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.
I can state that because Obama lives in a fish bowl where the only ideas to improve the economy are Keynesian. Obama is doomed because of this.
Do you think that people are going to be satisfied with our economic picture 5 months from now?
If anything, Obama will just make it worse. That will solidify the swing states even further to vote for Romney.
What's wrong with Keynesian ideas? They've proven 100% in this crisis. The Europeans, who have been following anti-Keynesian policies, have proven that austerity -- what the right-wing wants here, doesn't work in a liquidity trap.
Moreover, even Milton Friedman, the darling of conservative economic thought, believed in Keynesian principles. Even the Weekly Standard believed in Keynesian principles.
Put it this way: If something like the financial crisis of 2008 had occurred in, say, 1971 -- the year Richard Nixon declared that “I am now a Keynesian in economic policy” -- Washington would probably have responded fairly effectively. There would have been a broad bipartisan consensus in favor of strong action, and there would also have been wide agreement about what kind of action was needed.
What's really going in is that conservatives are using the economic crisis as an excuse to do what they always want to do -- to cut back on social programs. Thus, their new mantra is to reject proven Keynesian economics. Also, is the fact that Keynesian policies will improve the economy at a time when President Obama is seeking re-election, which the GOP will gladly wreck the economy to prevent.
As far as the fishbowl goes, the right-wing is very guilty of that -- thinking that the whole nation looks at Obama the way they do -- as a neo-socialist out takeover private enterprise.
Lawrence Summers, gets a paycheck from hedge funds
Louis Caldera, sat on several boards, one of them needed taken over by the federal government.. But when did bank boards, not count as walls treet?
Neal Wolin, actually worked for Hartford Insurance company, wall street
And GEO, isnt wall street? Where the hell do you live where thats true?
I guess these people dont count!!
No they don't count. The reason is they simply aren't on the cabinet. As I pointed out earlier, only one member of the cabinet is from Wall St., which undercuts your assertion that most are. Failing that fact, you expand the set to other officers. But even including those, there still isn't a majority.
But why do you hold Obama to this strange standard? I would think that the proportion of cabinet members under Obama from WS is no greater than any other president.
Your statement that 'Obama has failed to 'bolster confidence in investor' is contradicted by the facts. Treasury bill rates are the lowest in my long lifetime and the stock market has doubled since Obama was inaugurated.
That would indicate that investors are indeed confident.
Point of fact here.
T-bill and treasury bond rates are indicative of two things: extreme fear, and the policy of the Federal Reserve. If investors were confident, more than half of the companies in the S&P 500 index would NOT have dividend yields in excess of the ten year treasury bond. Confident investors would bid those stock prices up until their dividend yields were lower than Treasury bonds.
T-bill and treasury bond rates are indicative of two things: extreme fear, and the policy of the Federal Reserve. If investors were confident, more than half of the companies in the S&P 500 index would NOT have dividend yields in excess of the ten year treasury bond. Confident investors would bid those stock prices up until their dividend yields were lower than Treasury bonds.
That's preposterous. Treasury bills represent the risk-free rate. Corporate bonds inherently have risk (e.g. the company can fold, lose revenue, etc.) Thus, there is always a risk premium built into corporate bonds that does not exist for T-bills.
No sound investor would buy risky corporate bonds that pay less return than risk-free government bonds.
But you also discuss stock prices, which are equities. Most stocks pay no dividends at all, for many reasons. However, the dividend yield on the S&P 500 has fallen, disproving your own point that investors have no confidence.
No they don't count. The reason is they simply aren't on the cabinet. As I pointed out earlier, only one member of the cabinet is from Wall St., which undercuts your assertion that most are. Failing that fact, you expand the set to other officers. But even including those, there still isn't a majority.
But why do you hold Obama to this strange standard? I would think that the proportion of cabinet members under Obama from WS is no greater than any other president.
FAIL.. I'm not holding Obama up to a different standard, I'm simply pointing out your flawed theory that Obama hasnt surrounded himself with Wall Street.. And to justify your opinion, you have to stand there and tell me that GE, isnt Wall Street..
FAIL.. I'm not holding Obama up to a different standard, I'm simply pointing out your flawed theory that Obama hasnt surrounded himself with Wall Street.. And to justify your opinion, you have to stand there and tell me that GE, isnt Wall Street..
You are moving the bar again. Your first claim was that most of Obama's cabinet was from Wall Street. I showed how that was false.
You next expanded that list to ancillary positions but the claim was still not true.
Now, you change the claim to the vague, "surrounded himself with Wall Street," while providing no further evidence. I think that Tim and Larry had too much influence in 2009 but Summers is out and Tim has far less influence. In any case, the President is not "surrounded" by Wall St.
That's preposterous. Treasury bills represent the risk-free rate. Corporate bonds inherently have risk (e.g. the company can fold, lose revenue, etc.) Thus, there is always a risk premium built into corporate bonds that does not exist for T-bills.
No sound investor would buy risky corporate bonds that pay less return than risk-free government bonds.
Government bonds may be risk free, but they are at their lowest rate in history. That's bad for investors.
Interest rates are also low and no one is buying. The Fed keeps printing money. Also not good in my opinion.
Anyway, whether you are a big fan of Keynesian economics or not, Americans are not in the mood for another $800 billion dollar spending spree for shovel ready projects.
If Obama tries another stimulus, it will be the final nail in his coffin.
I think President Obama is on his way out, but it is because he was naive coming in and he focused on the wrong things. People can't spend money (on health care) if they are not making money. People have to feel secure before they are willing to spend/give a little.
I am a lot less smart than most on the forums and I am a Federal worker...but I live in a trailer and drive a 15 yo (and getting older) car.
The President needed to concentrate on the economy. He need to say, America First...for the next decade we are putting this country back together.
No one wants to hurt anyone. No one wants to not help the children, or the elderly, or those who need it, but the fact is that what we have only goes so far and there are a lot of takers and not so many givers.
Maybe the President should have given us a stable economic platform, worked with the unions to open up some apprenticeship type jobs. Given grants or something to any State that came up with a good idea and got it going and proved it could be done before they got the money.
Why do people on welfare get to sit around doing nothing. If you are on welfare or unemployment, they should have a list of jobs and you should have to report for work every day, or to school. I have no problem with sending people on welfare or unemployment to school. The money would be better spent paying teachers or unions to teach people, than just throwing money to a bailout.
When I was little if you were on public assistance you went to a warehouse and got your food. It only carried approved things. What is the difference between that and Costco. You go in, you pick up your food, you give over your card, you leave with food and household supplies.
Personally, I don't give a rats A$$ about the rich. I only care about me, my family and my friends and neighbors, then my city, then my state and overall the USA. This is my home, my country.
These people are a lot smarter than I am...why aren't they doing something?
And cut out the advertising. It should be banned for the next decade, just like cigarette ads. No one needs shoes that blink, and white people don't live like their homes are from home and garden. My place has a rug that needs vacuuming, a dog that needs a hair cut, grass that needs mowing, wash that needs to be done over the weekend and dishes in the sink. I live the same way everyone else does. There is only one race on this planet...the human race. There are tons of ethnic groups in the USA and once upon a time it made us strong. It made us proud. We need to get back there.
Teens...teens should be sent to some sort of job or youth corp from about 16 on, if they are not at least C students in school. It should teach them life skills and/or job skills. There would be a ton of jobs created for those who take them on as apprentices. There could be tax breaks or something for people that take them on to work. Every type of skill could be used.
Close America to immigration for the next decade. Pull our troops back and deploy them on our south border...as FOBs to practice their skills. Have them help in disasters.
Why is everyone sitting around complaining and no one is talking about ideas.
If President Obama wins, he needs to shift his focus and get us on secure ground, get the American people back to feeling safe. If Mitt Romney wins, he needs to start his focus there or we will continue on the path we are on.
People are so much smarter than I am...why doesn't someone do something?
Government bonds may be risk free, but they are at their lowest rate in history. That's bad for investors.
Interest rates are also low and no one is buying. The Fed keeps printing money. Also not good in my opinion.
Anyway, whether you are a big fan of Keynesian economics or not, Americans are not in the mood for another $800 billion dollar spending spree for shovel ready projects.
If Obama tries another stimulus, it will be the final nail in his coffin.
Government bonds are at their lowest rate in history precisely because MANY are buying -- they're bidding the interest rate down.
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.
