+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 98

Thread: Bad news for the gop

  1. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iriemon View Post
    It just as been slow. Just like that previous two recoveries, all of which were relatively slow and shallow. The last robust recovery we had was the early 1980s. In those days, we had a strong middle class, and we had a government with a post WWII low level of debt (proportionate to GDP), and we had a completely different government response:
    Now we are getting somewhere.

    The difference between the 1980's and today is that we no long have a manufacturing base to drive the economy.

    Workers need jobs and most of our production has moved to China.

    Bush ignored it and so has Obama.

    That's why when you bash Bush it gets nowhere with me because I think he was a bad president.

    Where we disagree is that you think Obama is better and he isn't.


  2. #72

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mac-7 View Post
    Originally posted by Iriemon
    As to the recovery, it's not long over due. The economy stopped tanking and started growing again within a year of Obama taking office. It has been recovering steadily ever since, despite Tea Party Republican attempts to derail it for political purposes.

    It just has been slow. Just like that previous two recoveries, all of which were relatively slow and shallow. The last robust recovery we had was the early 1980s. In those days, we had a strong middle class, and we had a government with a post WWII low level of debt (proportionate to GDP), and we had a completely different government response:

    Spending increase, 1981-1984: +25%.

    Spending increase, 2009-2012: +0.6%

    Total Government employment, 1981-1984: -27,000

    Total Government employment, 2009-2012: -730,000

    What do you figure the economy would be doing if federal government spending increased 25% over the past three years instead of being flat, and the Republican dominated state governments had not laid off 730,000 workers?

    Since 1979, the 1%'s has doubled its take of the nation's income (to 20%) and wealth (to 40%).

    What do you figure the economy would be doing if the middle classes had another $1.3 trillion in income to spend instead of it sitting in the offshore bank accounts of the 1%?
    Now we are getting somewhere.

    The difference between the 1980's and today is that we no long have a manufacturing base to drive the economy.

    Workers need jobs and most of our production has moved to China.

    Bush ignored it and so has Obama.

    That's why when you bash Bush it gets nowhere with me because I think he was a bad president.

    Where we disagree is that you think Obama is better and he isn't.
    Great. We both agree Bush totally sucked as a president and his policies were played a significant part in squandering the surplus and the economic fiasco.

    I pointed out the difference between then and now in my post above.

    Reagan dramatically increased spending in his recession. Federal spending has been flat the last three years. The states didn't add 730,000 people to the unemployment lines like they have over the past three years. The 99% got 90% of the nation's income, not just 80% as they do now.

    We've had outsourcing for decades. There was no great surge of outsourcing in 2009-09 that explains why the unemployment rate jumped from about 5% to 10%. And no major increase over the past three years that explains why this recovery like the two before it have been slow. To the contrary, if anything jobs are being in-sourced.

    Way to dodge my questions, btw. But the reason you did is obvious.
    Last edited by Iriemon; May 29 2013 at 04:52 AM.

  3. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iriemon View Post
    .

    We've had outsourcing for decades.

    There was no great surge of outsourcing in 2009-09 that explains why the unemployment rate jumped from about 5% to 10%. And no major increase over the past three years that explains why this recovery like the two before it have been slow. To the contrary, if anything jobs are being in-sourced.
    It's obvious to me that you care more about Obama not getting blamed for anything than you do about the problem itself.

    Yes, the loss of factories and jobs to china didn't start under Obama.

    So there, your precious lib president is not to blame for that.

    But he's done squat to fix it and has just made the problem worse.

    Bush was a fool.

    But so is Obama.

    The difference between them is that bush is gone and can do no more harm but Obama is still here and he is doing harm.

  4. #74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mac-7 View Post
    Originally posted by Iriemon
    Great. We both agree Bush totally sucked as a president and his policies were played a significant part in squandering the surplus and the economic fiasco.

    I pointed out the difference between then and now in my post above.

    Reagan dramatically increased spending in his recession. Federal spending has been flat the last three years. The states didn't add 730,000 people to the unemployment lines like they have over the past three years. The 99% got 90% of the nation's income, not just 80% as they do now.

    We've had outsourcing for decades. There was no great surge of outsourcing in 2009-09 that explains why the unemployment rate jumped from about 5% to 10%. And no major increase over the past three years that explains why this recovery like the two before it have been slow. To the contrary, if anything jobs are being in-sourced.

    Way to dodge my questions, btw. But the reason you did is obvious.
    It's obvious to me that you care more about Obama not getting blamed for anything than you do about the problem itself.

    Yes, the loss of factories and jobs to china didn't start under Obama.

    So there, your precious lib president is not to blame for that.

    But he's done squat to fix it and has just made the problem worse.

    Bush was a fool.

    But so is Obama.

    The difference between them is that bush is gone and can do no more harm but Obama is still here and he is doing harm.
    It's obvious to me that you cam more about blaming Obama than you do about the problem itself.

    We don't have an outsource problem. We have a spending problem. The federal government spending hasn't grown for 3 years and is set to fall again this year, the states have added 730,000 more people to the unemployment rolls, and the 1% are taking 10% more of the nation's income and sticking it in offshore accounts where it isn't dong squat for the economy.

    The middle class is tapped out and doesn't have the resources to spending and government isn't picking up the slack. Less spending = less demand = less production = less hiring.

    That is the problem. And the Tea Party Republicans are doing everything in their power to prevent improvement in that function because they no a (*)(*)(*)(*)ty economy they can blame on Obama like you and the rest of the conservatives do is their only hope for more power.
    That's the problem.

  5. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iriemon View Post

    We don't have an outsource problem. We have a spending problem. The federal government spending hasn't grown for 3 years


    .
    OMG.

    Talking to you is like talking to a Martian.

    Without an interpreter.

    We do have problem what you call "outsourcing".

    That's why chinas economy is growing and ours isn't.

    Then you say we have a spending problem which we do.

    But rather than concede that government spends too much you think it doesn't pend enough.

    You are hopeless.

  6. #76

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mac-7 View Post
    It's obvious to me that you cam more about blaming Obama than you do about the problem itself.

    We don't have an outsource problem. We have a spending problem. The federal government spending hasn't grown for 3 years and is set to fall again this year, the states have added 730,000 more people to the unemployment rolls, and the 1% are taking 10% more of the nation's income and sticking it in offshore accounts where it isn't dong squat for the economy.

    The middle class is tapped out and doesn't have the resources to spending and government isn't picking up the slack. Less spending = less demand = less production = less hiring.

    That is the problem. And the Tea Party Republicans are doing everything in their power to prevent improvement in that function because they no a (*)(*)(*)(*)ty economy they can blame on Obama like you and the rest of the conservatives do is their only hope for more power.
    That's the problem.
    OMG.

    Talking to you is like talking to a Martian.

    Without an interpreter.

    We do have problem what you call "outsourcing".

    That's why chinas economy is growing and ours isn't.

    Then you say we have a spending problem which we do.

    But rather than concede that government spends too much you think it doesn't pend enough.

    You are hopeless.
    OMG, you think firms are outsourcing more and giving more money to the 1% and austerity is the path to progress in a weak economy.

    You are hopelessly deluded by RW propaganda.

    Made in America: Trend against outsourcing brings jobs back from China
    http://rockcenter.nbcnews.com/_news/...rom-china?lite

    Outsourcing Declines for Third Straight Year
    http://news.dice.com/2012/02/16/outsourcing-declines/

    Outsourcing Declines, Are IT Jobs Coming Back?
    http://www.cio.com/article/706120/Ou...s_Coming_Back_
    Last edited by Iriemon; May 29 2013 at 05:23 AM.

  7. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iriemon View Post
    OMG, you think firms are outsourcing more and giving more money to the 1% and austerity is the path to progress in a weak economy.

    You are hopelessly deluded by RW propaganda.

    Made in America: Trend against outsourcing brings jobs back from China
    http://rockcenter.nbcnews.com/_news/...rom-china?lite

    Outsourcing Declines for Third Straight Year
    http://news.dice.com/2012/02/16/outsourcing-declines/

    Outsourcing Declines, Are IT Jobs Coming Back?
    http://www.cio.com/article/706120/Ou...s_Coming_Back_
    I don't think moving factories to China is a good idea.

    But you want to blame private companies for bad GOVERNMENT policy.

    Instead of forcing an unpopular government takeover of the private healthcare system Obama could have spent the last five years doing something positive like saving American factory jobs.

    But he didn't.

