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 have not seen President Obama "hunch over and sob" yet. He has taken the drastic steps necessary to give our economy a chance to survive the hyper inflated bubble created by Republican policies since Ronnie Raygun. I can only hope he has the time and backing to return our country to a save and invest economy and to restore true progressivity to our federal tax system.
BTW – At least he did not kiss the Saudi King. Bush did.
This unchecked liberal investment in spending us out of a recission wil create the second four year presidential term that enjoyed two recessions. Carter of course being the other.
No, just the one recession under Carter...the one triggered by the Arab Oil Crisis. It lasted six months. Nixon had two. Eisenhower had three. And of course W had two. But just the one for Carter, just as with Reagan and Bush-41. One as well for Truman, and none for Clinton, Kennedy, or Johnson.
Months in recessions begun under Democratic Presidents since WWII: 17. Under Republicans: 105 and counting...
I'm not an expert on economics, but i can see a president who is not man enough to take responsibility for our current crisis, and whines about it all not being his fault.
If the crisis had begun on January 20 of this year, I might see your point. As is, you're simply playing the Denial card. Obama has done huge amounts in record time in trying to get the brakes properly applied to the skid that was already long in progress by the time he took the wheel. All these right-wing clowns have done is whine. "No!" is all they've got. As in no plans, no ideas, no clue, and no backbone of the sort that would allow you to recognize that the very policies that you would now support are the sort of thing that got us here in the first place. Your whackadoodle economics doesn't work. It never has. It never will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha
Besides, over the past 6 months, 0bama has so drastically changed things that the state of our economy does not resemble what he claims he "inherited" any more...
It's not yet five months, and he certainly owns the outcomes of his own actions and his own programs. Those who would find and fault failure to perform miracles, however, have fallen for some of that dopey Messiah talk that they made up and tried to foist off on all those who didn't need to be hit over the head with a stick to realize what a complete mess of things the Republicans had made. The scope and nature of the current crisis preclude quick fixes of any sort, and Obama has told you that. Try to deal with reality, difficult as that may be...
No, just the one recession under Carter...the one triggered by the Arab Oil Crisis. It lasted six months. Nixon had two. Eisenhower had three. And of course W had two. But just the one for Carter, just as with Reagan and Bush-41. One as well for Truman, and none for Clinton, Kennedy, or Johnson.
Months in recessions begun under Democratic Presidents since WWII: 17. Under Republicans: 105 and counting...
Way to be objective. You disappoint me saganista, if you would be less opinionated with your reasoning you might gain more respect around here. As such, you appear to be an educated individual, making excuses for the Carter recession. As you have it made it clear, it happened under his watch, therefore it was his fault. You also failed to mention that the largest instance of growth since WWII occured under Republican leadership.
You also fail to mention that the first recession under Nixion occured for the same reason the early 80s recession occured - High interest rates to curb inflation. And of course everyone already knows the second recession was caused by OPEC and the end of the Vietnam War. Since Vietnam was the Democrat's war, should LBJ not receieve at least some credit for that recession? Or rather is he immune since there is no R next to his name?
Furthermore, there was indeed a recession under Kennedy. As a matter of fact Kennedy's recession was probably the only one that resulted directly from the actions of a president. If you look at a breakdown of all the others, there was always an underlying cause that was not necessarily controlable. A healthy economy generally enters recession every 10 years, no one with half a brain is going to deny that simple fact.
Perhaps instead of argueing with you over undisputed facts regarding the political nature of recession, how about you eleborate on what you would have done to stop the recessions from occuring?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tightwad
An emotional response totally devoid of facts.
Well 700 billion+ on economic stimulus, added to the additional 450 billion pushed through by Obama in the first 100 days surpassed the $1 trillion cost of the Iraq War. Not to mention the costs associated with rescuing subsequent banks, and of course the auto manufacturers. I you want, you could add the TARP funds and the first auto bailouts to the mix, since both were pushed through by Democrats in Congress and approved by Bush.
If only MC Hammer were here to tell us that those things really do add up..
Way to be objective. You disappoint me saganista, if you would be less opinionated with your reasoning you might gain more respect around here.
It was a simple recitation of the facts. Not sure how to be any more objective or impartial than that. If you have any information that would tend to contravene those facts, you didn't include any of it in this post.
And as an fyi, there are some around here whose respect I would not care to have, given the sorts that apparently have it already.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
As such, you appear to be an educated individual, making excuses for the Carter recession. As you have it made it clear, it happened under his watch, therefore it was his fault.
Yes, as I made clear. But there is likely no other post-WWII recession that so obviously had an external cause. The recession is particularly stark given that the GDP growth rates over Carter's first three years had been 4.6%, 5.6%, and 3.2%. Very healthy numbers. Then the oil crisis resulted in a doubling of the percent of GDP going to petroleum purchases in just about six months. So you got six months worth of recession as the economy tried to adjust to that (Jan-Jul 1980). That is still the shortest recession of the post-WWII era.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
You also failed to mention that the largest instance of growth since WWII occured under Republican leadership.
I also omitted the score of last night's Yankees/Red Sox game, and for the same reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
Furthermore, there was indeed a recession under Kennedy.
No, there was not. The recession that had begun in April 1960 ended in February 1961. Kennedy was inaugurated on January 20, 1961. The next recession did not begin until December 1969.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
A healthy economy generally enters recession every 10 years, no one with half a brain is going to deny that simple fact.
