• 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!

Obama Heralds 1.1M Private Sector Jobs Created Since Jan.

cpwill said:
interesting question: what happened when the Harding administration pursued such a course?
Click to expand...

Not the same scenario. Government spending as a % of GDP was nowhere near the levels it was prior to 1940. To use a scenario that applies only to an industrial economy emerging from a major world war (pent up consumer demand) and try to apply it to a post-industrial economy is..... full of ****.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Not the same scenario. Government spending as a % of GDP was nowhere near the levels it was prior to 1940. To use a scenario that applies only to an industrial economy emerging from a major world war (pent up consumer demand) and try to apply it to a post-industrial economy is..... full of ****.
Click to expand...

Why is it that you focus on the dollars spent vs how those dollars were spent? Krugman and you seem to believe that not enough money was spent but other economists and I believe it was how the dollars were spent that didn't have the desired effect. If Obama had taken the entire 862 billion dollars and threw it into the private sector we would have gotten the desired results but that was never his intent. His intent was to bail out his continuent groups and redistribute wealth and transfering taxpayments from those who pay taxes to those who don't.
 
Conservative said:
Why is it that you focus on the dollars spent vs how those dollars were spent? Krugman and you seem to believe that not enough money was spent but other economists and I believe it was how the dollars were spent that didn't have the desired effect. If Obama had taken the entire 862 billion dollars and threw it into the private sector we would have gotten the desired results but that was never his intent. His intent was to bail out his continuent groups and redistribute wealth and transfering taxpayments from those who pay taxes to those who don't.
Click to expand...

Do tell: When the highway administration conducts formalized bidding to contract a new project, what are the names of the government owned construction companies that submit the bids?
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Do tell: When the highway administration conducts formalized bidding to contract a new project, what are the names of the government owned construction companies that submit the bids?
Click to expand...

How much of that stimulus money went to highway departments for "shovel" ready jobs? You are dodging the question again. Why do you and others always focus on spending dollars instead of focusing on where those dollars went? If you don't have proper spending to grow the economy you aren't going to get the desired results so the logical statement from many is we didn't spend enough. How do you know?
 
Conservative said:
How much of that stimulus money went to highway departments for "shovel" ready jobs? You are dodging the question again. Why do you and others always focus on spending dollars instead of focusing on where those dollars went? If you don't have proper spending to grow the economy you aren't going to get the desired results so the logical statement from many is we didn't spend enough. How do you know?
Click to expand...

No more than $80 billion was appropriated to infrastructure projects. Much of the total spending came in the form of tax cuts and state/local budgetary shortfalls. The reason we could not get $800 billion in infrastructure spending is because the so called conservatives would have done everything in their power to stall the process. So instead of getting an excess of $1.25 trillion, where $800 billion could be appropriated towards infrastructure, we got $800 billion with more than half of the funds appropriated towards tax cuts and state budget support.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
No more than $80 billion was appropriated to infrastructure projects. Much of the total spending came in the form of tax cuts and state/local budgetary shortfalls. The reason we could not get $800 billion in infrastructure spending is because the so called conservatives would have done everything in their power to stall the process. So instead of getting an excess of $1.25 trillion, where $800 billion could be appropriated towards infrastructure, we got $800 billion with more than half of the funds appropriated towards tax cuts and state budget support.
Click to expand...

Conservatives couldn't have stopped anything so stop with the revisionist history. Fact the stimulus plan was enough money but it was spent on the wrong issues. There was no need to bailout state shortfalls as that was the states' responsibility and all it did was allow the states to shirk that responsibility. The tax cuts were mostly tax transfers from those that pay taxes to those that don't, little value at all and too many strings attached. We didn't get what was promised so the answer now is not enough was spent, that is bs as the money was wasted instead of being well spent to grow the private sector.
 
Conservative said:
Conservatives couldn't have stopped anything so stop with the revisionist history. Fact the stimulus plan was enough money but it was spent on the wrong issues. There was no need to bailout state shortfalls as that was the states' responsibility and all it did was allow the states to shirk that responsibility. The tax cuts were mostly tax transfers from those that pay taxes to those that don't, little value at all and too many strings attached. We didn't get what was promised so the answer now is not enough was spent, that is bs as the money was wasted instead of being well spent to grow the private sector.
Click to expand...

If congress could pass whatever it wanted, why did they stop short with stimulus spending and enact health care overhauls without a public option? The fact is, you have no business discussing topics such as fiscal and monetary policy, as you require heroic assumptions in order to rationalize the policy. The fact is, the dems needed to entice the repubs by incorporating tax cuts and keeping the nominal estimate below $1 trillion, and had to do away with the public option when they passed health care.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
If congress could pass whatever it wanted, why did they stop short with stimulus spending and enact health care overhauls without a public option? The fact is, you have no business discussing topics such as fiscal and monetary policy, as you require heroic assumptions in order to rationalize the policy. The fact is, the dems needed to entice the repubs by incorporating tax cuts and keeping the nominal estimate below $1 trillion, and had to do away with the public option when they passed health care.
Click to expand...

Why?because they couldn't sell the Blue Dog Democrats. Obama couldn't hold his own party on implementing a socialist agenda. Keep revising history, maybe when the next history books come out they will remind you what you missed during the last year.
 
Conservative said:
Why?because they couldn't sell the Blue Dog Democrats. Obama couldn't hold his own party on implementing a socialist agenda.
Click to expand...

So you are admitting that i am correct; democrats could not pass whatever they wanted and concessions were vital to enacting policy.

