deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 3, 2012 17:30:43 GMT -5
and I agree with him, what he is asking is a easy one..yet I beleive the other side will not listen to him and will disregard his request. Hopefully the American public will recognize this and file it away for action when it comes time to vote next November.. The problems are not over, as he admits. To many out of work or underemployed or even dropped out of looking for work, but things are getting better and where as he , the position, gets blamed for the bad, well it, IMHO, shhould get the credit for the good and especially when not one thing has come from the other side in almost four, a bit over three years actually , that is a positive in helping out in this situatio of bad problems we have faced..that I am afraid is the facts..and the truth... So hopefully they won't try to Muck it up... [ Don't count on it though..they will give it a shot.. ]
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 19, 2024 9:53:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2012 17:35:10 GMT -5
If his administration has caused the recession to last longer, but jobs eventually come back, he doesn't deserve credit for the jobs coming back. He deserves to take responsibility for keeping them from coming back sooner.
But lucky for him, most voters have no clue how the economy works. So he'll get the credit you want him to have.
Also, he was talking to Congress, not "the other side".
|
|
rockon
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 8:49:55 GMT -5
Posts: 2,384
|
Post by rockon on Feb 3, 2012 18:00:51 GMT -5
Not to mention he has from my perspective created most of his own muck. There is no reason to expect bi partisanship when you constantly blame the other side for everything bad in the universe.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 3, 2012 18:06:59 GMT -5
"Also, he was talking to Congress, not "the other side"."
Cone on now Bob...while there may be some Democrats who are not on the same playing field with all of the POTUS ideas and wants , when you have one side who is , on most votes , 100 % against anything at all that he or his party might purpose, in my book , that is the other side..you want to play the game of in this case the semantics of..be my guest, just leave me out of it, don't have the time or the inclination of..
As far as your thinking it's his legislation that cost s the jobs..how so, which pieces of legislation caused this to last longer?
I see it was his and his party's doings that got help for the unemployed..continued the unemployment benefits..the stimulus that kept so many teachers, police, fire people on the job.. some stupid spending too but was that he or the Congressional , what ever party , with their pet projects..
As far as the dissing of American voters , I don't feel they are as clueless as you think they are and I wonder if you are not as brilliant as you are suggesting you are as the one who really knows what is what..
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 3, 2012 18:11:03 GMT -5
If his administration has caused the recession to last longer, but jobs eventually come back, he doesn't deserve credit for the jobs coming back. He deserves to take responsibility for keeping them from coming back sooner. But lucky for him, most voters have no clue how the economy works. So he'll get the credit you want him to have. Also, he was talking to Congress, not "the other side". bob- the GOP should have let him have his way. using your logic, if they had, things would be way worse, now- since he was not able to get through hardly anything that he wanted. they did him a huge favor.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Feb 3, 2012 18:11:38 GMT -5
I don't understand, is this in regards to what topic?
Anyway, I don't blame Obama for the recession, he didn't come into office until it was well underway. But I view the recovery more of happening in spite of Obama instead of because of Obama. His policies made it last longer and more severe than it had to be.
|
|
Sum Dum Gai
Senior Associate
Joined: Aug 15, 2011 15:39:24 GMT -5
Posts: 19,892
|
Post by Sum Dum Gai on Feb 3, 2012 18:13:32 GMT -5
His policies made it last longer and more severe than it had to be. Which ones?
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 3, 2012 18:13:53 GMT -5
Not to mention he has from my perspective created most of his own muck. There is no reason to expect bi partisanship when you constantly blame the other side for everything bad in the universe. When I look and see 100 % voting in a block on all legislation..as if there is absolutly no one who can agree on anything that is proposed..hell, the Dems do break some what and it seems there is always a few who will differ, but pubs, NEVER EVER..and they HAVE said that their main objective , only objective when it comes down to it is a change in leadership in the office..no matter what..the countrys business, well being is secondary... to me that sucks...and if it was coming from the dems side I would feel the same way...yet so many here feel it is appropriate behavior...and now I guess I will get some one with the .. " Oh yeah, what about how they criticized Bush over his terms of eight years..yadda, yada.."
|
|
usaone
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 9:10:23 GMT -5
Posts: 3,429
|
Post by usaone on Feb 3, 2012 18:25:56 GMT -5
If his administration has caused the recession to last longer, but jobs eventually come back, he doesn't deserve credit for the jobs coming back. He deserves to take responsibility for keeping them from coming back sooner. But lucky for him, most voters have no clue how the economy works. So he'll get the credit you want him to have. Also, he was talking to Congress, not "the other side". Considering the condition of the housing market, it's a miracle that we have had any recovery. Not sure we could expect a recovery much earlier.