Few who have done any serious work in economics would not deny it. There is no such thing as a "business cycle". The natural state of the economy is steady, moderate expansion. Contractions of any sort do not occur in healthy economies, They are a sign that something has gone or been done wrong.
It was a simple recitation of the facts. Not sure how to be any more objective or impartial than that. If you have any information that would tend to contravene those facts, you didn't include any of it in this post.
Cherrypicking facts =\= Objectivity. You should not need me to sit here and explain the causes and effects of each and every recession since WWII, you are perfectly capable of doing so on your own time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
Yes, as I made clear. But there is likely no other post-WWII recession that so obviously had an external cause. The recession is particularly stark given that the GDP growth rates over Carter's first three years had been 4.6%, 5.6%, and 3.2%. Very healthy numbers. Then the oil crisis resulted in a doubling of the percent of GDP going to petroleum purchases in just about six months. So you got six months worth of recession as the economy tried to adjust to that (Jan-Jul 1980). That is still the shortest recession of the post-WWII era.
A recession is a recession. The 2001 recession was also comparatively short, however, it doesn't make a difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
I also omitted the score of last night's Yankees/Red Sox game, and for the same reason.
How would posting scores from a baseball game equate to proving your subjective nature?
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
Few who have done any serious work in economics would not deny it. There is no such thing as a "business cycle". The natural state of the economy is steady, moderate expansion. Contractions of any sort do not occur in healthy economies, They are a sign that something has gone or been done wrong.
This statement you have made is simply untrue. It does not apply in a free market economy and I would recommend you step back and rethink your take on economics.. The economy is not a static entity that grows in moderation unless it is a command economy. In the real world, consumer interests/tastes change, the value of our money changes, imports and exports change. Markets for individual products are constantly changing, labor markets fluctuate, etc. You even mentioned oil prices changing the market and causing a recession under Carter. There are many influences - both internal and external - that affect our economy.
There is a business cycle, we will eventually recover from the current economic crisis, and 10 years from now, we will hit another recession. The cycle is not limited to the US, either. Nor is it really limited to a free market economy, even the USSR suffered from economic problems that were cyclical in nature.
Cherrypicking facts =\= Objectivity. You should not need me to sit here and explain the causes and effects of each and every recession since WWII, you are perfectly capable of doing so on your own time.
Cherry-picking? Try to keep up. The claim was falsely made that there were two recessions during the Carter administration. I corrected that error, noting that some Presidents had seen the onset of more than one recession during their tenures, but that Carter was not one of them, and that the recession that he did confront was both short and of external origin. Just the facts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
A recession is a recession. The 2001 recession was also comparatively short, however, it doesn't make a difference.
Yes, just 8 months in 2001. And actually, that's very different from Reagan's 16 months or the 17 months that we've so far gotten out of this one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
How would posting scores from a baseball game equate to proving your subjective nature?
Subjective nature? When the topic is recessions, bringing up either expansions or basbeall scores is irrelevant -- an attempt to hijack the discussion into a new area where one might (for obvious reasons) feel more comfortable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
This statement you have made is simply untrue. It does not apply in a free market economy and I would recommend you step back and rethink your take on economics..
No, you're at least fifty years out of date.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
The economy is not a static entity that grows in moderation unless it is a command economy. In the real world, consumer interests/tastes change, the value of our money changes, imports and exports change. Markets for individual products are constantly changing, labor markets fluctuate, etc. You even mentioned oil prices changing the market and causing a recession under Carter. There are many influences - both internal and external - that affect our economy.
Hey, how'd the Cubs do this afternoon? Weren't you actually supposed to be talking about this business cycle thing of yours? Meanhwile, the bulk of the things you listed are conditions, events, and problems that all economies confront, be they market, command, or mixed. Those sorts of things are what economies are designed to incorporate and account for. When an economy fails to provide steady, moderate expansion through such things, then something has gone or been done wrong. The exception is the one that you follow me in mentioning: external shocks. One can try to anticipate, to build in resiliency and reserves, but in the end, there is still some external contingency out there that you can't prepare for.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
There is a business cycle, we will eventually recover from the current economic crisis, and 10 years from now, we will hit another recession. The cycle is not limited to the US, either. Nor is it really limited to a free market economy, even the USSR suffered from economic problems that were cyclical in nature.
Mumbo-jumbo. Nothing more. Don't want to blame Bush and the massive failure of laissez-faire free-market capitalism, so blame it on the mysterious and irresistable forces of the business cycle instead. Same sort of thinking that once got virgins sacrificed to volcanos.
I noticed KBR (Kellog Brown Root) mentioned heavily in the OP article:
APNewsBreak: Major problems found in war spending - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090607/ap_on_go_ot/us_wartime_contracting_report - broken link)
Quote:
KBR Inc., the primary LOGCAP contractor in Iraq, has been paid nearly $32 billion since 2001. The commission says billions of dollars of that amount ended up wasted due to poorly defined work orders, inadequate oversight and contractor inefficiencies.
You all know that KBR is part of Halliburton?
Any surprise that they were paid $32 Billion while their former CEO Dick Cheney (who resigned to become VP) was in the White House?
Any surprise that they were able to waste billions of dollars due to inadquate oversight during the Bush years?
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.
AND IT TOOK hussein obama ONLY FOUR MONTHS TO BEAT THEIR RECORD AND OUT SPEND THE ACCUMULATION OF EVERY PRESIDENT IN HISTORY.