Go figure.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
So you are admitting that i am correct; democrats could not pass whatever they wanted and concessions were vital to enacting policy.

Go figure.
Click to expand...

LOL, yep, you are right, as you always claim you are, Obama couldn't pass the healthcare bill with a socialist single payer program because of his own party balking and zero Republican support so he took the incremental approach knowing that when people cannot get in to see a doctor because of overcrowding and hospitals are full that they will demand the govt. jump in and take over the system giving them what they wanted in the first place, single payer.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
If congress could pass whatever it wanted, why did they stop short with stimulus spending and enact health care overhauls without a public option? The fact is, you have no business discussing topics such as fiscal and monetary policy, as you require heroic assumptions in order to rationalize the policy. The fact is, the dems needed to entice the repubs by incorporating tax cuts and keeping the nominal estimate below $1 trillion, and had to do away with the public option when they passed health care.
Click to expand...

You should know this. First-off, Obama had two choices, compromise with the Republicans, or take his majorities and say "to heck with the Republicans", dealing with only his own party hold-outs. He chose the latter, telling the Republicans to take a hike. But this was not without its own pratfalls within his own party. The holdup was always in the Senate, until final reconciliation, when Pelosi had to make some cosmetic House deals as well, but it was the Senate that twisted arms. Cause Obama needed every last Democrat Senator to get 60. So he sold out with such as the Cornhusker Kickback (Ben Nelson's vote), Louisiana Purchase (Landrieu's vote), and the Florida Flim Flam (Bill Nelson's vote). He only got Lieberman from CT if he dropped the more obvious single-payer verbage.

Obama chose partisanship, not Republicans. The rest is history ... at least through Nov 2nd anyway :)
 
Last edited:
I do not believe democrats are blameless for the fiscal and health care blunder. The stimulus was too small and poorly constructed (tax cuts/incentives) and the so called health care reform did not come with a public policy. Political allegiance is for ideologues. They would watch their country suffer rather than admit their ideology was wrong.

Doesn't mean i cannot point out the facts.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
I do not believe democrats are blameless for the fiscal and health care blunder. The stimulus was too small and poorly constructed (tax cuts/incentives) and the so called health care reform did not come with a public policy. Political allegiance is for ideologues. They would watch their country suffer rather than admit their ideology was wrong.

Doesn't mean i cannot point out the facts.
Click to expand...

As usual, I disagree with a couple things and agree with a couple, first that the Democrats are indeed not blameless for the fiscal and health care blunder as they controlled the entire legislative process including a time when they had a filibuster proof Senate. I also believe the stimulus was very poorly constructed and since it was poorly constructed we don't know if it was too small or not. Reagan got us out of a worse recession at much lower the cost.

As for the healthcare bill, are you trying to tell me that this country needs the public option? Where are you going to find doctors and hospitals to participate? The public option takes incentive out of the process and thus will destroy the economy like it has in Europe. Most countries there are trying to undo decades of socialism. There is no way that the public option makes this country stronger economically.
 
winston53660 said:
I do.


........
Click to expand...

Aw, remember if you like your doctor and your current insurance you can keep them. oh, wait, your doctor and your insurance went out of business. Congratulations, you now get a Govt. appointed doctor. Just think, you can probably get your driver's license and physical at the same place with the same waiting procedure.
 
Conservative said:
Aw, remember if you like your doctor and your current insurance you can keep them. oh, wait, your doctor and your insurance went out of business. Congratulations, you now get a Govt. appointed doctor. Just think, you can probably get your driver's license and physical at the same place with the same waiting procedure.
Click to expand...


Granted if you need a boil on your ass lanced one might have a problem with a public option.
 
winston53660 said:
Granted if you need a boil on your ass lanced one might have a problem with a public option.
Click to expand...

I wonder where that public option service will be in your rural area of TX. I worry about your well being and healthcare
 
Conservative said:
I wonder where that public option service will be in your rural area of TX. I worry about your well being and healthcare
Click to expand...


You don't give a flying flip about my health care and don't even pretend like you do.

However the doctors the nurses the students at the nationally recognized teaching hospital that I'm a patient at have and continue to go the extra mile.
 
winston53660 said:
You don't give a flying flip about my health care and don't even pretend like you do.

However the doctors the nurses the students at the nationally recognized teaching hospital that I'm a patient at have and continue to go the extra mile.
Click to expand...

Aw, you really don't understand me. I am sure those nurses and doctors will really enjoy working for the govt.

By the way were you one of the 111 companies that applied for an exemption from the Obamacare rules?

Obama White House Hands Out 111 Obamacare Waivers- Hides It From Public (Video) | The Gateway Pundit
 
Conservative said:
Aw, you really don't understand me. I am sure those nurses and doctors will really enjoy working for the govt.
Click to expand...


Some of them already do. And they deal with some of the worst case scenarios one could imagine.
 
winston53660 said:
Some of them already do. And they deal with some of the worst case scenarios one could imagine.
Click to expand...

Unlike you I hope that those nurses and doctors make as much as humanly possible and that won't happen working for the govt. Incentive is what creates good doctors and nurses and govt. destroys incentive thus promotes mediocrity
 
Conservative said:
Unlike you I hope that those nurses and doctors make as much as humanly possible and that won't happen working for the govt. Incentive is what creates good doctors and nurses and govt. destroys incentive thus promotes mediocrity
Click to expand...


So again what is the incentive? To practice medicine or to make money?

I'm going to stick with doctors whose goal is medicine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom