Barack Obama’s disastrous first 1,000 days

Thanks man...I am truly glad you liked it and agree with much of it.

I actually got a little chuckle after I wrote it myself...because I was 100% sincere in everything I typed. I was not trying to be malicious at all.

 

You have a great way with words, DA60.

Please keep up the wonderful work!

 

You two need to get a room.

 

Ha-Ha!

That's OK.

Our attraction is simply intellectual and nothing else!



"Nothing like a good little elephant dance to signify agreement!"

 

So your string of error continues, then. Not exactly a page-one headline. Anger and bitterness, meanwhile, may not be so appropriate as the word "scorn", but whatever it is, it is reserved for the liars and deceivers, whether such deceit be of themselves or others.

Actially, all my degress are in economics and all of those nearly forty years mentioned earlier are as a rather well compensated profesional economist. I imagine that your experiences are different from that.

Please. Disagreement is a fact of intellectual life, and it isn't as if economists are noted for being some harmonious lot. But to be respected at all, disagreement must be based on the practical application of fact and reason. Not emotional refusal to concede a point proved wrong. The latter is a childish sort of behavior that calls for neither respect nor tolerance of any sort.

Appearances can be deceiving. As can really bad economics. Ask Bush or Greenspan about that. As for the discipline itself, basic principles in the short run are prone to wiggle and wobble about an axis as the Earth does, and in the long run, they evolve. Crumbling is something that isn't observed. There is nothing particularly puzzling or unexplained about the credit crisis or about the Great Bush Recession that was sprung from it. There are no mysteries to the structure or success of the stimulus bill, nor in the diminishing returns that have accompanied the onset of TP-paralysis and self-defeating hostage-taking and intransigence. It all fits into the same neat little package that it always has. As for the future, many of these Republican types may indeed be hopeless, but the deficits are not, and the economy as a whole is of course far better off than it was in the dark days of three years ago. Further steps forward require only that a certain progress-retarding ilk be shoved out of the way.

Enjoy your trip.

 

Were not seing the effects of Obamas amazing economic policies you constantly praise. Im sure business is booming for Washington economist. Need lots of them to paint such a pretty picture.

 

Yeah, it's like "Rah! Rah! Go, Team, Go!" Great for people who maybe majored in cheerleading, or are otherwise mired in an Al Bundy-style, high school football game mentality.

LOL!!! Economics is not built by mere ideas or people unless you are some sort of dingbat Austrian. The rest of us do it via constant testing and checking, and then by retesting and rechecking. Indeed, the TWO recent winners of the Nobel Prize in Economics are particularly noted for the sophisticated means they have devised for extracting meaningful information from time series data. Austrians skip that step.

Yes, and when the Day of Judgement comes as well. People have been getting ready for the rapture now for nearly 2,000 years, and still not an open grave or anything. Kind of makes you wonder about all these "visionaries" and their various visions.

They say that now. The fact is not dependent upon any future course of events at all. You are whackjobs. You are wrong. End of story.

Well, they are trying their best to do that alright. Run a short-sale on the USA and hope to reap a profit at the polls from the increasing suffering of our people. That's the TP-Republican way. Guess how much respect and tolerance that deserves.

 

And how is that Broke Owebama OWS way working out These are your folks in Oakland, CA, yesterday. "Rah! Rah! Go, Team, Go!"





My thanks to Ctrl for first getting these pics into another thread.

 

You are very incorrect James.

How does that video show that Barney Frank Created the Housing Bubble?

All it shows is that Frank, in 2005 when he was a member of the minority part in the house, didn't think there was a housing bubble, and that he pushed for more affordable rental housing rather than simply encouraging more home ownership.

Here's the real reason so many got into housing they should not have:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYvtvcBKgIQ&feature=player_embedded"]Home Ownership and President Bush - YouTube[/ame]

 

No one said the picture would be pretty. In fact you were told in no uncertain terms on the afternoon of January 20, 2009, that the road ahead was long and hard and that it could not be quickly or easily travelled. You all are like the guy who somehow survives being hit by a speeding bus and then complains that the surgeons and therapists are taking too long to get him back on the golf course. Golf is out for a while. Enjoy the fact that you can still clean your clubs. For people who extol the virtues of hard work so often, you certainly don't take to actually pitching in with any of it very well.

 

This discussion is typical of so many Obama sycophants.

Too many excuses (Obama can't drive or steer a speeding bus!) and not enough workable ideas to get our economy moving forward again.

Sad. ... Very sad.

 

And then he drove it into the ditch and has had us stuck there ever since.

 

Public Health Warning: These are the sorts of posts that people who lack the gene for aversion to lameness can put up. Get yourself tested. There are treatments. There can be a cure.



MONTHLY JOB LOSSES

 

I great post demonstrating what happens when someone can't even read their own cited graphs.

 

Bush bad. Obama good. How hard is it to see that? It happens with virtually any economic statistic you want to measure. Bush and his idiot laissez-faire gnomes and helpers flat out DESTROYED the economy. Obama is trying to piece things back together and doing a much better job of that than even optimistic people thought could be done at all back in early 2009.

But some people have opposed him every step of the way. I wonder why they would do a thing like that?

 

Really?

So the American economy is far better off today then it was on November 3, 2008?

Well...let's take a look...

- we know people's houses were worth a lot more in 2008 then today.

