Who's to blame for the slow recovery?

jpn · Aug 12, 2016

countryboy said:
I just did. It's not Obama's fault. Amirite?

Oh I see, you're just a spammer. I'll remember to ignore you in the future.
By the way, why don't you go run your trite little "every life matters" banner past the red states that elected not to expand Medicaid for the poor? Do something useful.

countryboy · Aug 12, 2016

jpn said:
Oh I see, you're just a spammer. I'll remember to ignore you in the future.
By the way, why don't you go run your trite little "every life matters" banner past the red states that elected not to expand Medicaid for the poor? Do something useful.

Does Obama hold any blame whatsoever for the slow recovery? Yes, or no?

I don't think you know what the word "spammer" means. And I'm sorry if you are offended by human life. I also don't think you know the definition of "trite".

Casper · Aug 12, 2016

jpn said:
Some of that is true, but a large part is myth. Many jobs have been lost due to automation, especially in the steel and mining industries.

If you want to see one awful indicator is look at import verses exports at shipping terminals across the Nation, lots of various products being imported and few produocts being export, much of which consists of paper products for use in making packaging of products to be shipped here. There is no one cause but there are some that are more impactful than others. I would love to see products produced by American companies be required to pay higher import tariffs to reduce the driving force behind much of the reason to off-shore manufacturing.

mmi · Aug 13, 2016

Moderate Right said:
Liberal policies have failed over and over

Like the effort to diminish poverty, which cut it in half 1965-2000? Like the effort to end widespread suffering among our elderly population through the enactment of Social Security and Medicare? Like the effort to destroy fascist aggression in the 1940s?

>>liberals are still blaming Ronald Reagan for things.

Things like creating an economy that had unemployment above seven percent until Nov 1986 and doubled the national debt as a percentage of GDP?

>>Seattle minimum wage … Another liberal policy that did not deliver as promised.

Yer misrepresenting the findings in that report. What a surprise.

jpn said:
the 40-hour workweek … Child labor laws … Consumer safety laws

And many of the progressive reforms from a hundred years ago were championed by Republicans, principally TR. The effort to make the Civil War into a fight to end slavery was led by Republicans, principally A. Lincoln. Where's the partisanship in progressive liberalism?

countryboy said:
Does Obama hold any blame whatsoever for the slow recovery?

Perhaps. What would you say he should have done differently?

>>sorry if you are offended by human life

I figure jpn is just asking if you think the lives being lost because some GOP governors are refusing to accept the Medicare expansion matter?

joG · Aug 13, 2016

Ganesh said:
The bottom line is that spending should meet social goals, and be in line with available physical resources. A good deal of spending in recent years in the US has gone to mitigate the greed and waste of the private sector, through the purchase of problematic securities, and the expansion of the money supply. Debt itself is not the issue, in terms of numerical amounts, but the effect spending will have on the economy and society. Buying up dodgy mortgage funds may be an emergency measure, but not the ideal way forward to a bright future. Spending on projects that will create growth and a better society are a better strategy. The US is a rich country, that can and should spend more to counter the increasing social problems that exist.

That is a very noble attitude and well meant, I am sure. The thing is, that it is at odds with the math of social sciences and especially economics. But you are a grown-up. If you haven't learned the 1,2,3 of it, nothing I say will change your mind. Social democracy sound too good to be true and is. But people follow that kind of Pied Piper over the edge, before they realize there is a problem. But even then, they will go on and on about this detail or that that could have made it work. It is crazy, I know. But that is how populism works.

DA60 · Aug 13, 2016

Bush, Obama, Congress (both parties clearly have no clue how to run an economy), the ignorant masses for going along with them and more then all of the above combined - the Federal Reserve.

No doubt most of you do not agree.

No doubt I don't much care.

mmi · Aug 13, 2016

DA60 said:
Bush, Obama, Congress (both parties clearly have no clue how to run an economy), the ignorant masses … the Federal Reserve.

You've repeated this plenty of times. So what should we do, oh wise one? Cut taxes, which won't do much of anything other than increase the deficit and therefore the supposedly horrible national debt, eliminate regulations, typically stated vaguely — which ones and how will that help, and … perhaps return to some sort of GOLD STANDARD?