  8. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iriemon View Post
    Yes, that has been the normal for the last three recoveries, all of which were relatively anemic and shallow. The last robust recovery we had was the early 1980s. In those days, we had a strong middle class, and we had a government with a post WWII low level of debt (proportionate to GDP), and we had a completely different government response:

    Spending increase, 1981-1984: +25%.

    Spending increase, 2009-2012: +0.6%

    The recession hit in Dec of 07. Federal spending was 2.7t and change. What are estimating for 2013? 3.5t? 3.6t?. What is that? 30% increase? We injected more money into the economy than anyone ever imagined would exist. Stimulus and bailouts and clunkers and god knows how many other things. If we are talking about recoveries, then the argument that we haven't had the benefit of federal spending is just dishonest.

    Here is how you are able to show no increase in spending under Obama... Bush spends 700b on his way out the door on the bail outs. This was a one time injection and Obama replaced that 1 time expense with an 800b stimulus that stays with us every year and is now the new baseline. It is dishonest again to pretend that 800b increase in spending didn't happen on his watch. In reality, the president took a 2.7b baseline to a 3.5t baseline. Wow, thats an even bigger increase in spending than the 80's, just minus the economic growth.

    Total Government employment, 1981-1984: -27,000

    Total Government employment, 2009-2012: -730,000

    What do you figure the economy would be doing if federal government spending increased 25% over the past three years instead of being flat, and the Republican dominated state governments had not laid off 730,000 workers?

    So 30% increase in spending in year 1 followed up by another 25% increase the over the next 3? Is there any level of increase that might make you say, "whoa, wait a minute here, I'm not sure this is such great idea?"
    Since 1979, the 1%'s has doubled its take of the nation's income (to 20%) and wealth (to 40%).

    People getting richer is bad? why?

    What do you figure the economy would be doing if the middle classes had another $1.3 trillion in income to spend instead of it sitting in the offshore bank accounts of the 1%?
    Look up how much money existed 50 years ago and compare it to today. I think you will see that there is a lot more today. That is because wealth is created and there is no limit to how much we can create. If some guy stashes a $100 bill in his underwear drawer it does not limit my ability to go out a make a $100. And why on Earth would the 1.3t in income be in the hands of the middle class if the guy didn't have it in some off shore acct? a) you think the guy with the off shore bank account had no business earning that kind of money - so the money would not exist. or b) you know what, i have no idea what (b) could be - help me out here.


    Whoa, sorry for the whacky reply format, I hope you can see my responses that are tucked into you orig message. my bad, no clue how this works
    Last edited by MisterMet; May 29 2013 at 06:04 AM.

  9. #79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mac-7 View Post
    I don't think moving factories to China is a good idea.
    Great.

    But you want to blame private companies for bad GOVERNMENT policy.
    I did no such thing.

    Instead of forcing an unpopular government takeover of the private healthcare system Obama could have spent the last five years doing something positive like saving American factory jobs.

    But he didn't.
    The US health care system was a total disaster with costs spiraling out of control and 50 million Americans without coverage. We should have just made Medicare universal for everyone but that was politically unfeasible so Obama did what he could. It was way past due.

    Obama tried to create more jobs but was blocked by obstructionist Republicans who want the economy to falter for their political purposes.

    The Tea Party should have worked with Obama to create more jobs.

    But they didn't.
    Last edited by Iriemon; May 29 2013 at 06:27 AM.

  10. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iriemon View Post
    The US health care system was a total disaster with costs spiraling out of control and 50 million Americans without coverage. We should have just made Medicare universal for everyone but that was politically unfeasible so Obama did what he could. It was way past due.
    It was not a disaster for most Americans.

    I have excellent health insurance and healthcare.

    So do about 280-300 million others.

    But there are the 30-50 million who do have a problem.

    What you and Obama have done is ruin the health system for 300 million so that you can throw money at the remaining 50 million who you hope will be obama voters for life.

+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 112
    Last Post: Mar 21 2014, 06:09 AM
  2. Replies: 41
    Last Post: Oct 14 2013, 10:10 PM
  3. Bad news for the gop
    By Surfer Joe in forum Political Opinions & Beliefs
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: May 02 2013, 08:49 AM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: Jan 23 2013, 05:41 AM
  5. Bad news for the right, stocks surging!
    By The Mello Guy in forum Current Events
    Replies: 142
    Last Post: Dec 02 2011, 09:33 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks