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.
His missing the memo does not change the fact of what I said. The government can create a more business friendly situation and they can bail out companies, such as Obama did and save many jobs from being lost but creat them not really. You keep thinking I am defending Obama and attacking the Repubs when the reality is I do not think any of them has done their jobs well enough.
Correct and the jobs created by the House have been what? Pssst, it is not the job of the government to create jobs, now if they were to do their job and pass a budget then jobs would be faster in being created.
1. "Jobs created by the House"?
a. the house wanted to cut taxes. Obama and the Senate increased taxes
b. the house wants to repeal Obamacare. Obama and the Senate want Obamacare
c. the house wants to increase coal and oil exploration. Obama and the Senate oppose this
d. the house wants to cut taxes on small business. Obama and the Senate increased them
e. the house wants to curb EPA regulations. Obama and the Senate want to increase them
2. The Senate and Obama failed to pass a budget for four years. The House sent several budget proposals to Obama, all of which were rejected.
3. The government CAN CREATE JOBS by getting out the way of prosperity. Increased taxes and regulations impair the ability of the private sector to create jobs. (See Reagan vs Carter)
It is funny as hell to hear the liberals now universally state, "the POTUS does not matter" when we have an incompetent, inept president. Now are you saying that the office of President has never mattered? Or is it just this incompetent president, who has been rendered useless by his ineptitude.
I have long felt that Bush , more than anybody, could have averted the housing bubble. Primarily the SEC's leverage rules which allowed investment banks to take on too much risk, but also in his re-appointment of Greenspan, and his decision to overrule the states in their attempts to regulate mortgage lending.
To be fair, though, he (Bush) inherited an economy that was volatile and undergoing major problems with structural unemployment.
Well, a lot of the problems which have arisen in recent years were seeds sown decades ago. For instance, had Nixon retained the convertability of dollars to gold in the 70's, the housing crisis would likely not have occured.
Yet, that doesn't mean that Nixon caused the housing crisis.
Which ones? It appears to me that Obama's policies haven't been all that problematic.
So far you haven't addressed anything close to the topic in this thread. Your comments on the state of the state when Obama took office or what the GOP may have thought were good policies are not rebuttals to the topic of Obama's policies and their results. Which ones? I love it when people don't read the OP and then feel free to post away with what they think are rebuttals to something they haven't read. What next? Will you invoke racism?
1. "Jobs created by the House"?
a. the house wanted to cut taxes. Obama and the Senate increased taxes
b. the house wants to repeal Obamacare. Obama and the Senate want Obamacare
c. the house wants to increase coal and oil exploration. Obama and the Senate oppose this
d. the house wants to cut taxes on small business. Obama and the Senate increased them
e. the house wants to curb EPA regulations. Obama and the Senate want to increase them
2. The Senate and Obama failed to pass a budget for four years. The House sent several budget proposals to Obama, all of which were rejected.
3. The government CAN CREATE JOBS by getting out the way of prosperity. Increased taxes and regulations impair the ability of the private sector to create jobs. (See Reagan vs Carter)
It is funny as hell to hear the liberals now universally state, "the POTUS does not matter" when we have an incompetent, inept president. Now are you saying that the office of President has never mattered? Or is it just this incompetent president, who has been rendered useless by his ineptitude.
a. The House was not trying to cut taxes they wanted to retain the tax cuts for the rich, BIG difference. My taxes have not gone up.
b. Has nothing to do with jobs, if anything Obamacare will create more jobs.
c. They oppose cola exporation, please provide proof. Drilling on Federal wildlife areas can wait, there are plenty of other areas to drill before we are stuke with that.
d. I did not support raising taxes on small business, got a link?
e. Yes by all means get rid of regulations that allow wanton polluting of the environment in the name of a few jobs and more profits for big business, jeeez do you righties ever realize you are being played?
Of-course they were rejected they were so partisan in Nature they knew they would not pass, it is called pander to you righties to say they did their part while knowing that nothing would get done.
Sure, pass a rational budget and get out of the way, that is gonna happen when?
Strange when righties have nothing more to add to a discussion they start saying others say things they did not say, pssst is it posting Lies in the hopes that someone will believe it, rational minds know how to read the words people post and figure out who is not being truthful.
No idea what the "Independent Journal Review" is, but the economy is getting better and neo-cons are futilely whining like a bunch of petulant children. Gotta love it.
Wrong, the economy stopped imploding before Obama spent a dime.. fact
Your original claim was that the economy stabilized before Obama signed the stimulus bill. Moving the goal posts doesn't help your argument though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
Most peoples opinion, doesnt have a dam thing to do with fact..