Ganesh · Aug 13, 2016

joG said:
That is a very noble attitude and well meant, I am sure. The thing is, that it is at odds with the math of social sciences and especially economics. But you are a grown-up. If you haven't learned the 1,2,3 of it, nothing I say will change your mind. Social democracy sound too good to be true and is. But people follow that kind of Pied Piper over the edge, before they realize there is a problem. But even then, they will go on and on about this detail or that that could have made it work. It is crazy, I know. But that is how populism works.

When people say social democratic goals are too good to be true, I often ask them to think about to whose benefit it is to insist on this ideology. Answer that and you are well on your way.

You might also want to ask yourself why a number of nations that are similar to the US in terms of economic development can afford things the US cannot. Places like Australia and Canada have public medicine, Germany and France largely free education, and even poorer countries like Singapore or Thailand can build superior infrastructure in some areas, and they are no more in debt, in fact less so in many cases, than the US.

They are not over any edge, although the US is getting dangerously close to an edge, as inequality becomes extreme, radical ideology starves government of funds for rebuilding infrastructure, and demagogues like the Donald can arise, as anyone who promises to tear down the rotten system is seen as a hero, no matter how personally flawed.

What is too good to be true, and isn't, is the projected spin that free markets function with ideal efficiency, and wise and honest businessmen (such as the Donald) know how to run a society better than those with some actual education and experience in that field. It is those ideas, and others originated by the rentier class, and accepted by the gullible and malleable, that is truly leading the US over the edge.

joG · Aug 13, 2016

Ganesh said:
When people say social democratic goals are too good to be true, I often ask them to think about to whose benefit it is to insist on this ideology. Answer that and you are well on your way.

You might also want to ask yourself why a number of nations that are similar to the US in terms of economic development can afford things the US cannot. Places like Australia and Canada have public medicine, Germany and France largely free education, and even poorer countries like Singapore or Thailand can build superior infrastructure in some areas, and they are no more in debt, in fact less so in many cases, than the US.

They are not over any edge, although the US is getting dangerously close to an edge, as inequality becomes extreme, radical ideology starves government of funds for rebuilding infrastructure, and demagogues like the Donald can arise, as anyone who promises to tear down the rotten system is seen as a hero, no matter how personally flawed.

What is too good to be true, and isn't, is the projected spin that free markets function with ideal efficiency, and wise and honest businessmen (such as the Donald) know how to run a society better than those with some actual education and experience in that field. It is those ideas, and others originated by the rentier class, and accepted by the gullible and malleable, that is truly leading the US over the edge.

I have not looked at Canada and Australia very carefully and am more acquainted with European social democracies and social democratic monarchies, where I have checked and rechecked the comparisons with the US. In the areas of my profession and in areas of the profession of close friends of whom I could ask for details beyond readily available statistics I have found that the European models, which are each quite different are floundering on their last legs. In some cases you have to look more closely to see, what state of the situation is. In others you have to understand, what it means, when governments make the proposals they do. But the systems are not sustainable and have usually not been able to fulfill the promises, while wasting huge amounts of money. In most cases they have led populations into situations that are incredibly opposed to the professed wills of the parties that marketed the ideology after the 1960s to get their members elected into well paying jobs. BTW, Germany and to a lesser extent France are two of the systems I have studies and you are very wrong to believe the sirens' song their parties are still trying to hide the doom.

That does not mean that the US is perfect. Of course the Europeans are not alone. Here we have tried to solve many social problems with social programs in huge scale and are finding that they have not worked. Now the people and politicians that have been living of these programs are worried, because these are the only game they understand. They do not want to realize that the world is more complicated than they had told their voters.

It is a long way from that. But the things that can be done are by far and away different from the dreamy social schemes brigade's fantasies.

Moderate Right · Aug 13, 2016

joG said:
I have not looked at Canada and Australia very carefully and am more acquainted with European social democracies and social democratic monarchies, where I have checked and rechecked the comparisons with the US. In the areas of my profession and in areas of the profession of close friends of whom I could ask for details beyond readily available statistics I have found that the European models, which are each quite different are floundering on their last legs. In some cases you have to look more closely to see, what state of the situation is. In others you have to understand, what it means, when governments make the proposals they do. But the systems are not sustainable and have usually not been able to fulfill the promises, while wasting huge amounts of money. In most cases they have led populations into situations that are incredibly opposed to the professed wills of the parties that marketed the ideology after the 1960s to get their members elected into well paying jobs. BTW, Germany and to a lesser extent France are two of the systems I have studies and you are very wrong to believe the sirens' song their parties are still trying to hide the doom.

That does not mean that the US is perfect. Of course the Europeans are not alone. Here we have tried to solve many social problems with social programs in huge scale and are finding that they have not worked. Now the people and politicians that have been living of these programs are worried, because these are the only game they understand. They do not want to realize that the world is more complicated than they had told their voters.

It is a long way from that. But the things that can be done are by far and away different from the dreamy social schemes brigade's fantasies.

Many European countries were forced to become more fiscally responsible because their liberal policies were tearing them apart, not only financially but socially as well. Greece is just the biggest iceberg, but they are not the only iceberg. And, liberally social policies have provided the roots for the growth of terrorism, which is much more worse in many European countries than it is here in the US. We have many problems here in the US which need to be solved but the liberal policies of Europe have been shown not to be the blueprint we want to follow and the ultra conservative policies here in the US should not be the blueprint to follow either. We need to get rid of the extreme partisan and gridlocked ideologies of both parties and look at non-partisan ideas about solving our problems with clear heads instead of the prejudiced heads of both sides.

Critter7r · Aug 13, 2016

Moderate Right said:
Many European countries were forced to become more fiscally responsible because their liberal policies were tearing them apart, not only financially but socially as well. Greece is just the biggest iceberg, but they are not the only iceberg. And, liberally social policies have provided the roots for the growth of terrorism, which is much more worse in many European countries than it is here in the US. We have many problems here in the US which need to be solved but the liberal policies of Europe have been shown not to be the blueprint we want to follow and the ultra conservative policies here in the US should not be the blueprint to follow either. We need to get rid of the extreme partisan and gridlocked ideologies of both parties and look at non-partisan ideas about solving our problems with clear heads instead of the prejudiced heads of both sides.

Well I'd say you're off to a swell start bringing the two sides together after calling one of them the gateway to terrorism!!

Bravo!!

mmi · Aug 13, 2016

joG said:
we have tried to solve many social problems with social programs in huge scale and are finding that they have not worked.

Is increasing spending by one percent of GDP a "huge scale"?

Is reducing poverty by fifty percent 1965-2000 an example of something that "hasn't worked"?

Moderate Right · Aug 13, 2016

mmi said:
Is increasing spending by one percent of GDP a "huge scale"?

View attachment 67205690

Is reducing poverty by fifty percent 1965-2000 an example of something that "hasn't worked"?

View attachment 67205691

Did you forget that we owe 20 trillion dollars and add more to it every year?

So now you are claiming that liberals have succeeded in greatly reducing poverty while at the very same time arguing that conservative's SSE policies have destroyed the country and that it has been conservatives policies that have been overriding liberal policies for decades?

joG · Aug 13, 2016

Critter7r said:
Well I'd say you're off to a swell start bringing the two sides together after calling one of them the gateway to terrorism!!

Bravo!!

He didn't, really. He just pointed out that the policies that were tried have resulted in terrorism. That is no sensational statement. Even liberals should have realised that by now.

Moot · Aug 13, 2016

Moderate Right said:
LOL. Liberal policies have failed over and over, they just think that when their policies haven't worked it is because they didn't do enough of it or they blame the Republicans for their failed liberal policies. Hell, liberals are still blaming Ronald Reagan for things. We just had the Seattle minimum wage thread which shows that after getting a hefty hike in the minimum wage, Seattle workers took home an average of around -$5 to +$5 more on their weekly paychecks after employers cut their hours back. Another liberal policy that did not deliver as promised. Their policies always sound better on paper than what happens in reality.

I think Kansas proved once and for all that right wing economic policies don't work....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...her-cut-them-guess-which-one-is-in-recession/

Trickle-Down Economics Has Ruined the Kansas Economy | Mother Jones

iguanaman · Aug 13, 2016

chuckiechan said:
OK, I'll bite. Since it's all Bush's fault during the meltdown, and everything he did was wrong, and he made things worse:

What should he have done?

And what should have Obama done after him?

Bush should have let the States police the predatory mortgages with their own laws instead of invoking Federal power to protect the commercial banks scheme. For one.

Obama should have insisted the stimulus was all cash instead of caving to the Republicans who wanted 1/3 of it to be tax breaks. Tax breaks are poor excuses for stimulus because they encourage hoarding not spending.

Eliot Spitzer - Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

joG · Aug 13, 2016

mmi said:
Is increasing spending by one percent of GDP a "huge scale"?

View attachment 67205690

Is reducing poverty by fifty percent 1965-2000 an example of something that "hasn't worked"?

View attachment 67205691

I am not sure, what numbers you are using, but they aren't the portion of gdp being spent on social programs. Why, cash disbursements to the lowest quintile alone is ca 20 percent.

bluesmoke · Aug 13, 2016

MrWonka said:
Why is recovery taking so longâ€”and who’s to blame? | Economic Policy Institute

I realize few people around here will let Economists explain the economy to them, but I keep trying. Surprise surprise! Austerity is what has caused our recovery to take as long as it has.

Austerity by way of a Republican Congress' obstruction of Obama's forward policy to get us out of the hole they all, including Democrats, put us in and on to a better place than before.

mmi · Aug 13, 2016

Moderate Right said:
Did you forget that we owe 20 trillion dollars and add more to it every year?

No. What would you say created all that debt?

>>you are claiming that liberals have succeeded in greatly reducing poverty

Yes.

>>while at the very same time arguing that conservative's SSE policies have destroyed the country

No, not "destroyed," but rather weakened and deprived us of opportunities for social progress, including higher incomes for the lower quintiles.

>>and that it has been conservatives policies that have been overriding liberal policies for decades?

I wouldn't say "overriding" them, more like pulling in the other direction.

I very much appreciate yer polite tone, and I sincerely apologise for the obnoxious way I've treated you in the past. I hope I don't return to that, but you know how I am.

joG said:
He just pointed out that the policies that were tried have resulted in terrorism.

Some immigrant populations have not been effectively integrated into European society. Is that the fault of liberalism? Should they simply have been excluded?

iguanaman said:
Obama should have insisted the stimulus was all cash instead of caving to the Republicans who wanted 1/3 of it to be tax breaks.

I figure he was hoping to establish an effective governing coalition of moderates. Didn't seem to work out, but we may yet see some benefits in the long run.

joG said:
I am not sure, what numbers you are using, but they aren't the portion of gdp being spent on social programs.

The description is in the chart's title — "welfare and social services." At a little more than 1.2% of GDP, that's about $220 billion. I'd say it includes EITC, child care, and other tax credits ($82 billion), SNAP ($71 billion), housing assistance ($48 billion), TANF ($16 billion), WIC ($6 billion), and LIHEAP ($3 billion).

>>cash disbursements to the lowest quintile alone is ca 20 percent.

Can you flesh that out a bit? If you include the $446 billion for Medicaid (that goes to vendors) and $55 billion for SSI (you need to be not only poor but elderly or disabled to qualify), you still get to only four percent of GDP.

Moderate Right · Aug 13, 2016

Moot said:
I think Kansas proved once and for all that right wing economic policies don't work....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...her-cut-them-guess-which-one-is-in-recession/

Trickle-Down Economics Has Ruined the Kansas Economy | Mother Jones

Kansas's problems are the result of far right policies, which are different than "moderate right" policies.

Moderate Right · Aug 13, 2016

joG said:
I am not sure, what numbers you are using, but they aren't the portion of gdp being spent on social programs. Why, cash disbursements to the lowest quintile alone is ca 20 percent.

