Rate the administration

I'm just curious as to where people stand now that Obama and Congress have passed the largest spending bill in history and the economy is falling deeper into recession/depression. With the stock market reaching it's lowest point in more than a decade (the Clinton years), and GM on the brink of implosion, are you happy with the performance of the Obama WH and Congress thus far?

P/N said:

I'm just curious as to where people stand now that Obama and Congress have passed the largest spending bill in history and the economy is falling deeper into recession/depression. With the stock market reaching it's lowest point in more than a decade (the Clinton years), and GM on the brink of implosion, are you happy with the performance of the Obama WH and Congress thus far?

Click to expand...

No. Thanks to Obama and the rest of the Democrats we have spent more in 2 months than Bush did in 7 years of Iraq war.

Well, government spending is the only way out of the Bush depression, so.

Other

I didn't vote and I need more time before I rate his administration.

I'm not pleased with the massive bailout/stimulus/budget plans(based on my conservative lean regarding economic issues) put forth by the Obama administration(and Bush), but I realize that they haven't had time to be implemented nor has there been enough time to gauge the results of these plans.

Plus there are many other facets to an administration, outside of our economy that need to be weighed. He's just gotten started, and I feel its only fair to give the man some time, before I rate his efforts. Thats not to say I won't be critical, or voice my opposition to his actions as they happen. But I realize things take time to come to fruition and somethings work out in the end, despite it seeming fruitless or worthless at the time.

I doubt I will have high regards for his administration, just based on the ideological differences between my views and his, but I said I would give the man a fair shake and thats what I am doing.

faminedynasty said:

Well, government spending is the only way out of the Bush depression, so.

Click to expand...

That is a myth. The economy would have been alot better off if they had let companies like AIG fail. Yes it would have hurt. But in the long run we would have been far better off. All this spending has done is put us in worse debt and has made the economy go to crap alot faster. What so many people fail to realize is that the value of our dollar is dependant on how much our debt and deficit is. The more they are the less the dollar is worth. The less the dollar is worth the harder it is to pay for the same amount of materials/services as you did before the fall of the value of the dollar. Which hurts companies which in turn hurts the common people.

Kal'Stang said:

That is a myth. The economy would have been alot better off if they had let companies like AIG fail.

Click to expand...

Uh....letting AIG go would effectively destroy much of the insurance industry. Those policies would then be marked down in a massive fire sale causing other insurance agencies to have to take massive charges on their financials. Much of the credit default swap market would vanish and likely we'd get some crackpots in office outlawing them which will hurt us in the long run. What you propose is essentially to let large sectors of the financial sector collapse and then slowly rebuild. Just how long do you expect your savings to last you through the decade long depression? AIG is being kept alive because its tentacles have reached into so many industries and places that letting them go would pull the rug out of things we normally wouldn't think about.

All this spending has done is put us in worse debt and has made the economy go to crap alot faster.

Click to expand...

Some of it.

What so many people fail to realize is that the value of our dollar is dependant on how much our debt and deficit is.

Click to expand...

Actually, like all fiat money, our dollar's value is dependent upon perception of value. If people don't think it has any value then it doesn't. Our level of debt is somewhat relevant but as seen in the past couple months, rising levels of debt really haven't caused our currency to tank.

obvious Child said:

Uh....letting AIG go would effectively destroy much of the insurance industry. Those policies would then be marked down in a massive fire sale causing other insurance agencies to have to take massive charges on their financials. Much of the credit default swap market would vanish and likely we'd get some crackpots in office outlawing them which will hurt us in the long run. What you propose is essentially to let large sectors of the financial sector collapse and then slowly rebuild. Just how long do you expect your savings to last you through the decade long depression? AIG is being kept alive because its tentacles have reached into so many industries and places that letting them go would pull the rug out of things we normally wouldn't think about.

Click to expand...

I have no credit. I do not use credit cards and the only insurence company I use is to put full coverage insurence on my car. I pay it in full every time it's time to pay it. I do not spend more than I have. I do not buy something if I cannot afford to pay it in full. This has kept me out of debt. The only time that having no credit has affected me is when I applied for a quick refund for my taxes. They actually turned me down for the quick refund. No big...I just had to wait a couple extra weeks to pay for some things I needed.

And you do know that when something is built slowly it is stronger than if something is built quickly.

obvious Child said:

Some of it.

Click to expand...

Might want to explain this....was not all of the money for the stimulus package not borrowed? And borrowing money is the main cause of what puts people in debt.

obvious Child said:

Actually, like all fiat money, our dollar's value is dependent upon perception of value. If people don't think it has any value then it doesn't. Our level of debt is somewhat relevant but as seen in the past couple months, rising levels of debt really haven't caused our currency to tank.

Click to expand...

You are correct here. The value of our money is also about perception. Tell me what do you think the value of our dollar is when you see so much of it being borrowed? Who would you trust to loan money to, the person with the most borrowed money/debt...or the person with the least borrowed money/debt?

