Anyone still believe the economy is Bush's fault??

[g8terh8ter_eric]

It's actually Bill Clinton's fault, but I think now that Obama has been in office almost a year and nothing has really changed for the better, that it's his baby now. If the Health Crap Bill passes, it will make it worse starting in 2012. So, for all you Obama supporters out there, what say you?? You really think this guy is any different than anyone else who has promised to make things better and instead made things worse because they got the government involved?? If he would move the government out of the way, things would get better much quicker, IMO.

 

[lawgator1]

You expected to go from the worst economic downturn, with the economic and banking system a day or so from completely unreavelling, to economic prosperity in ten months?

It took years to get here, going to take a little while to get out of it.

 

[droski]

I expect if a trillion dollars gets spent to "save jobs" that our unemployment rate isn't the highest it's been in 60 years.

 

[joevol320]

You expected to go from the worst economic downturn, with the economic and banking system a day or so from completely unreavelling, to economic prosperity in ten months?

It took years to get here, going to take a little while to get out of it.

if hussein lowers taxes and doesn't increase spending. the economy grows very fast. Bush cut taxes and it took no time to start growing. the problem is when the taxes go up in 2010 i think you'll see companies continue to freeze hiring. they'll suddenly have more taxes to pay. that is not going to help the economy.

 

[lawgator1]

if hussein lowers taxes and doesn't increase spending. the economy grows very fast. Bush cut taxes and it took no time to start growing. the problem is when the taxes go up in 2010 i think you'll see companies continue freeze hiring. they'll suddenly have more taxes to pay. that is not going to help the economy.

It must be nice to view the world in such uncomplicated ways.

 

[joevol320]

It must be nice to view the world in such uncomplicated ways.

what is complicated about spending less and lowering taxes. he wouldn't be able to make the fed government more powerful. you're saying that's complicated?

 

[RockyTopVol]

You expected to go from the worst economic downturn, with the economic and banking system a day or so from completely unreavelling, to economic prosperity in ten months?

It took years to get here, going to take a little while to get out of it.

He did campaign on the promise of HOPE & CHANGE.

 

[lawgator1]

what is complicated about spending less and lowering taxes. he wouldn't be able to make the fed government more powerful. you're saying that's complicated?

In today's economy, it is infinitely more complicated than that.

 

[KentheOrange]

It's actually Bill Clinton's fault, but I think now that Obama has been in office almost a year and nothing has really changed for the better, that it's his baby now. If the Health Crap Bill passes, it will make it worse starting in 2012. So, for all you Obama supporters out there, what say you?? You really think this guy is any different than anyone else who has promised to make things better and instead made things worse because they got the government involved?? If he would move the government out of the way, things would get better much quicker, IMO.

You are on the right path, but LBJ started this snowball rolling, and no POTUS since has had the backbone to put his political career on the line to stop it. That covers both parties. Clinton did more than anyone else to keep it going.

 

[droski]

In today's economy, it is infinitely more complicated than that.

right because basic economic principles just don't work anymore

 

[BeecherVol]

In today's economy, it is infinitely more complicated than that.

Redistribution will do that.

 

[KentheOrange]

In today's economy, it is infinitely more complicated than that.

Not really. The government needs to get out of the way and let the system work, even if that means some large businesses fail. The surviving businesses would hopefully look further into the future than the next quarter.

 

[rjd970]

if hussein lowers taxes and doesn't increase spending. the economy grows very fast. Bush cut taxes and it took no time to start growing. the problem is when the taxes go up in 2010 i think you'll see companies continue to freeze hiring. they'll suddenly have more taxes to pay. that is not going to help the economy.

The deficit would increase as well. I'm not saying Obama is any better in this regard, but let's be honest here. If one includes supplemental spending and war costs, Bush regularly ran up deficits that were in the trillion dollar range.

 

[droski]

The deficit would increase as well. I'm not saying Obama is any better in this regard, but let's be honest here. If one includes supplemental spending and war costs, Bush regularly ran up deficits that were in the trillion dollar range.

obama's run up more debt than every other president before him COMBINED. Bush is the jon daily of deficit spending. Obama is Tiger woods.

 

[rjd970]

It's actually Bill Clinton's fault, but I think now that Obama has been in office almost a year and nothing has really changed for the better, that it's his baby now. If the Health Crap Bill passes, it will make it worse starting in 2012. So, for all you Obama supporters out there, what say you?? You really think this guy is any different than anyone else who has promised to make things better and instead made things worse because they got the government involved?? If he would move the government out of the way, things would get better much quicker, IMO.

I would love to hear you explain how the economy right now is Clinton's fault.

