How long will it take to repair the damage Bush and the Republicans have done? (generation, political)
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.
Bush has spent more than Clinton on social programs. The budget for the military is only 20% of the total budget.
Right - Bush is the true socialist - in spite of all the rhetoric to the contrary.
And as far as defense spending goes, we spend more than the cumulative total of the next 20 countries on defense (actually, I think it's a bit more than 20). That is way way way too high.
The top spenders
The world’s top 10 military spenders and the approximate amounts each currently budgets for its military establishment are: RankCountryMilitary budget 1. United States (FY 2008 budget) $623bn 2. China (2004) $65bn 3. Russia $50bn 4. France (2005) $45bn 5. United Kingdom $42.8bn 6. Japan (2007) $41.75bn 7. Germany (2003) $35.1bn 8. Italy (2003) $28.2bn 9. South Korea (2003) $21.1bn 10. India (2005 est.) $19bn World total military expenditures (2004 est)$1,100bnWorld total (minus the US)$500bn
In this economy military spending is mostly corporate socialism independent of the troops or the weapons effectiveness. For instance we are still using the M-16 as our main rifle when previous designs were more reliable and efficient. For what it's worth all our rifles are now built by a Belgian firm in South Carolina. So we are subsidizing Europe as wall as the south.
We all know that the economy is in disastrous shape - it seems to be getting worse - not better. GM, Ford, Chrysler, Citibank - all on the verge of bankruptcy...
The stock market is way down from it's peak just over a year ago... everyone sees that in their 401K statements..
We have an astronomical national debt - it has more than doubled during Bush's 8 years... it may increase by $1.5 Trillion this year alone..
Unemployment is headed up, up, up... to probably 8.5%+...
Our standing in the world is at a very low point - we are hated far more than admired around the world...
We are in a seemingly endless, costly and needless war in Iraq....
Our infrastructure is in bad need of not just repair - but modernization...
College costs are so high that many bright people can't attend any longer - unless they join the military... not a good omen for us competing in the world economy 10 years from now...
Does anyone think that this MESS can be straightened out and the country turned around in a first Obama term???
I personally think not - that it will take at least 2 Obama terms - plus some time beyond that for the Democrats to clean up this God-awful mess that Dubya and his Republican minions have inflicted upon our once great nation.
How long do you think it will take to repair the damage Bush has done?
Is it even repairable?
Maybe longer:
"With the economy tumbling and American troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, President Bush has promised to cooperate with Mr. Obama to make the transition “as smooth as possible.†But that has not stopped his administration from trying, in its final days, to cement in place a diverse array of new regulations."
Right - Bush is the true socialist - in spite of all the rhetoric to the contrary.
Which means he is not a true conservatives... which true conservatives already know!
Quote:
And as far as defense spending goes, we spend more than the cumulative total of the next 20 countries on defense (actually, I think it's a bit more than 20). That is way way way too high.
The top spenders
The world’s top 10 military spenders and the approximate amounts each currently budgets for its military establishment are: RankCountryMilitary budget 1. United States (FY 2008 budget) $623bn 2. China (2004) $65bn 3. Russia $50bn 4. France (2005) $45bn 5. United Kingdom $42.8bn 6. Japan (2007) $41.75bn 7. Germany (2003) $35.1bn 8. Italy (2003) $28.2bn 9. South Korea (2003) $21.1bn 10. India (2005 est.) $19bn World total military expenditures (2004 est)$1,100bnWorld total (minus the US)$500bn
Regardless of the dollar amount, it is still only 20% of the budget.
I would have to look it up, but IIRC, 10 million jobs were lost under Carter; 20 million were created under Reagan. So how can you claim that "more jobs were created under Carter?
And you are the silly one if you think Reagan "declared war" on the poor, middle class, women & children, mentally handicap, elderly, etc.
And yeah, a "Reagan recession" of which he inherited from Carter.
Why did the rich pay more in taxes (percentage-wise) under Reagan than under Carter?...
Taxpayers earning over $200,000:
---------------------- 1980--------- 1988
Tax rate-------------- 70%--------- 28%
Number of returns----- 117,000------ 725,000
Dollars paid----------- $19.5 billion--- $100.3 billion
Percent of income----- 7.5%--------- 25.3%
Total taxes------------ $250.3 billion- $412.9 billion
(Source: Internal Revenue Statistics published in Arkansas Democrat Gazette, Oct. 12, 1992)
The "evil" rich went from paying less than 8% of the total taxes to paying almost 1/4 of them. For those earning $20,000 and less, the share of taxes fell from almost 20% to 7%. If you want a true period of the rich getting richer at the expense of the poor, you have to go back to the Carter years.