|
|
usaone
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 9:10:23 GMT -5
Posts: 3,429
|
Post by usaone on Feb 3, 2012 18:29:00 GMT -5
If his administration has caused the recession to last longer, but jobs eventually come back, he doesn't deserve credit for the jobs coming back. He deserves to take responsibility for keeping them from coming back sooner. But lucky for him, most voters have no clue how the economy works. So he'll get the credit you want him to have. Also, he was talking to Congress, not "the other side". bob- the GOP should have let him have his way. using your logic, if they had, things would be way worse, now- since he was not able to get through hardly anything that he wanted. they did him a huge favor. I agree. I still don't understand why a handful of Tea Party Republicans blocked the debt deal in August. 4 Trillion in cuts are a lot better than nothing and if it didn't help, they could have used it against Obama.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 3, 2012 18:39:39 GMT -5
bob- the GOP should have let him have his way. using your logic, if they had, things would be way worse, now- since he was not able to get through hardly anything that he wanted. they did him a huge favor. I agree. I still don't understand why a handful of Tea Party Republicans blocked the debt deal in August. 4 Trillion in cuts are a lot better than nothing and if it didn't help, they could have used it against Obama. Reason? "I still don't understand why "..agree, hard to understand because you and I are reasonable people..like to think we would work together to solve problems that are affecting both of us..however, when one side is set on saying " No ", " never " as their solution..in fact a solution or even a mitigation of the problem is not their agenda ..their only agenda is to replace the one in that position no matter what..well there is your reason.. Not my way of doing things and hopefully for the countrys sake, the majority of , or at least the electorial majority will see that and not reward those who have done all they could to hurt rather then help.. These last three years have been not the most satisfying in my many years here when it comes to how the politics of my country has played out..being older then many here, not what I am use to..and for you younger ones , hopefully you will get a bit of bipartison solutions some day..it would be something I hope to see you experience... to continue as it has is not going to be a fun experience or good for the country IMHO ...
|
|
usaone
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 9:10:23 GMT -5
Posts: 3,429
|
Post by usaone on Feb 3, 2012 18:43:47 GMT -5
I agree, except Boehner and most Republicans were willing to compromise andmove our country forward.
|
|
rockon
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 8:49:55 GMT -5
Posts: 2,384
|
Post by rockon on Feb 3, 2012 18:46:08 GMT -5
I agree. I still don't understand why a handful of Tea Party Republicans blocked the debt deal in August.
Please explain how a handful of any party can block anything. This is typical misinformed talk. The Tea Party can't and never have blocked anything. In most cases it was actually a handful of Democrats that joined the no vote to block a bill. Didn't your news source report that?
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Feb 3, 2012 19:02:46 GMT -5
"Which ones?"
Obamacare, and his rhetoric about being anti rich people and anti business create at atmoshere of uncertainty. Not to mention the threats of government shutdowns due to the Senate (controlled by Democrats) not passing an actual budget since 2009.
"Reason? "I still don't understand why "..agree hard to understand because yopu and I are reasonable people..like to think we would work together to slve problems that are affecting bioth of us..however, when one side is set on saying " No ", " never " as their solution..in fact a solution or even a mitigation of the problem is not their agenda ..their only agenda is to replace the one in that position no matter what..well there is your reason."
What are you talking about? The republican house passed several bills trying to solve the problems, but the Senate wouldn't even remove the wrapping. It's not hard to see who's really the "party of no" here.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 19, 2024 9:53:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2012 19:17:21 GMT -5
"in my book , that is the other side..you want to play the game of in this case the semantics of..be my guest"
He was talking to Congress because they, as a whole, have accomplished nothing. Why do you have to make it about "sides"? Your comments are the epitome of what is wrong. You want "the other side" to just do whatever Obama wants. That's not how our gov't works. They need to work together for the common good, not fight to see what "side" can win.
-------------------------------------------------- "bob- the GOP should have let him have his way. using your logic, if they had, things would be way worse"
Other than the debt, things would not be "way worse". I didn't say he made things worse. I said he delayed the recovery. ------------------------------------------------- "Which ones?"
Continuously extending unemployment benefits.
Fomenting the anti-business sentiment and creating the uncertainty that has helped lead to businesses hoarding cash rather than investing.
Too much "stimulus" which stimulates the economy in the short-run but slows down growth for the long-run.
Highly divisive and not acting like a leader trying to bring both sides together to actually do something worthwhile.
Could probably go on, and on, and on.
--------------------------------------------------------------- "Considering the condition of the housing market, it's a miracle that we have had any recovery."
A strong housing market doesn't cause a recovery. A recovery causes a stronger housing market.
--------------------------------------------------- "4 Trillion in cuts are a lot better than nothing and if it didn't help, they could have used it against Obama."