Doesn't change the fact that you failed 4 different times to specify which bill you were referring to when you said the economy stabilized before Obama signed the bills. Given that most people think Obama signed TARP, multiple bills were signed in 2009, and that you could not tell me which bill you were referring to, I had no reason to assume you were different or knew what you were talking about.
I mean seriously, how hard is it to say which bill you were referring to. If you were originally referring to ARRA or TARP your claim would be wrong, but if you were referring to one of the later bills you would be right.
The ultimate irony is that I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but your blind ideology and agenda wouldn't allow you to have a factual discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
Signing a bill doesnt stimulate, neither does taking money out of the economy so it can be respent. You cant ignore the money taken, in order to pretend you're giving it out. Furthermore, the economy is in the same shape as when the economy stabilized years ago..
I never said signing a bill stimulates the economy. I said you were wrong when you claimed the economy was stabilized prior to Feb 2009.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
So says the person who cites peoples opinions as fact
Hahaha, no, I stay away from Faux News.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
The thread I pointed to did just that.. you can ignore that you credited Obama with a housing credit bill which was signed by Bush, but once again, your ignorance, isnt really important.
Reality doesn't seem to matter to you either. I didn't credit Obama with the full housing credit, just his expansion of the credit. Please quote me crediting the stimulus to Bush and TARP to Obama.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
Wrong.. Their $831 billion cost was oly a few years out, and ignored things like interest cost. THATS ONLY SPENDING..
Fact being that the stimulus bill is a 10 year bill, you dont get to ignore years 4-10 and pretend the costs are free without looking like a complete idiot.
The CBO didn't ignore any years. There is a reason you won't find an actual CBO projection stating that the actual cost is 3.2 trillion.
Here is the interest cost included. Note the years go thru 2019.
So far you haven't addressed anything close to the topic in this thread.
You wanted to know "How his economic policies are a disaster."
I'm addressing that. His economic policies haven't been a disaster.
Quote:
Your comments on the state of the state when Obama took office or what the GOP may have thought were good policies are not rebuttals to the topic of Obama's policies and their results.
Which ones? I love it when people don't read the OP and then feel free to post away with what they think are rebuttals to something they haven't read.
I read the OP. It says:
Hope & Change, folks! How's it looking now?
If you post a link on P&OC without commentary, I'm probably not going to read it, and I'm not going to apologize for that.
His missing the memo does not change the fact of what I said. The government can create a more business friendly situation and they can bail out companies, such as Obama did and save many jobs from being lost but creat them not really. You keep thinking I am defending Obama and attacking the Repubs when the reality is I do not think any of them has done their jobs well enough.
So whatever happened to those shovel ready jobs. Oh that's right. The money went to government cronies.
This is you, is it not? I guess sometimes it is hard to remember what you said a few moments before.
Originally Posted by Casper in Dallas B*tching about the President is fine, just so long as you understand that the House run by the Republicans and the Senate run by the Democrats are probably more to blame for the lack of fast economic recovery than the President. Always fun to watch people blame all the ills of our situation on the other guys while failing to look in the mirror and seeing the rest of the problem.
1. Obamacare is a disaster. Now blaming it on "Romney care" is absurd. Obama and the libs had the choice of doing whatever they wanted. They designed and implemented a disasterous plan. Saying Obamacare is "based on Romney care" is like saying the "constitution" of the old USSR was based on the US constitution.
2. Obamacare and the income tax increases resulted in the largest tax increase in US history on the middle class.
3. Has Obama killed jobs?
a. record number of citizens unemployed
b. record number of citizens on foodstamps
c. incomes down 7%
d. personal savings down 40%
e. most jobs created are part time
f. record unemployment for people under 30 years of age
g. increased gas and energy prices
h. largest deficits in US history
i. debt at $17 trillion
- Yes, I would say he wrecked the economy.
4. Amnesty for illegals, when we have so many US citizens unemployed? How about when your job is replaced by an illegal? Granting citizenship to 30 million poor people is possibly one of the dumbest ideas the dems have ever come up with (and God knows there have been plenty of dumb ideas). It is the fast track to third world status.
5. War on coal and energy? Yes. Tell me................................. which "alternative" energy source-
a. solar
b. nuclear
c. wind
d. hydroelectric
do the libs fully support and is capable of providing power to our energy grid today? Have you ever heard of a place called "North Dakota"? They are doing the opposite of what Obama wants and have the lowest unemployment rate in the US. A wise man would take notice- liberals choose to ignore this fact.
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.
Or is it just this incompetent president, who has been rendered useless by his ineptitude.