The poverty rate was also less in 1989 than it was in 1980:
Poverty rate----------- 1980----- 1989
----------------------- 13.0%--- 12.8%
(Source: American Almanac, table 717, page 456)
And Iran-Contra was not a U.S. war... there were no U.S. wars between the Vietnam war and the 1991 Gulf war.
And I certainly am old enough to remember. Apparently either you aren't or you have the wrong "facts!"
Reagan was in office LONGER than Carter. However on AVERAGE Carter created MORE jobs than Reagan, just as I said.
from wiki:
I see in the far right column, that in nearly every case since Herbert Hoover, Democrat presidents have created the most jobs on an average percentage basis.
Guess Fleet was just "slightly off" with his Carter numbers? (his -10 million jobs lost versus the actual +10 million jobs created).
Bush's final job losses are going to be pretty substantial. The number in the Wiki chart is from October 2008 ... which is before the recent 55K Citigroup job cuts, etc.
Seems like you have a lot of confidence in the newly elected Messiah. Many economists and moguls have predicted this years ago, including Buffet (who endorsed Obama) blasting the nation as "spending junkies" and "sharecroppers" and congressman Ron Paul who used the R word - Recession since December 2007. Buffet says invest for the long run but for how long Mr. Mogul? He says he doesn't know but does list possibly up to 15-20 years, that is more than 2 Obama and 2 Biden administrations, which most likely will NOT occur.
The market goes up and down, and the economy goes through cycles, if Obama does not turn the economy around for the better, much unlikely given current situations, he will be out of Office in 2013. The question should be better rephrased then, "Does the president control the economy" or "Does the economy control the president". From what we saw in this election, and possibly going back if not 30-40 years ago is the later, that the economy in our capitalistic society controls our elections and presidencies. I'm sure many today wonder how Bush, a redneck, alcoholic, mommas boy, got elected in 2000 may similarly 4-8 years down the road wonder how Obama a black, junior senator with a Muslim middle name get elected into the white house. Better yet, think about who was so instrumental in getting Bush or Obama into the white house and what favors Bush and today Obama may have promised them in return. Remember it was also the economy that made the presidencies of Regan and Clinton legacy. Clinton who today is the most influential man in the world and his wife the new Sec. of State, while Regan a Godlike figure to the GOP.
Last edited by RangerDuke08; 12-01-2008 at 10:59 PM..
I see in the far right column, that in nearly every case since Herbert Hoover, Democrat presidents have created the most jobs on an average percentage basis.
Guess Fleet was just "slightly off" with his Carter numbers? (his -10 million jobs lost versus the actual +10 million jobs created).
Bush's final job losses are going to be pretty substantial. The number in the Wiki chart is from October 2008 ... which is before the recent 55K Citigroup job cuts, etc.
Chasingclouds should have posted the entire story behind the figures.
There were several government programs enacted during the Carter era.
One was called "Young Adult Conservation Corps" was similar to the depression-era CCC. It provided disadvantaged youths with work on needed conservation projects on public lands and waters.
That is just one example of several programs which is described in the link below:
U.S. Department of Labor -- Brief History of DOL - Carter Administration, 1977-1981 (http://www.dol.gov/oasam/programs/history/dolchp08.htm - broken link)
In other words, many of the "jobs" created during the Carter era were not private-sector jobs, but government ones. Quantity doesn't trump quality. The above jobs created was welfare, people put to work doing nothing, supported by tax rates in the 50% range. The government reached into our pockets and put it in someone else's. Higher taxes on those people gave us a 9% unemployment rate. Higher corporate taxes hindered growth.
And regarding the overall economy, the Carter era can't even begin to compare with the Reagan era.
When Reagan left office in 1989, the unemployment rate was 5.5%, inflation was in the 4% bracket and interest rates were around 12%.
When Carter left office in 1981, the unemployment rate was around 9%, inflation was about 13% and interest rates were over 20%.
I also notice that Chasingclouds could not back up his claim of the "rich getter richer" during the Reagan era or that most of the jobs created during the Reagan era were "low-paying." Both of those are just myths.
Here is more information of the types of jobs in both administrations:
Job creation by administration and income level (1984 dollars)
Percent of jobs created paying:
-------------------- Under $7,012-- $7,012-$28,048- Over $28,048
Carter ('77-'80)----- 41.77%-------- 68.2%---------- -9.9%
Source: Joint Economic Committee based on data from Bureau of Labors Statistics, U.S. Dept. of Labor.
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.
