U2 Feedback

U2 Feedback (http://www.u2interference.com/forums/)
-   Free Your Mind Archive (http://www.u2interference.com/forums/f290/)
-   -   Obama General Discussion, vol. 3 (http://www.u2interference.com/forums/f290/obama-general-discussion-vol-3-a-210448.html)

kramwest1 06-03-2011 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by INDY500 (Post 7226836)

I'll give them one month with a road bump (obviously because I support the guy).

But, if the employment rate goes up again next month, I expect a push for more stimuli. The tax cuts ain't doing it. (Surprise! Supply-side economics is bullshit.)

Canadiens1131 06-04-2011 12:40 AM

No President has ever been reelected with an unemployment rate over 7%. I think Obama may be the first one, if Mittens is the best the GOP can shove forward.

Whether it was President Obama or President McCain / President Palin (lol) governing during this financial crisis, a huge bailout would have been passed. Politicians, left or right, will always push the panic button during a financial crisis because their constituents demand it.

Economics is not a short-term game, obsessing over monthly numbers is something for the pundits and pollsters.

BVS 06-04-2011 12:54 AM

:up:

INDY500 06-04-2011 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kramwest1 (Post 7226850)
I'll give them one month with a road bump (obviously because I support the guy).

But, if the employment rate goes up again next month, I expect a push for more stimuli.

What were we promised by the administration unemployment rates would be at this point if we passed the 2009 stimulis bill? Never above 8 and under 7 by mid 2011 wasn't it?

Surprise! Keynesian economics leads to inefficient expenditures of capital.

Quote:

The tax cuts ain't doing it. (Surprise! Supply-side economics is bullshit.)
Do you really wanna compare the Reagan recovery vs the Obama recovery? :no:

Earnie Shavers 06-04-2011 10:17 AM

"So, the Reagan Recovery (something something something) and THAT is how we ended up needing the Obama Recovery!"

Irvine511 06-04-2011 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by INDY500 (Post 7227356)
Do you really wanna compare the Reagan recovery vs the Obama recovery? :no:



Obama is much more popular now than Regan was at this point in his term, and Obama inherited a much deeper recession and he inherited much deeper deficits.

in 1984 the economy started to heat up, but in 1982/3, not so much.

but we'll see. :shrug: while the 7% point is a good marker, it's not so perfect in that unemployment was actually higher in 1984 than it was in 1980, but because it had gone down, Reagan looked effectual.

kramwest1 06-04-2011 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by INDY500 (Post 7227356)
Do you really wanna compare the Reagan recovery vs the Obama recovery? :no:

I'd love to compare income tax rates between Reagan's and Obama's admins. :yes:

Tax cuts for the rich don't stimulate the economy. You need to get the money into the hands of the people who spend it and create demand, that's mostly the lower and middle classes.

Irvine511 06-04-2011 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kramwest1 (Post 7227390)
I'd love to compare income tax rates between Reagan's and Obama's admins. :yes:


:up:

or even with Eisenhower, where the top tax bracket was 91%.

INDY500 06-04-2011 12:01 PM

Tax rates and taxes actually collected are 2 different things. That's how GE pays no taxes.

Reagan lowered the rates but closed loopholes and ended deductions. You used to be able to deduct credit card interest for instance. As a whole these were revenue neutral but the effect was to explode economic growth which expanded the tax base (put people to work) and increased tax revenue.

INDY500 06-04-2011 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Irvine511 (Post 7227389)
Obama is much more popular now than Regan was at this point in his term, and Obama inherited a much deeper recession and he inherited much deeper deficits.

in 1984 the economy started to heat up, but in 1982/3, not so much.

but we'll see. :shrug: while the 7% point is a good marker, it's not so perfect in that unemployment was actually higher in 1984 than it was in 1980, but because it had gone down, Reagan looked effectual.

Granted no two recessions or recoveries are the same. Obama must deal with a debt and housing crisis but Reagan inherited double digit inflation and interest rates. The difference is Reagan didn't go for the quick fix, his monetary policies actually slowed the recovery until late 1982 which is why the GOP lost big in the mid-terms. But starting in 1983 until the time of his reelection real GDP grew at almost 8% and more than 5 million jobs (in a smaller economy) were created.

Irvine511 06-04-2011 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by INDY500 (Post 7227409)
Granted no two recessions or recoveries are the same. Obama must deal with a debt and housing crisis but Reagan inherited double digit inflation and interest rates. The difference is Reagan didn't go for the quick fix, his monetary policies actually slowed the recovery until late 1982 which is why the GOP lost big in the mid-terms. But starting in 1983 until the time of his reelection real GDP grew at almost 8% and more than 5 million jobs (in a smaller economy) were created.



i have no crystal ball and i have no idea what's going to happen. it can be plausibly argued that we've averted a second great depression, as well as saved Detroit, and the economy is substantially better today than it was in 2008 and 2009, and we may need to adjust to a new understanding of unemployment, though it is a lagging indicator of economic health.

however, i don't think the average person -- American or not -- really knows all that much about politics, domestic or foreign. there are some hot button issues that are a matter of identity, but i think most people in the middle simply look at their paychecks, their pocketbooks, and their immediate needs and make an evaluation.

if i were to water down the next election to the bare, basic choice, i'd say that Obama is going to argue that things are substantially better in 2012 than they were in 2008, and Romney is going to argue that they should be better than they are.

in a way, Reagan got that right: "are you better off now than you were four years ago?"

mobvok 06-04-2011 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by INDY500 (Post 7227356)
What were we promised by the administration unemployment rates would be at this point if we passed the 2009 stimulis bill? Never above 8 and under 7 by mid 2011 wasn't it?

Surprise! Keynesian economics leads to inefficient expenditures of capital.

The unemployment rate was already surging higher than expected just after the stimulus was signed. As it was impossible for the X hundred billion dollars in funds to be immediately distributed in a meaningful fashion, that strikes me as pretty good evidence that the downturn was actually far more severe then the designers projected.

MrsSpringsteen 06-07-2011 09:40 AM

Honestly I don't understand how anyone could give him positive marks on the economy and deficit

washingtonpost.com


The public opinion boost President Obama received after the killing of Osama bin Laden has dissipated, and Americans’ disapproval of how he is handling the nation’s economy and the deficit has reached new highs, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

The survey portrays a broadly pessimistic mood in the country this spring as higher gasoline prices, sliding home values and a disappointing employment picture have raised fresh concerns about the pace of the economic recovery.

By 2 to 1, Americans say the country is pretty seriously on the wrong track, and nine in 10 continue to rate the economy in negative terms. Nearly six in 10 say the economy has not started to recover, regardless of what official statistics may say, and most of those who say it has improved rate the recovery as weak.

New Post-ABC numbers show Obama leading five of six potential Republican presidential rivals tested in the poll. But he is in a dead heat with former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who formally announced his 2012 candidacy last week, making jobs and the economy the central issues in his campaign.

Among all Americans, Obama and Romney are knotted at 47 percent each, and among registered voters, the former governor is numerically ahead, 49 percent to 46 percent.

Overall, about six in 10 of those surveyed give Obama negative marks on the economy and the deficit. Significantly, nearly half strongly disapprove of his performance in these two crucial areas. Nearly two-thirds of political independents disapprove of the president’s handling of the economy, including — for the first time — a slim majority who do so strongly.

In another indicator of rapidly shifting views on economic issues, 45 percent trust congressional Republicans over the president when it comes to dealing with the economy, an 11-point improvement for the GOP since March. Still, nearly as many, 42 percent, side with Obama on this issue.

The president has sought to point to progress on the economy, particularly in the automobile industry, and to argue that the policies he put in place at the beginning of his term are working. But the combined effects of weak economic indicators and dissatisfaction among the public are adding to the political pressures on the White House as the president’s advisers look toward what could be a difficult 2012 reelection campaign.

Meanwhile, Romney emerges in the new survey as the strongest current or prospective Republican candidate in the 2012 presidential field. Although he is by no means in a secure spot, on virtually every measure, the former governor appears better positioned than any of his rivals.

Irvine511 06-07-2011 10:05 AM

^ the above comes after Romney's launch and what was a very, very bad week for the economy. i'd imagine the numbers will continue to fluctuate as the economy improves (or doesn't).

it does seem, for now, that Romney will be the best general candidate to run against Obama because of his perceived economic expertise. again, that's "perceived." but i will say, and i said in 2008, that although Romney makes my skin crawl, he is a very smart, rational person and i'd rather the country in his hands than W, Palin, McCain, or pretty much any other Republican out there.

let's see if the GOP base agrees.

MrsSpringsteen 06-07-2011 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Irvine511 (Post 7230780)
but i will say, and i said in 2008, that although Romney makes my skin crawl, he is a very smart, rational person and i'd rather the country in his hands than W, Palin, McCain, or pretty much any other Republican out there.

Never thought I'd have to say this but I agree. I wonder what people would think if they really looked into what he did at Bain and how he made his money. And into some of the things he did in MA. But as far as govt is concerned, he really benefits from the comparison to people like Palin.

I don't think it was just a bad week for the economy-I think it will just get worse.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:33 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com