Why Obamanomics Has Failed (McCain, unemployment, Congress, enemy)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Uncertainty about future taxes and regulations is enemy No. 1 of economic growth.
Quote:
The administration's stimulus program has failed. Growth is slow and unemployment remains high. The president, his friends and advisers talk endlessly about the circumstances they inherited as a way of avoiding responsibility for the 18 months for which they are responsible.
But they want new stimulus measures—which is convincing evidence that they too recognize that the earlier measures failed. And so the U.S. was odd-man out at the G-20 meeting over the weekend, continuing to call for more government spending in the face of European resistance.
</div>The contrast with President Reagan's antirecession and pro-growth measures in 1981 is striking. Reagan reduced marginal and corporate tax rates and slowed the growth of nondefense spending. Recovery began about a year later. After 18 months, the economy grew more than 9% and it continued to expand above trend rates.
Yeah lets give more money for wars and please decrease corporate taxes. They might give the workers in Haiti or India a 2 cents raise.I don't want ceo's of any corporation operated at all overseas to get one more damn dime.
Yeah lets give more money for wars and please decrease corporate taxes. They might give the workers in Haiti or India a 2 cents raise.I don't want ceo's of any corporation operated at all overseas to get one more damn dime.
I study economics, so yes it's the best thing to do Taxes for business are too high, particularly small businesses
I have cut and paste the most pertinent part, as libs will not read it, as they cannot face Obama's failure. This man is a fool, and his dismal economic performance is evidence of his lack of understanding of economics and history.
Most of the earlier spending was a very short-term response to long-term problems. One piece financed temporary tax cuts. This was a mistake, and ignores the role of expectations in the economy. Economic theory predicts that temporary tax cuts have little effect on spending. Unless tax cuts are expected to last, consumers save the proceeds and pay down debt. Experience with past temporary tax reductions, as in the Carter and first Bush presidencies, confirms this outcome.
Another large part of the stimulus went to relieve state and local governments of their budget deficits. Transferring a deficit from the state to the federal government changes very little. Some teachers and police got an additional year of employment, but their gain is temporary. Any benefits to them must be balanced against the negative effect of the increased public debt and the temporary nature of the transfer.
The Obama economic team ignored past history. The two most successful fiscal stimulus programs since World War II—under Kennedy-Johnson and Reagan—took the form of permanent reductions in corporate and marginal tax rates. Economist Arthur Okun, who had a major role in developing the Kennedy-Johnson program, later analyzed the effect of individual items. He concluded that corporate tax reduction was most effective.
Yeah lets give more money for wars and please decrease corporate taxes. They might give the workers in Haiti or India a 2 cents raise.I don't want ceo's of any corporation operated at all overseas to get one more damn dime.
Right....................
This is the typical leftist rant.
Obama's econmic policies have failed, as similar programs failed in the Great Depression and 1990s Japan. History has already shown us this, yet Obama spent over $1 trillion and neutered the US economy to find this out for himself. One might venture that he is an idiot.
History has shown that corporate and personal income tax cuts work. Corportate taxes must be viewed in relative sense to rates in other parts of the world, not absolute rates. The left shows "data" that there is "little correlation" between tax rates and economic growth and federal revenue- BS- the opposite is true and the real data shows this.
Now that Obama's polices have failed, why just keep doing the same failed policy? That would be what a fool would reccomend. Why not try what has worked in the past- tax cuts. How about stopping the federal bleeding with these massive "stimulus" programs that only drain the treasury and keep the nation unemployed.
Want a good economy? Get rid of Obama. He is wed to failed economic policy and is too stubborn to admit defeat and change.
I have cut and paste the most pertinent part, as libs will not read it, as they cannot face Obama's failure. This man is a fool, and his dismal economic performance is evidence of his lack of understanding of economics and history.
Most of the earlier spending was a very short-term response to long-term problems. One piece financed temporary tax cuts. This was a mistake, and ignores the role of expectations in the economy. Economic theory predicts that temporary tax cuts have little effect on spending. Unless tax cuts are expected to last, consumers save the proceeds and pay down debt. Experience with past temporary tax reductions, as in the Carter and first Bush presidencies, confirms this outcome.
Another large part of the stimulus went to relieve state and local governments of their budget deficits. Transferring a deficit from the state to the federal government changes very little. Some teachers and police got an additional year of employment, but their gain is temporary. Any benefits to them must be balanced against the negative effect of the increased public debt and the temporary nature of the transfer.
The Obama economic team ignored past history. The two most successful fiscal stimulus programs since World War II—under Kennedy-Johnson and Reagan—took the form of permanent reductions in corporate and marginal tax rates. Economist Arthur Okun, who had a major role in developing the Kennedy-Johnson program, later analyzed the effect of individual items. He concluded that corporate tax reduction was most effective.
No, Obama isn't a fool, it's a brillant man.But he didn't study economics, it's not a speciality for him, and Obama's economic policies can prove it.
And John McCain was bad about economics too, so the US wasn't very lucky in 2008
Obama's econmic policies have failed, as similar programs failed in the Great Depression and 1990s Japan. History has already shown us this, yet Obama spent over $1 trillion and neutered the US economy to find this out for himself. One might venture that he is an idiot.
History has shown that corporate and personal income tax cuts work. Corportate taxes must be viewed in relative sense to rates in other parts of the world, not absolute rates. The left shows "data" that there is "little correlation" between tax rates and economic growth and federal revenue- BS- the opposite is true and the real data shows this.
Now that Obama's polices have failed, why just keep doing the same failed policy? That would be what a fool would reccomend. Why not try what has worked in the past- tax cuts. How about stopping the federal bleeding with these massive "stimulus" programs that only drain the treasury and keep the nation unemployed.
Want a good economy? Get rid of Obama. He is wed to failed economic policy and is too stubborn to admit defeat and change.
If republicans win in November, Obama will have more conservative economic policies.I can't be sure, but that's happened with Bill Clinton.
If republicans win in November, Obama will have more conservative economic policies.I can't be sure, but that's happened with Bill Clinton.
Oddly, the restrained spending, which libs so fondly refer to as "The Clinton Surplus", had very litte to do with Clinton and more his republican senate and congress.
Why do libs not understand that the congress controls spending? Was that not covered in liberal civics? They must have devoted too much time to thier unit on "Che" and had to pass on that information.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Taxes for business are too high, particularly small businesses 