Whatever cuts you are talking about were for future years and would have little or no affect on the current economy.
|
|
Sum Dum Gai
Senior Associate
Joined: Aug 15, 2011 15:39:24 GMT -5
Posts: 19,892
|
Post by Sum Dum Gai on Feb 3, 2012 19:31:27 GMT -5
Continuously extending unemployment benefits. Too much "stimulus" which stimulates the economy in the short-run but slows down growth for the long-run. OK, I can see those. As long as we acknowledge that the bottom would have been worse without them. Maybe it would have been better to take a bigger hit quickly and get it over with. There's also the TARP thing to consider. Would your average Joe have been alright with bailing out the banks when they got in trouble, but letting ordinary citizens take the full hit? I'm guessing no. I don't think it would have mattered which party was in power, after TARP you have to do some kind of stimulus as a way to appease voters and make it "fair". Fomenting the anti-business sentiment and creating the uncertainty that has helped lead to businesses hoarding cash rather than investing. Businesses hoard cash and stop investing when the economy is in the crapper. It's a demand issue. When consumers stop spending, businesses don't invest in new factories and whatnot. Any CEO who's making decisions based on what a specific politician says is a friggin moron. Half the crap coming out of their mouth is nonsense to begin with. Highly divisive and not acting like a leader trying to bring both sides together to actually do something worthwhile. Divisive? He's one of the single most moderate dudes in DC right now. That's why the far left has been pissed at him since he took single payer off the table in the very beginning of his presidency. I've seen a dude that's been trying to get congress to work together his entire term. It's not working that well since congress is super divided, but he's been trying the whole time. Could probably go on, and on, and on. Oh, please do.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 19, 2024 9:53:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2012 19:48:51 GMT -5
"As long as we acknowledge that the bottom would have been worse without them." No. The bottom was hit before they were an issue. The initial stimulus (under both Bush and Obama) helped soften the landing. Once that was done, stimulus is counter-productive. ------------------------------------------------------------- "Maybe it would have been better to take a bigger hit quickly and get it over with." Technically, yes. But as a human being, I must believe that needs to be tempered with some stimulus and even some unemployment extensions. ---------------------------------------------- "There's also the TARP thing to consider. Would your average Joe have been alright with bailing out the banks when they got in trouble, but letting ordinary citizens take the full hit?" The average Joe benefitted from TARP. The point of TARP was not to save the banks but prevent a complete collapse of the country or possibly the world's financial system. ------------------------------------------------ "I don't think it would have mattered which party was in power, after TARP you have to do some kind of stimulus as a way to appease voters and make it "fair"." The banks got high interest rate loans that were paid back for a profit. The average Joe got free money at the expense of future generations. I think it went way past "fair". ------------------------------------------------------ "Businesses hoard cash and stop investing when the economy is in the crapper." Yes, of course. But again, we're talking about extending the downturn. The uncertainty that has been created by our gov't has also caused businesses to cancel or delay investments. ----------------------------------------- "He's one of the single most moderate dudes in DC right now." At the moment, sort of. Because he's looking to be re-elected. I didn't say anything about his place on the spectrum, but rather the fact that he has been very good at alienating anyone that doesn't agree with him, especially earlier in his term. ----------------------------------------------------------- "It's not working that well since congress is super divided, but he's been trying the whole time." Yes, Congress is much more divisive, and is basically mirroring public sentiment. -------------------------------------------------------- "Oh, please do." Oh, I think we have enough to discuss. Plus it was typical hyperbole....
|
|
Sum Dum Gai
Senior Associate
Joined: Aug 15, 2011 15:39:24 GMT -5
Posts: 19,892
|
Post by Sum Dum Gai on Feb 3, 2012 19:52:20 GMT -5
The average Joe benefitted from TARP. The point of TARP was not to save the banks but prevent a complete collapse of the country or possibly the world's financial system. That's completely and totally true. I agree completely. Good luck running for re-election on that though! I think your average voter saw it as a bailout of Wall St, even though they screwed up. If you don't have something to call an individual bailout to balance it against, I think you get your ass kicked in the voting booth.
|
|
usaone
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 9:10:23 GMT -5
Posts: 3,429
|
Post by usaone on Feb 3, 2012 19:57:00 GMT -5
I agree. I still don't understand why a handful of Tea Party Republicans blocked the debt deal in August. Please explain how a handful of any party can block anything. This is typical misinformed talk. The Tea Party can't and never have blocked anything. In most cases it was actually a handful of Democrats that joined the no vote to block a bill. Didn't your news source report that? Speaker Boehner is the one who said it.