- the unemployment rate for Nov/'08 was 6.8% - today it is 9.1%

http://www.miseryindex.us/urbymonth.asp

- inflation is 350+% higher (3.9%) then it was in Nov. '08 (1.1%)

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/

- the '07-'08 FY deficit is 20+% higher then the '10-'11 FY deficit

http://home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html

- the national debt is almost 50% higher now then it was in 2008

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm
http://www.usdebtclock.org/

- the trade deficit was $52 billion in Nov/'08 - today (as of Aug.) it is over $60 billion

http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c0004.html

And all this was near the end of the worst recession in 60+ years.

Now, the DOW is much higher today - about 45-50% higher.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/markets/indexes/chart/?q=djia-I

But who has that helped? Major share holders/commodity speculators and corporate CEO's (i.e. mostly the rich).
But a higher DOW has done squat for the masses.


BTW - President Obama thinks America was better off 4 years ago then they are today.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdun9s8Zm5E"]President Obama: "America Not Better Off Today Than Four Years Ago" (10-3-11) - YouTube[/ame]




And 17thAndK says America is 'far better off today'...despite a FAR higher unemployment rate/national debt/deficit/inflation rate/trade deficit and lower house prices?

Okaaaaaaaaaaaaay...noted.

 

You can do it in one word -- freefall. You ducked that word,, even though it's the singular adjective for the time. I wonder why you did that. Instead, you engage in the fallacious nonsense notion that you can simply take two points, draw a straight line through them, and then be done with things. Here's a bulletin -- the unemployment rate in November 2008 was NOT 6.8%. It was 6.8% rising by half a point per month with no known end in sight, this as the result of staggering levels of Republican malfeasance and incompetence. 802,000 American jobs were lost in November 2008. That's freefall. 103,000 jobs were gained last month. That's NOT freefall.

Are you cognizant of the difference between FOUR years and THREE years? That's not something that tends to throw a lot of people off. FOUR years ago was late 2007. Behind the scenes, the credit crisis itself was in full bloom and Bush was busy doing nothing about it, but Main Street had barely felt a thing. THREE years ago, everyone in America -- even Bush himself -- realized that he and his idiot crew had led us into the blackest of economic holes, a downward spiral from which means for escape were entirely unknown. Obama has since put the brakes on that runaway decline, then slowly turned us around and got us headed back in the direction we came from. You would have prefered more hurtling into the abyss, I take it? What a pitiful case...

 

This is great!

Thanks for sharing, DA60.

You have hit this one out of the park!

 

And are you not cognizant of what 'BTW' means - which is what I put before the vid?

In case you are not:

by the way: used when you are writing something that relates to the subject you are discussing, but is not the main point of the discussion

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/btw




And just to repeat:


17thAndK says America's economy as a whole is 'far better off' then it was three years ago...

...despite a FAR higher unemployment rate/national debt/deficit/inflation rate/trade deficit and lower house prices?

 

but Obama has been great for gold

 

Continued Unemployment Claims at Record High
In the week ending Jan. 24, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 588,000, an increase of 3,000 from the previous week's revised figure of 585,000.

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/01/continued-unemployment-claims-at-record.html[/QUOTE]


you are assuming that the economy would of kept falling indefinately......a highly unlikely scenerio!

 

That is true!

Obama has been bad for the U.S. dollar but very good for the price of gold!

The gold "hucksters" we see on TV all the time are making a small fortune!

At least Obama has put someone back to work!

Ha-Ha!

 

if housing was allowed to fall in 2008/09 there is no question that houses would of been alot lower today than it is now, and sure some banks would of failed, but by now housing would of been affordable enough that first time buyers would be in the market again and a new boom could of materialized!

 

ATTENTION: FOUR years ago was before there was a widespread economic crisis to deal with. It is NOT AT ALL related to the situation of THREE years ago when the economy was in total freefall with no bottom is sight.

Your inane illogic would criticize the surgeon who operated on the star pitcher who blew his arm out because at this point in his rehab program, he's only throwing at 80% of what he did before he was hurt. It would criticize the (union) electrical worker who restored your power after the winter ice storm because the temperature in your living room is still only 56 degrees when it was 72 degrees before the power went out. This sort of logic is put forward by people who are either insufferably stuoid or who are deliberate liars. Maybe there are other conditions. I can't think of any offhand.

There is no freaking Reset button to push. The damage that laissez-faire whackos did to the US and global economies was both deep and widespread. No matter who attempted it, the work of recovery would have taken a long time and a lot of work under the best of circumstances. It takes even longer when a bunch of recovery-killer, jerkwad right-wingers are purposely doing everything they can to assure that the best of circumstances doesn't happen.

Yes indeed, and this is because -- unlike some common dolt or simpleton -- 17thAndK is bright enough to realize that there is a great deal of difference between a temperature of 56 degrees and falling as against a temperatuire of 56 degrees and rising. Some people would recognize this concept as being related to that of the first derivative, but I'll be generous and suppose that you don't, rather than supposing that you do and are once again deliberately seeking to obscure and misrepresent the facts. I wouldn't doubt however that such generosity will shortly prove to have been misplaced and unwarranted.

 

Why would that have been highly unlikely? Can you offer as much as a single sustainable reason why a self-reinforcing downward spiral would not simply continue to reinforce itself and spiral downward?

[It's "would have" or "would've" by the way, not "would of".]