Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-12-2009, 08:14 AM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,890 posts, read 18,722,751 times
Reputation: 3146

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista View Post
It's you who remains clueless. What Obama and a broad consensus of others said was that things were very bad and getting worse, and that the option of doing nothing about it was not an option at all. The only people not on board were boneheads and their close relatives, Congressional Republicans, who were off in the corner somewhere mumbling about...what was it again? Oh yeah...more tax cuts for the rich and mega-corporations. Wonderful plan. Your comments meanwhile are not even related to that non-debate, nor to anything else factual. You hang your entirely partisan hat on a single projection done seven months ago, claiming that if it had been done using the data available today, different numerical outcomes would have resulted. Brilliant. All we need to do then is take these data from today and mail them back to people still living in last December. As soon as you figure out a way to do that, let us know. Until then, you are just babbling your way through a very feeble attempt at Monday-morning quarterbacking.


What is your point? I have read this several times, and I don't detect one. Is it that health care and energy are somehow not worth dealing with? They aren't major problems? They aren't already (thanks to years of Republican neglect) long overdue for overhaul and redirection? You clowns need to consider the concept of put up or shut up. At this point, you don't know what either of these bills will end up looking like. No problem, though. You'll just bytch and moan in any case. Criticism merely to criticize. Opposition merely to oppose. You're a disgrace to the very concept of rational political discourse.


Opinions are judged by the quality of fact and theory underlying them. You don't have any. You are no more insightful, relevant, or useful than flipping a two-headed coin.

Interesting revisionist history. If I remember correctly TARP was started under (drum roll please) George Bush a Republican.

The Obama administration has been pitiful in their economic projections. It is so off simple incompetence doesn't explain it. As a matter of fact Obama said yesterday the stimulus is working, he is the only one who believes this.


Mmmm again no one said energy and healthcare aren't worth addressing but you are adopting one of Obama's favorite tactics, the false choice. Something or nothing. But rational people believe there is a middle ground between piling up trillions in debt and nothing.

Last edited by shorebaby; 07-12-2009 at 08:46 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-12-2009, 08:27 AM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,425,821 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
So my question is why did they rush to get it passed ASAP ?
The bill had been in the works for months. It was introduced on January 26. It was passed on February 13 and signed on February 17. The economic benefits of further delay would have been...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2009, 08:35 AM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,890 posts, read 18,722,751 times
Reputation: 3146
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista View Post
The bill had been in the works for months. It was introduced on January 26. It was passed on February 13 and signed on February 17. The economic benefits of further delay would have been...

It couldn't have been less effective.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2009, 08:47 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,321,515 times
Reputation: 27718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huckleberry3911948 View Post
it was not a swindle. it stopped the free fall at crippling cost.
at some time some body is going to have to pay the bill, we will no longer be a rich nation.
You cannot prove that. It cannot be proved that it worked or it didn't work.
That's the beauty of it..it's a win/win for the administration.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2009, 08:51 AM
 
11,155 posts, read 15,681,234 times
Reputation: 4209
Quote:
Originally Posted by springfieldva View Post
McCain said that we were in for some tough times ahead and that some belt tightening in government spending would be necessary. He also said that this would be worst possible time to place heavy taxes on corporations and individuals.

That sounds very practical and boring compared to Obama's magic wand waving, I know...
Actually, McCain advocated freezing all federal spending for 5 years.

Essentially, he advocated taking the only sizable entity still capable of borrowing and spending out of the economy.

Disaster with a capital D.

Give it time. You all want instant gratification, yet forget that the unemployment rate peaked over 2 years into Reagan's term.

Over 2 years, and he is still widely regarded as having fixed the economy.