|
|
rockon
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 8:49:55 GMT -5
Posts: 2,384
|
Post by rockon on Feb 3, 2012 19:58:12 GMT -5
There really should be no doubt that many of the problems we face today are a result of decision made years and even decades ago. But there also should be no doubt that the decision made or mucked up by this administration will haunt this country for years and decades to come as well. As a majority this country agreed that our direction was wrong and voted for a promised change that turned out to be faster speed in the same direction. In terms of leadership Obama has been by far the most divisive and ineffective of any president that I recall in spite of what he says in his speech's.
|
|
usaone
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 9:10:23 GMT -5
Posts: 3,429
|
Post by usaone on Feb 3, 2012 19:59:04 GMT -5
There is always uncertainty in the economy.
|
|
rockon
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 8:49:55 GMT -5
Posts: 2,384
|
Post by rockon on Feb 3, 2012 19:59:14 GMT -5
Speaker Boehner is the one who said it.
That makes it true?
|
|
Sum Dum Gai
Senior Associate
Joined: Aug 15, 2011 15:39:24 GMT -5
Posts: 19,892
|
Post by Sum Dum Gai on Feb 3, 2012 20:00:47 GMT -5
In terms of leadership Obama has been by far the most divisive and ineffective of any president that I recall in spite of what he says in his speech's. Or he's the guy who got stuck with the most divisive congress that I recall ever seeing. I guess it depends on how you look at it. At the end of the day the president really can't do much. Most everything is up to congress.
|
|
usaone
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 9:10:23 GMT -5
Posts: 3,429
|
Post by usaone on Feb 3, 2012 20:07:01 GMT -5
Speaker Boehner is the one who said it. That makes it true? So you don't believe him?
|
|
usaone
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 9:10:23 GMT -5
Posts: 3,429
|
Post by usaone on Feb 3, 2012 20:09:25 GMT -5
Congress is NOT mimicking US sentiment. That's why they have a 15% approval rating and Obama has a 47% approval rating.
|
|
rockon
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 8:49:55 GMT -5
Posts: 2,384
|
Post by rockon on Feb 3, 2012 20:13:21 GMT -5
Yep I suppose it always comes back to perspective and like was posted earlier the congress is probably representative of the people so again Mr. Nobody is responsible as our country heads over the cliff. Funny that you kind of just took away Obama's most common defense by also taking Bush off the hook since it obviously must have been the Democratically controlled congress then that caused all of this.
|
|
rockon
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 8:49:55 GMT -5
Posts: 2,384
|
Post by rockon on Feb 3, 2012 20:17:08 GMT -5
Congress is NOT mimicking US sentiment. That's why they have a 15% approval rating and Obama has a 47% approval rating.
Actually yet another bit of misinformation. While the majority don't approve of congress it is for opposite reasons. About half disapprove of the Democrats and half disapprove of the Republicans so it is a very divided populous.
|
|
rockon
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 8:49:55 GMT -5
Posts: 2,384
|
Post by rockon on Feb 3, 2012 20:20:22 GMT -5
So you don't believe him?
If he said that I do not believe it because the fact are very easy to see. They don't have the numbers to stop any bill.
|
|
Sum Dum Gai
Senior Associate
Joined: Aug 15, 2011 15:39:24 GMT -5
Posts: 19,892
|
Post by Sum Dum Gai on Feb 3, 2012 20:28:20 GMT -5
Funny that you kind of just took away Obama's most common defense by also taking Bush off the hook since it obviously must have been the Democratically controlled congress then that caused all of this. If by all of this you mean the current economy, there were no politicians from either party that caused it. It was caused by greedy bankers and Wall St types, with the help of incredibly stupid borrowers. The banks were lending money to anyone with a pulse, because they could sell the debt to Wall St no matter how shaky it was. Wall St wanted it because there were making a fortune chopping up, bundling, and repackaging the debt, and then betting on it. The rating agencies went along with the whole scheme because everyone's computer model was telling them it was all good because historically the foreclosure rate was very low, and nobody was smart enough to ask what would happen to the foreclosure rate if you essentially stopped doing any diligence whatsoever when underwriting loans. The bankers and Wall St types were making money hand over fist, so they weren't going to upset the apple cart. The dumb borrowers bought the line that home prices always go up, so they weren't asking any questions. Like all bubbles built on BS and air, it eventually popped. And here we are. I don't see anywhere in that chain of events where a specific politician or party had anything to do with it. Except that regulators should have stepped in and stopped it when they realized, if they'd been smart enough to realize, that the whole thing was going way out of control.
|
|
rockon
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 8:49:55 GMT -5
Posts: 2,384
|
Post by rockon on Feb 3, 2012 20:34:34 GMT -5
If by all of this you mean the current economy, there were no politicians from either party that caused it.
OK not much sense in arguing this point much further. You obviously still believe what your spoon fed.
|
|