1930s. Deficits were called for by all orthodox economists, Democrat and Republican, in order to revive the economy and prevent the recession becoming a depression. The only arguments were over the form of and size of Obama's stimulus package. Many like Nobel prize economists Krugman and Stiglitz thought Obama's package was too small and were probably correct. The current uproar over the deficit, not heard under Bush, is political noise, not economics.

              1. habee profile image95
                habeeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                Where ya been, Ralph?? Plenty of financial conservatives were berating Bush's spending!

                1. Ralph Deeds profile image63
                  Ralph Deedsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  That's true. But they should have been berating his tax cuts while conducting two wars and starting a bunch of new programs. I remember taking scrap to school and buying war bonds and savings stamps and sticking them in booklets during WWII.

                  1. habee profile image95
                    habeeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                    I've heard my dad talk about all the sacrifices during WWII. Can you imagine Americans doing stuff like that now? We're too spoiled. Most of the "Greatest Generation" has expired.

      2. profile image54
        ecriderposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        The freedom to do what , rape and rob the system when ever they choose ?   Do you call deregulation --- freedom ?

  2. profile image0
    cosetteposted 7 years ago

    if the President is so concerned about 'boosting the economy', why did he give the First Lady 10 billion dollars for her pet 'childhood obesity' project? ten billion dollars would be better spent creaing jobs. just yesterday 15,000 people here in arizona lined up in the heat to get jobs at McDonald's.

    1. Flightkeeper profile image72
      Flightkeeperposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Or to fund that health care bill that was not funded?

    2. weholdthesetruths profile image60
      weholdthesetruthsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Think about this.   If someone handed me 500,000 dollars, I would invest it in my business... first, infrastructure, and then marketing.   In 3-6 mo, I would  hire one person, and in 3-6 more months, another.   These people would be permanent hires, permanent jobs.   My business provides services that improve people's lives and producitivity and saves them money.   

      That's about 250K a job.   But, the job is permanent and requires no continuing subsidy.   

      "Job training" programs run by the government cost anywhere from 100K to 1 million per job, sometimes more.    Yet, all that spent money creates NOT A SINGLE JOB.   It just gives people a slightly more marginal "hireability" than they had before. 

      If the stimulous had worked,  or if that money had been properly USED,  700 billion is enough for people like me to create 28 MILLION new jobs.  Yet, employment FELL by several million.   

      So, for those of you who are for the "stimulous", please note the fantastic waste of capital, TO A NET NEGATIVE RESULT.    Almost any business owner can create a permanent job for between 200 and 400k investment, and that's doing something useful and productive.   

      And then remember that Democrats want to tax business owners, by confiscating more than 1/3 of every dollar they have to invest  toward a new job hire.    All jobs created by business are created with AFTER TAX DOLLARS.   And NUMBSKULL Obama wants to raise that tax, diverting the money from them, to more spending like his stimulus.   

      Those of you who support him can perhaps understand now, the reason why the adults are so fed up with the stupidity.

      1. profile image0
        jerrylposted 7 years agoin reply to this


        If Obama hadn't been elected,  who would you say should have taken his place?

        How would he/she have kept this economy from going into a deep depression?

        How would he/she have paid for the cost of 2 unfunded wars?

        How would he/she have gotten us out of the financial mess that the
        greedy bankers put us into with their loaning to people at 125% of the value of their homes?  Sub prime mortgages?

        Please explain in detail how your choice of president would have done
        any better than (as you call him, numbskull Obama) did, in 2 years?

        Remember, Obama was consulting with the same experts that all politicians do.  Namely, Barnanke and the fed res. and other economists.

        I would like to hear your solutions to the problem, and where the money to
        pave the way to prosperity will come from?  Details please!!!

        You are good at dishing out criticism, now how about some solutions!!!!!

        If you know our current policies are wrong, you must have some sort of solution.

        I personally believe that both parties are in cahoots and take orders from the fed res and wall street.

      2. profile image54
        ecriderposted 7 years agoin reply to this

        We need to tax the rich who profited from deregulation in order to cut the national debt.   Most of them pocketed the profits and didn't reinvest to create jobs.

  3. Jim Hunter profile image61
    Jim Hunterposted 7 years ago

    "Obama concedes poor economy threatens Democrats"

    Man he's smart roll

  4. tobey100 profile image61
    tobey100posted 7 years ago

    As usual, he's the last one to figure it out!

  5. profile image53
    Lisafrequencyposted 7 years ago

    I think the dems will hold their own.

  6. I am DB Cooper profile image56
    I am DB Cooperposted 7 years ago

    This should be an interesting election. You've got a struggling economy on the one hand, which always hurts the ruling party. On the other side, you've got tea partiers making a mess of the GOP and possibly scaring away moderate conservatives.

  7. soldout1 profile image59
    soldout1posted 7 years ago

    What Is there to say about the core of a Government that has always had corruption at its root from her conception. Honestly from the time Obama begin to run for office I was surprised. He came from out no where. He was selected to carry the burdens of a very damaged and almost unrepairable Economy. Let's be honest' America was in trouble or going down hill long before he arrived on the seen. This was the perfect timing to vote for a Black Man. I'm not a racist but a realist. I to have many Bloodlines running through my vains . The moment I found out a black man had any chance of becoming President, I knew it was because of America's

    Unrepairable state. This country has diminshed her repretation across the World. What better way to restore Her Honor except with the appearance of change. If America is to descend any further. Wouldn't it look better if She reached her lowest disgrace in the hand of a black man. Come on' who can repair the extreme damage done to this economy in just two years? You're kidding me right ? This was a purposed plan. Obama signed up to run this country at Her most critical stage in history, with the manure of America dumped in his lap'Oh sh was smelling bad long before he stepped in. And he was given two years to clean it up. No' I am not surprise at America's response, look at her history across the globe. History speaks for itself. Obama never had a chance unless he was a miracle worker.

  8. Ralph Deeds profile image63
    Ralph Deedsposted 7 years ago

    With Larry Summers gone from his post as Obama's chief economic adviser, maybe government policy will improve. He's the one who recommended an inadequate stimulus program out of misplaced concern about the effect of a bigger stimulus on U.S. government bonds.

    1. soldout1 profile image59
      soldout1posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I just think these guys felt an intensive need to do something in a very desperate time. Wisdom saids that we can not make concrete discisions in desperate times. Mr. Summers knew that the real responsibilty would fall back on Obama. America will always look to the President to blame seeing that he chose Larry Summer to be his advisor.

  9. Mighty Mom profile image85
    Mighty Momposted 7 years ago

    Latest is that businesses are taking advantage of availability of loans and stockpiling the money. Not hiring anyone. Just sitting on a pot of gold waiting for the economy to get better.
    Yeah. I totally trust the free enterprise system and business owners to "do the right thing" and put Americans back to work.
    They don't give a sh#t about workers. They only care about making more money for themselves and keeping it.

  10. JON EWALL profile image73
    JON EWALLposted 7 years ago

    Beck: Taxing Times Video Tue, 5 Oct 2010
    Mr. Goosly explained President Barak Obama's position on the George W. Bush tax cuts on foxnews.com on the Glen Beck's show.
    A program worth NOT MISSING about the TAX debate.