Let's be adults about this and accept that the federal government can only minimize the collapse of the economy, it can't control the economy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2009, 08:53 AM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,325 posts, read 44,874,903 times
Reputation: 7118
Quote:
The economic benefits of further delay would have been...
Could it be much worse than what has happened with the passage of the stimulus? According to obama, one of the goals of the stimulus was to stem the tide of unemployment, to keep the rate below 8% - did it achieve that goal?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2009, 08:54 AM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
8,998 posts, read 14,762,991 times
Reputation: 3550
Default Second Stimulus=Tax Cut

Do you think there should be a second stimulus bill that cuts the amount that the government takes from your check?

I know in the first stimulus bill there was a tax cut but it didn't affect as many people as it was widely believed.

I know that those under 18 or who can be filed as a dependent don't receive the tax cut and as well all know, many young people aren't the best at saving. If they went out and spent more of their money, that would bring some good retail spending.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2009, 08:54 AM
 
Location: Earth
24,620 posts, read 28,236,422 times
Reputation: 11416
Default Try the search feature as noted in the TOS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ridgewalker View Post
How many of you that voted for Nobama are unemployed? Of course being unemployed is a career choice for many of Nobama's sheeple.
Please use the search feature before you start yet another stimulus thread.
Duh, there are several already.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2009, 08:55 AM
 
Location: southern california
61,289 posts, read 87,253,323 times
Reputation: 55556
hold on friend, the economy meltdown is a lie? did not bush advocate hard for the bank bailout?
i think pin the tail on the donkey is a lil late no? more than one chicken lickin in the barnyard. where was the moral outrage last 8 years?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2009, 09:49 AM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,425,821 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby View Post
Well I am happy to see that you agree with me that the administration should not have "misread" the situation as Biden indicated.
I don't agree with you, and I don't agree with Biden, except for this...

"It is worse, quite frankly, than everyone thought it was, and it is getting worse every day," Vice President Joe Biden said on CBS' "Face the Nation" Sunday.

That was Sunday, January 25. To put it simply, there was no misreading of the economy. It was apparent that it was in very bad shape and quickly getting worse. Only boneheads missed out on that realization and thought a major stimulus was not called for. The administration sought and achieved the most signficant stimulus package that it could. More would have been better, but that was not feasible. Keep in mind that there were idiots with votes actually walking around at the time who thought the inclusion of family planning funds, NEA grants, and Park Service restoration efforts to be the most signficant aspect of the stimulus package. Nothing but more whiny loserism there. Yet another example in a long line of rightwing failure to recognize the scope of a problem or to offer any serious contribution toward its solution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby View Post
And again we differ on the cause of the problem , there was too much meddling by congress to encourage risky loans. I know you disagree but here we go again, history repeating itself.
We differ because my views are based on fact and yours based on crudely contrived propaganda. All loans are risky in degree. Prime loans carry the risk-price of that class of loans. Subprime loans carry the risk-price of the individual loan. This is how borrower-price and lender-cost are equalized. The loans that Congress encouraged were not to a risk-class, but to a socio-economic class long and unjustly denied service by prime institutions. Those are NOT the loans that failed. The loans that failed were those that Congress (and others) questioned. But Chairman Greenspan insisted that he had the situation covered and President Bush wasn't about to hit on any of his good buddies. You want a "misread"? There was one!

Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby View Post
More intervention by the guy who had a hand in the original problem.
Your imagination has run away with you again. Rep. Frank played no significant role in the emergence of the credit crisis. Neither did CRA or the GSE's. And don't even bother with those absurd "In Their Own Words" YouTube videos. They are sliced and diced pieces of propaganda interspersed with counter-factual editorializing designed to lead you to an incorrect conclusion. You have only made their creators happy by following right along with their little bouncing ball. Good boy! Here is the transcript of the hearing in question in the most often posted video. Read it and learn the degree of your foolishness...

Subcommittee Hearings: October 6, 2004

Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby View Post
You are being generous about the administrations forcasts they are very far off from the top business forcasters.
So you compare an administration projection from December 2008 to a private sector projection from June 2009. Can you give me a single reason why I should not burst out laughing?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:19 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top