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.
It seems a bit overly simplistic to me to blame either Bush or Obama. It even seems simplistic to me to blame Republicans or Democrats. For starters, how about everybody who voted for whoever caused the problem? Or another, how about those who never voted? Or how about all those things that are outside the purview of the government? Blaming the government for the economy assumes the government controls the economy, maybe not a good assumption.
Can't blame me, I voted for Kerry, and after than Ron Paul for president. He was the one guy who was 100% serious when he said he would build a fence on the mexico border and pull troops out of iraq. No blame can be placed on me what so ever.
So if I understand Obama's story on this, the tale goes like this ...
When President Bush was in office, the Democrat controlled congress all went home on vacation and authorized Bush to take their seats and votes.
Before they got back, Bush had voted in their stead to authorize and fund all policies and programs which he was tied to whether directly or indirectly.
After 20 months of BO people are hurting and afraid for their future. Obama's big government approach is scaring business so they are afraid to expand and hire.
I believe that BO wants the American economic system to fail so that people will have no choice but to rely on big government.
Americans began hurting and fearing for their future long before Obama took office.
So if I understand Obama's story on this, the tale goes like this ...
When President Bush was in office, the Democrat controlled congress all went home on vacation and authorized Bush to take their seats and votes.
Before they got back, Bush had voted in their stead to authorize and fund all policies and programs which he was tied to whether directly or indirectly.
Good story Obama.
How about a story about poll numbers?
So if I understand the Republican story it goes like this...
When President Bush was in office his tax cuts, Wall Street deregulation and implementation of two wars in which the U.S. borrows $3 billion a day to fund, didn't negatively effect the economy whatsoever. Also, the claims from economist that the recession started in 2007 are false. And the banks collapsing and stock markets crashing actually took place during Obama's term, but liberal news medias have formed a great complex conspiracy to convince everyone that those events happened in 2008 during GWB's term.
It seems a bit overly simplistic to me to blame either Bush or Obama. It even seems simplistic to me to blame Republicans or Democrats. For starters, how about everybody who voted for whoever caused the problem? Or another, how about those who never voted? Or how about all those things that are outside the purview of the government? Blaming the government for the economy assumes the government controls the economy, maybe not a good assumption.
Yes.
Politicians are merely symptoms of human nature at work. And, as with our traditional allopathic medicine: focus on the symptoms and you miss entirely the root of the problem. Miss the root of the problem and it will reassert itself as soon as it adjusts to the medicine (to say nothing of the new problems caused by toxic pharmacologies).
Also yes, money controls everything -- as long as people buy into it (money) as the solution to their search for security and happiness, it will continue to control the processes under which we all live. Money is an abstraction of substantive value. It is a necessary and useful abstraction -- but it is not substantive in itself. Over indulgence in abstract wealth is toxic and will lead to cancer.
Allow money to control the political process and symptoms obfuscate the root issues -- and thus any hope of cure. The new rulings of law allowing hidden campaign contributions are the most insidious stages of the disease we are living along with the gross deterioration of integrity in impartial journalism. Without full disclosure and free and unbiased reporting we are on a path to a new feudalist society.
Well, let me offer up a slightly different perspective.
Though multiple aspects caused the economy to tank, practically all financial analysts and economists agree that housing was a key contributor to the problem. Within this key contribution, was the inadequate oversight and control over the granting and requirements associated with mortgage loans. After all, the loose requirements allowed the loans to get easier, and substantially contributed (if not caused) the housing price bubble.
President Bush proposed stronger oversights over the loan processes, way back in 2003. He was rebuffed by Congress. Here is a very interesting and insightful article from the New York Times, dated Sept, 2003:
The Bush administration today recommended...a new agency created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.
The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.
Here is a response to President Bush's proposal:
''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''
Allow money to control the political process and symptoms obfuscate the root issues -- and thus any hope of cure. The new rulings of law allowing hidden campaign contributions are the most insidious stages of the disease we are living along with the gross deterioration of integrity in impartial journalism. Without full disclosure and free and unbiased reporting we are on a path to a new feudalist society.
I pretty much agree with everything you have posted, including the fact this started with Reagan. (I still remember his famous "trickle down theory" and the "voodoo economics.") We will have to pay for all of this and there will be a societal cost.
So, how much more money do you think they will try to stuff in the pockets of the billionaires before everything completely collapses?
Bush and congress (Republican in the first half, Democrat in the second) was a bad mix of mismanagement. Obama and his Democrat congress is just exponentially worse. Bush's fault, Obama's fault. Frankly, they both suck. Can we leave it at that?
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.