Yet one more example of MMI's cherry picking.

Fenton · Aug 13, 2016

MrWonka said:
Why is recovery taking so longâ€”and who’s to blame? | Economic Policy Institute

I realize few people around here will let Economists explain the economy to them, but I keep trying. Surprise surprise! Austerity is what has caused our recovery to take as long as it has.

Ok, so according to the link the FED's QE and ZIRP Policies didn't work ( big shock there :roll: ) and we didn't spend enough......:lamo

U.S. National Debt Clock 2020 at Current Rates

Yup, 10 Trillion in new spending over 8 years equates to " austerity " for the average Lib :roll:

Hillary plan to grow the economy is to create jobs is basically " shovel ready jobs " meet " green jobs ". Those worked so well.....:lol: She wants to " seed " these new investment opportunities with Federal dollars and of-course the private sector will just blindly throw money at whatever ridiculous Progressive initiative she thinks is deserving of someone else money.

Hey, what did Tax payers get for their Solyndra investment ??? They got a bunch of 5th amendment pleas from chroney capitalist.

Obama-backed green energy failures leave taxpayers with $2.2 billion tab, audit finds - Washington Times

In a old thread you criticized SSE or basically said it simply didn't work. I asked you if SSE doesn't grow market economies then what does ? You said investment in education and massive new Federal spending

Lol.....your'e probably the LAST person that should be posting in the section of the forum. Primarily because your'e knowledge on the economy is limited to partisan left wing talking points

Fenton · Aug 13, 2016

iguanaman said:
Bush should have let the States police the predatory mortgages with their own laws instead of invoking Federal power to protect the commercial banks scheme. For one.

Obama should have insisted the stimulus was all cash instead of caving to the Republicans who wanted 1/3 of it to be tax breaks. Tax breaks are poor excuses for stimulus because they encourage hoarding not spending.

Eliot Spitzer - Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

Bush ???

1994....
FANNIE MAE CHAIRMAN JIM JOHNSON SAYS $1 TRILLION COMMITMENT IS ON TARGET AND IS TRANSFORMING FANNIE MAE AND THE AMERICAN MORTGAGE FINANCE INDUSTRY - Free Online Library

1999.....
HUD Archives: Cuomo Announces Action to Provide $2.4 Trillion in Mortgages for Affordable Housing for 28.1 Million Families

2000..........
Fannie Mae to Meet $1 Trillion Goal Early; CEO Raines Launches Ten-Year $2 Trillion ?American Dream

Home ownership rate in 1993 ???? 63 %

Home ownership rate in 2000 ???? 68%

That's a 5 % increase under Clinton

Home ownership rate in 2008 ??? 69%

1% increase under Bush

mmi · Aug 13, 2016

Moderate Right said:
Yet one more example of MMI's cherry picking.

Cherry-picking in what sense? Which cherries did I leave out of my analysis?

iguanaman · Aug 13, 2016

Moderate Right said:
Many European countries were forced to become more fiscally responsible because their liberal policies were tearing them apart, not only financially but socially as well. Greece is just the biggest iceberg, but they are not the only iceberg. And, liberally social policies have provided the roots for the growth of terrorism, which is much more worse in many European countries than it is here in the US. We have many problems here in the US which need to be solved but the liberal policies of Europe have been shown not to be the blueprint we want to follow and the ultra conservative policies here in the US should not be the blueprint to follow either. We need to get rid of the extreme partisan and gridlocked ideologies of both parties and look at non-partisan ideas about solving our problems with clear heads instead of the prejudiced heads of both sides.

LOL The Europeans got their "social policies" from FDR and that is not what is causing the terrorist attacks. Islamic radicals are thriving in the Muslim ghettos that are keeping them isolated from society. We do have much to learn from Europe. Things like banning private schools so that the wealthy force the Govt. to provide top class education to ALL are fine ideas. We have been left behind in many ways by Europe, who have spent the last few decades rebuilding their public transportation and infrastructure instead of stirring up hornets nests in the Mideast. We can still catch up but the time is running out.

Who's to blame for the slow recovery?

Retired Navy Commander