Most blame Bush, GOP for depression

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guns Guns Guns
  • Start date Start date
G

Guns Guns Guns

Guest
Obama did not end America's decades-long division between retail and investment banking, exposing bigger parts of more financial institutions to the subprime crisis.


That was Bush. And it was Bush who decided to bail out the banks after the fall of Lehman Brothers, not Obama.


It was Obama whose fiscal stimulus less than one month into his term probably avoided an even worse recession in 2009.


And Obama's healthcare reform promises to give 30 million more Americans regular access to health care when these benefits will be more desperately needed than ever.


But none of this is helping Obama today. All that matters is that the US and the world seem closer to a second global financial crisis and a double-dip global recession than at any time since the Lehman debacle.


The official US unemployment rate remains above 9 per cent.


After losing 30 per cent of their value between 2006 and 2008, US house prices have been flat since. Nervous Americans aren't spending.


US corporations are accumulating mountains of cash, but they will continue to sit on it until the American consumer comes back.


Obama has repeatedly tried to jump-start the economy, through his own fiscal stimulus and convincing the Federal Reserve under Ben Bernanke not only to keep near-zero interest rates but also to buy more than a trillion dollars of US Treasury bonds.


No surprise that debt and deficits are high and rising fast.


Over the last decade, we have spent trillions of dollars on war, at a time of rising debt and hard economic times.


Now, we must invest in America's greatest resource - people.



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/arts-arc/winter-of-us-discontent/story-e6frg8nf-1226126453301
 

While Republicans have pushed to cast the sputtering economy as Obama’s fault, Americans place their blame elsewhere.


  • Fifty-one percent say that George W. Bush is most to blame for the down economy, while 31 percent say it’s Obama.


  • At the same time, 44 percent of Americans say that “a lot” or “most” of the blame should be put on the shoulders of congressional Republicans. 36 percent say the same of congressional Democrats.




http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/62038.html
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Another really useful response from "the great debater" Yurt!
Click to expand...

ironic post don't you think....do you ever debate?

and really, what is there to respond to? he has made this thread probably three times, posted it over a dozens times. it is a POLL. it proves nothing, but he is obsessed with repeatedly bringing it up. why aren't you slamming him for repeatedly bringing up the poll? we all know you would, if you already haven't, slam any righty who constantly kept posting a POLL slamming obama.
 
Obama can win against Perry if he asks (P)Rick the Prayer where the jobs Bush promised are.
 
It's been more than 10 years since Bush promised tax cuts would create jobs.


Where are they?
 
I do belive President Obama beats Perry.

I also belive Romney and Huntsman beat President Obama.

President Obama will not be tagged with this economy in the historical long term. He will go down as one of the greats and will one day have his face on currency and have many streets and buildings named after him. He was the first president with any signifigant amount of African blood and OBL was captured under his watch. Rightfully or wrongfully that is enough to make him historically signifigant to be in the top tier.
 
Despite his alleged commitment to balancing the budget, John Boehner adamantly rejected the possibility of increasing government revenues by ending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.


Boehner bleated:
"The mere threat of tax hikes causes uncertainty for job creators -- uncertainty that results in less risk-taking and fewer jobs. If we're serious about balancing the budget and getting our economy back to creating jobs, tax hikes should be off the table."


There's plenty wrong with Boehner's argument, not the least of which is that it came during a speech in which Boehner promised to introduce more uncertainty into the economy by using the debt ceiling as a bargaining chip.


Moreover, Boehner glosses over the inconvenient fact that when upper-income tax rates were higher during the Clinton era, the economy was strong and budgets were balanced.



http://politicalcorrection.org/blog/201105100002


​
 
Jarod said:
I do belive President Obama beats Perry.

I also belive Romney and Huntsman beat President Obama.

President Obama will not be tagged with this economy in the historical long term. He will go down as one of the greats and will one day have his face on currency and have many streets and buildings named after him. He was the first president with any signifigant amount of African blood and OBL was captured under his watch. Rightfully or wrongfully that is enough to make him historically signifigant to be in the top tier.
Click to expand...

Well so far that's about all he has going for him. He was a hstoric first African American President. Bin Ladin was killed on his watch, he created a historic precedent for modernizing US Health Care and he was responsible for preventing this recession from becoming a depression. Significant accomplishments to be sure but the stuff of greatness? What you been smoking Jarod? ;)

Back to the present. We're still engaged in two wars we can't afford, are head over heals in dept and are still mired down in a great recession with over 9% unemployed.
 
\\(\()/)// said:
Despite his alleged commitment to balancing the budget, John Boehner adamantly rejected the possibility of increasing government revenues by ending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.


Boehner bleated:
"The mere threat of tax hikes causes uncertainty for job creators -- uncertainty that results in less risk-taking and fewer jobs. If we're serious about balancing the budget and getting our economy back to creating jobs, tax hikes should be off the table."


There's plenty wrong with Boehner's argument, not the least of which is that it came during a speech in which Boehner promised to introduce more uncertainty into the economy by using the debt ceiling as a bargaining chip.


Moreover, Boehner glosses over the inconvenient fact that when upper-income tax rates were higher during the Clinton era, the economy was strong and budgets were balanced.



http://politicalcorrection.org/blog/201105100002


​
Click to expand...

Yea....well Mr. Boehner....here's an idea.....how about if instead of threatening to drop the Bush tax cuts that instead we just raise the marginal tax rates back to 70% for the top 1% on a "use it or lose it" basis in regards to capital. If the problem in creating jobs in lack of money in circulation that's certainly a problem government can solve.
 
Under Clinton we had prosperity, a balanced budget and jobs.


Then Bush cut taxes.
 
Jarod said:
I do belive President Obama beats Perry.

I also belive Romney and Huntsman beat President Obama.

President Obama will not be tagged with this economy in the historical long term. He will go down as one of the greats and will one day have his face on currency and have many streets and buildings named after him. He was the first president with any signifigant amount of African blood and OBL was captured under his watch. Rightfully or wrongfully that is enough to make him historically signifigant to be in the top tier.
Click to expand...

But then, you also believe that the Blue Fairy can make you a real boy.
"When you wish upon a star........................"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top