Under Clinton, economic growth was modest and fiscally we actually saw surpluses. Obviously this wasn't all Clinton, he had a repub congress, tech bubble, etc...but saying our situation now is Clinton's fault seems pretty short-sighted with partisan glasses. Bush's economic growth was spurred by one of the greatest real estate bubbles in modern history. So placing too much blame or credit on either with regards to economic growth is wrong.

Lest you forget, Bush is the one that spent like a liberal and cut taxes like a republican. Fiscally that only leads to disaster. No argument from me on Obama making it worse right now, but let's all be honest here, the foundation of our current fiscal situation was set in place by the Bush administration unconstrained by a republican congress. Now we have a Dem president and a Dem congress, so expect it to get worse.

For all his faults, Clinton worked well with a repub congress on economic decisions and was surprisingly pro-business for a democrat.

 

[volinbham]

It must be nice to view the world in such uncomplicated ways.

As an Obama follower you should know that "nice" feeling. Afterall, blaming Bush for the economic mess is a perfect example of such and uncomplicated view.

Heck even Obama shares this uncomplicated view - or at least dishes it out to the public...

 

[droski]

Lest you forget, Bush is the one that spent like a liberal and cut taxes like a republican. Fiscally that only leads to disaster.

it leads to disaster 10 years from now. it certainly isn't a problem with interest rates at 30 year lows. it has had zero negative effect on our economy to date.

 

[volinbham]

The deficit would increase as well. I'm not saying Obama is any better in this regard, but let's be honest here. If one includes supplemental spending and war costs, Bush regularly ran up deficits that were in the trillion dollar range.

Not close - his (while nothing to cheer about) were at 1/2 trillion at the highest and were typically 400 billion or less. Total war spending for both wars is estimated at 1 trillion since they began (150 billion/year). At his worst, Bush might have hit 700 billion one time.

Obama will be racking them up at a 2x to 3x rate.

 

[rjd970]

obama's run up more debt than every other president before him COMBINED. Bush is the jon daily of deficit spending. Obama is Tiger woods.

But take that in context. What was the alternative? Cut taxes? Let the economy run its course? The argument can be made that in these times the debt could have increased more, not too mention significant economic shrinkage.

I'm no fan of Obama's spending, especially how he is focusing it. But he gets pass on some of it considering the situation he came into. Call it an excuse or whatever you want, but it is the simple truth. It's been 10 months, overnight economic turnarounds just don't happen

...and look at the national debt during the Bush years and what it is now. I'm not sure your first sentence is accurate.

 

[droski]

But take that in context. What was the alternative? Cut taxes? Let the economy run its course? The argument can be made that in these times the debt could have increased more, not too mention significant economic shrinkage.

I'm no fan of Obama's spending, especially how he is focusing it. But he gets pass on some of it considering the situation he came into. Call it an excuse or whatever you want, but it is the simple truth. It's been 10 months, overnight economic turnarounds just don't happen

...and look at the national debt during the Bush years and what it is now. I'm not sure your first sentence is accurate.

cutting taxes would have been a much more efficient use of the stimilus money. i dont neccasarily mind spending it, but having it go out ot all of obama's pet projects is disgusting and undefensable. $900 bil at least completely down the tubes. for instance, if he really wanted to save jobs he could have cut the payroll tax.

 

[rjd970]

Not close - his (while nothing to cheer about) were at 1/2 trillion at the highest and were typically 400 billion or less. Total war spending for both wars is estimated at 1 trillion since they began (150 billion/year). At his worst, Bush might have hit 700 billion one time.

Obama will be racking them up at a 2x to 3x rate.

Wrong. Add in supplemental spending and the fiscal cost of tax cuts that the Bush administration didn't include in for political purposes and it does approach a trillion. Look at the national debt increase over the Bush presidency for a more accurate picture.

 

[BeecherVol]

That stimulus package, will be pennies compared to the socilaized/government run health care cost/bill.

 

[droski]

the fact that the economy is recovering at all is simply a testiment to how well monatary policy works and the trillions the fed has been giving away. if obama did the right thing we surely woudl have been in a better place than we are today. but a decent argument could be made that we would have done just fine if he hadn't spent a cent.

 

[hndog609]

If a house is on fire and you drive a gasoline truck into it most people aren't all that sypmathetic to the "But I didn't start the fire." argument, nor should they be.

Fine, things weren't all rainbows and kittens when Obama took office. The how much he's accomplished (little) with how much he's spent (great big huge lots) ratio is not at all good and time is running short very quickly for some turnaround to be garnered from all this spending.

 

[BeecherVol]

Its pretty simple, the less the goverment is involved in the economy, the better. They need to stay out of the auto, banking, and health care businesses.

Obama believes the governemnt needs more control, and we should trust them to do the right thing with our money.