Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


0 Neutral

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  1. Relying on mostly government spending to stimulate the government was a poorly thought out plan. I favored a stimulus, but it would of had a much larger and lasting impact to pay businesses to create jobs.
  2. You are not really attributing the job loses the past year to Obama are you? Sure you can scoff at the notion that the stimulus package would have some kind of immediate, measurable benefits yet alone reverse the effects of the recession, but do you really think that Obama has done anything that has significantly impacted the economy - yet? It is still my belief that while negative economic reactions can happen pretty quick as the stock and bond markets can immediately signal a lack of confidence, but positive improvements take much longer to be noticeable. While I might offer a position from time to time that seems contradictory (like the auto bailouts) as other factors weigh in, but in general this liberal is not supporting Obama's fiscal policies as I generally don't believe in using fiscal policy for any role other than paying for government. That being said, I find it silly to believe that Obama's budgets so far have been significantly different from Bush's. That is while I am discouraged by Obama's lack of belief that priority one should be deficit reduction and elimination, it just isn't accurate to look at Bush's typical deficits and those projected out for Obama and say that Obama changed something significant to create the larger deficits.As far as unemployment, I'm not sure that we aren't at the threshold where optimal employment levels for our economy is less than full employment. That has been predicted over and over in the past and has never actually happened so there is lots of hope that I am wrong, but what do we do if this time is different? What if some of the guys are correct and the best we can get to "full employment" is now 8% unemployed rather than 4 or 5%? I hear the analysts suggesting that kind of job gains required to undo the loses is typical in a recovery from this type of recession, so again there is lots of hope that the guys predicting this are wrong also. But the fact that this type of recovery has been typical is also why I wish we were looking long term rather than short term. I opposed W's various tax cuts and rebates in the name of economic stimulus, so I'm not going to be hypocritical now and support Obama's. However, I don't think the point of this thread is serious analysis of Obama's stimulus package or unemployment, the point is that if employment numbers start to improve now it would be good news for democrats and the midterm elections. I don't think that is really debatable.No, I am not blaming this on Obama. The effect Presidents have on stimulating the economy are minimal. Governments are far more effective at ruining economic growth. I wouldn't put too much blame on Obama unless interest rates spike up significantly.Yes, Obama's budgets are worse. Bush took a huge charge against his budget by making his bailout of the banks. That money is much closer to an investment as most will be paid back with interest. I have my doubts about the money poured into AIG, but for the most parts banks are getting more stable and paying back the bailout money. I think about 30% has already been returned. Obama's money is real spending that will never get paid back. Not only that, Obama is taking the bailout money that is getting repaid and spending that too. That money was suppose to pay down the deficit. Also, I think most people know that Obama's health care bill is going to be another huge long term hit to the budget. Bush's budgets were a disaster, Obama's budgets are mind-boogling which blows away what even Bush would have done.
  3. Throughout the Bush years, anything short of 300K jobs gained was considered losing jobs. We get one month during Obama where we had 11K job loss and the media is throwing a ticker tape parade for him.
  4. No, if you are critical of the "stimulus" then you are a blind partisan hack that just hates Obama and love the party of no. Never mind the fact that Obama, Pelosi and Co promised that if they passed that pile of manure that unemployment would not go above 8%. Nevermind that anyone with a brain could look at the collection of political paybacks and pork spending that was labeled a "stimulus" and tell you it would have little positive impact, if any, and would just weigh us down with more debt. Because, remember, if they did not pass that crap- it would have been worse. You have to get use to the arguments by now... if the economy gets better- the stimulus worked! If the economy does not- the stimulus worked by making it not as bad as it could have been. Kinda like the Global Warming argument. If it is hot- it is Global Warming. If it is cold- it is Global Warming. If you position yourself right no matter what happens... then you win. As long as people do not use critical thinking. Obama keeps using the last month of Bush as his baseline. Anything is better than the freefall panic we were in for that brief period. But panics are temporary and it would stabilize no matter who was president. Besides, Bush's bailout was far superior policy to Obama's so-called stimulus. Bush's policy actually stabilized banks and is getting paid back. We will never see a dime back from Obama's massive flushing of cash down the toilet.
  5. Did Obama actually have a recovery plan? It seemed he punted to Pelosi and let her spend $800 billion on random acts of pork barrel spending and hoped it worked. I guess this is the hope and change plan.
  6. Odd that this managed to quickly fall to the second page without Borbely, Perry, Tobias, Mathias, tim, Fennis, Desert_Power, or white m0nkey posting to tell us how the employment numbers continue to improve on their way to positive gains...The system is working
  7. Bush's cut the income tax of every income tax rate. Even the lowest tax bracket at 15% was reduced to 10%, the biggest cut in any of the rates. It is a myth that Bush's tax cut was only for the rich. It was across the board and had bi-partisan support.
  8. I do that too because that what my browser comes up when i open it. I find it faster and easier to type in amazon and not have to worry about typing www or .com. Of course browsers are now more forgiving than they use to be and act like a search engine. Before if you did not type it exactly correct, you were SOL. But out of habit, i sometimes still use google to get the link even though I know the website.
  • Create New...