• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

White House says economy is sound despite 'mess'

I had to pawn my crystal ball:2razz:

You don't need one, Obama is the messiah and you believe whatever he tells you.

Don’t you know that the economy wasn’t structurally sound until Obama declared it; when Bush said the same thing, he was being a “moron.”
:cool:
 
You don't need one, Obama is the messiah and you believe whatever he tells you.

Don’t you know that the economy wasn’t structurally sound until Obama declared it; when Bush said the same thing, he was being a “moron.”
:cool:

Can you actually discuss something with out your partisan histrionics?
 
Well it could be a good signal that the capitalist system is working.
It -could- be a lot of things.
Its rather silly to look at the stock market over the last week and conclude that 'things are on their way back up'.
 
Can you actually discuss something with out your partisan histrionics?

Can you actually discuss anything without your whining about “perceived” partisanship histrionics?

Think for just one second in your life; how does one have a POLITICAL debate forum without "partisan" issues.

Carry on; your clown like assertions illustrate that you couldn't possibly carry out a coherent debate if your life depended on it.
 
It -could- be a lot of things.
Its rather silly to look at the stock market over the last week and conclude that 'things are on their way back up'.

Well with indexes up and volume up it is a good technical sign
 
Well with indexes up and volume up it is a good technical sign
Well then... since we're on the road to recovery, I guess we dont need all the spending planned for and past next year. Right?
 
Well then... since we're on the road to recovery, I guess we dont need all the spending planned for and past next year. Right?

:) ...........
 
Well then... since we're on the road to recovery, I guess we dont need all the spending planned for and past next year. Right?

No I think that would be a very bad idea at this point in time to stop the spending. Banks like Wells Fargo are making their payments on their borrowed funds.
 
Well with indexes up and volume up it is a good technical sign

What is a good sign when all the market did was make up the losses of the last week?

The market was above 8,000 in February and now you think it is a good technical sign they have moved above 7,000?

The market was at 9,034 the first week of 2009. :cool:

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=^DJI#chart2:symbol=^dji;range=3m;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined
 
No I think that would be a very bad idea at this point in time to stop the spending.
Ah. The economy is fixed, but we must keep fixing it. Gotcha.
 
Not what I said.
Yes, it is.
You argue that the economy is on the uptake -- that it is fixed -- and you argue that we need to keep spending the money that was supposed to fix said economy.

So, at what point WILL you argue that the spending planned for over the next several years should be cancelled?
 
So, at what point WILL you argue that the spending planned for over the next several years should be cancelled?

When the banks have paid back what they borrowed in full.

While Bank of America aims to return the funds, Chief Executive Officer Kenneth Lewis praised TARP last week for preventing a financial “meltdown.” JPMorgan Chase & Co. CEO Jamie Dimon said it helped stabilize the banking system.

Wells Fargo Assails TARP, Calls Stress Test ?Asinine? (Update1) - Bloomberg.com
 
When the banks have paid back what they borrowed in full.
Why can't the additional spending be stopped while the banks pay back their loans?
 
Why can't the additional spending be stopped while the banks pay back their loans?

Because at this point in time it would lead to an absolute collapse in our financial system and the dollar would not be worth the paper it is printed on IMO.
 
Because at this point in time it would lead to an absolute collapse in our financial system and the dollar would not be worth the paper it is printed on IMO.
Somehow, there's a disconnect here, as what you;re sayimg makes no sense.

We gave $X to the banks, that needs to be repaid, and we're planning to speld $Y on everything else.

You're arguing that we need to keep spending $Y on everything else, until the banks repay $X.

Where is the necessary relationship between those two things?
 
Somehow, there's a disconnect here, as what you;re sayimg makes no sense.

We gave $X to the banks, that needs to be repaid, and we're planning to speld $Y on everything else.

You're arguing that we need to keep spending $Y on everything else, until the banks repay $X.

Where is the necessary relationship between those two things?

What spending are you specifically talking about? I was talking about the loans to banks.
 
What spending are you specifically talking about? I was talking about the loans to banks.
There is a LOT more spending planned than the loans to the banks.

But even then -- we have to keep spending money on the banks until they pay it all back?
 
There is a LOT more spending planned than the loans to the banks.

But even then -- we have to keep spending money on the banks until they pay it all back?

Yes we do have LOAN banks/financial institutions money. Unless you want to see a total collapse of our banking system that would hurt a lot of innocent people.
 
A couple thoughts about assumptions behind the rhetoric here:

1) Is there something to the climate of fear that the Obama administration is talking about? That is, can fear in and of itself contribute to a downward spiral where people stop investing and buying?

If so, should the administration take it upon itself to inspire confidence?

2) Has anything significant happened to the economy since the election season comments of McCain? It seems to me that you can point to a stabilization of the banking industry (which could be considered a fundamental) since then.

If you answer "yes" to these questions, then I don't see much to criticize Obama on here except an awkward change in tone. This isn't just a political "gotcha", you have to form an opinion about what is and has been happening to our economy.
 
Back
Top Bottom