P/N said:

I'm just curious as to where people stand now that Obama and Congress have passed the largest spending bill in history and the economy is falling deeper into recession/depression. With the stock market reaching it's lowest point in more than a decade (the Clinton years), and GM on the brink of implosion, are you happy with the performance of the Obama WH and Congress thus far?

Click to expand...

These things are unrelated. The economic downtimes were brought on by the Bush administration. Obama has only been in office a couple of months. You cant possibly put this on him.

He is doing the best he can with a horrible situation created by the republican morons, so yes, he is doing a decent job. But his job is not only the economy, and on the rest of the things he is doing a below expectation job.

Maximus Zeebra said:

These things are unrelated. The economic downtimes were brought on by the Bush administration. Obama has only been in office a couple of months. You cant possibly put this on him.

He is doing the best he can with a horrible situation created by the republican morons, so yes, he is doing a decent job. But his job is not only the economy, and on the rest of the things he is doing a below expectation job.

Click to expand...

Why do so many people blame this on Bush when it was the democrats deregulation that caused this before Bush became prez? Hell when Bush was president he even tried to bring back more regulation, which would have stopped this crisis cold in it's tracks, to the likes of Fannie Mae...which the Democrats blocked.

[youtube]SCTxZa9kpSI[/youtube]

Kal'Stang said:

Why do so many people blame this on Bush when it was the democrats deregulation that caused this before Bush became prez? Hell when Bush was president he even tried to bring back more regulation, which would have stopped this crisis cold in it's tracks, to the likes of Fannie Mae...which the Democrats blocked.

[youtube]SCTxZa9kpSI[/youtube]

Click to expand...

Because ignorance is bliss.

They live in a blissful world... Back to the Vin de Table, baguette, Brie... and Bush bashing, as they light up another Gauloises.. and impress each other with their ignorant world view.

How else do you get something as backwards as Old Europe?
Or Obama?

How else can you ignore a core element of what we are experiencing?
The catalyst?

And then dance around like it's not there, not to be explored, dissected, and eliminated?

Where are the public hearings?
Why isn't Dodd and Frank testifying?
Raines and Gorellick?

Open, ethical administration... my ass.

Kal'Stang said:

Why do so many people blame this on Bush when it was the democrats deregulation that caused this before Bush became prez? Hell when Bush was president he even tried to bring back more regulation, which would have stopped this crisis cold in it's tracks, to the likes of Fannie Mae...which the Democrats blocked.

[youtube]SCTxZa9kpSI[/youtube]

Click to expand...

Ridiculous.. Fox News is not even a credible source when talking about party related issues, its clearly favorable towards the republicans no matter what..

Bush and his government allowed the mortgage crisis to happen in the first place, thats what triggered the rest of the crisis. Many of those related crisis is the fault of Bush, the brought the US into deficits again, huge ones, and outside of financial credibility. HE and the republican party. As for all the other following domino crisis, those are not the Bush admin alone, but those crisis have been built up over decades of many administration, and have been ready to burst and collapse as soon as something triggered it.

Maximus Zeebra said:

These things are unrelated. The economic downtimes were brought on by the Bush administration. Obama has only been in office a couple of months. You cant possibly put this on him.

He is doing the best he can with a horrible situation created by the republican morons, so yes, he is doing a decent job. But his job is not only the economy, and on the rest of the things he is doing a below expectation job.

Click to expand...

They are not unrelated at all. You couldn't be further from the truth if you tried. The housing crisis is what brought this on and it was put in motion long before Bush 41 was even just the VP. Carters policies started it all. As Jal'Stang pointed out, Clinton put the nails in the coffin. But instead of debating this issue, you dismiss it because it came from FOX News. Welcome to the leftwaffe!

The stimulus bill has sent Wall Street into a spiral that is now out of control. No one wants to invest in an economy that Obama is crucifying. Bush bears some blame here and his actions/inactions where appropriate are unexcusable, but Obama is destroying the free market system. He has made my great-grandchildren (I am a father of 4 with no grand kids, yet) broke and they are at least another 20 years from being conceived. His policies, and those of our piece of **** Congress, have pointed this country straight into the ground at the speed of sound. But since you don't live here, I fully expect the likes of yourself and Petey to have a grasp of the whole picture. :roll:

Maximus Zeebra said:

Ridiculous.. Fox News is not even a credible source when talking about party related issues, its clearly favorable towards the republicans no matter what..

Bush and his government allowed the mortgage crisis to happen in the first place, thats what triggered the rest of the crisis. Many of those related crisis is the fault of Bush, the brought the US into deficits again, huge ones, and outside of financial credibility. HE and the republican party. As for all the other following domino crisis, those are not the Bush admin alone, but those crisis have been built up over decades of many administration, and have been ready to burst and collapse as soon as something triggered it.

Click to expand...

The mortgage crisis began with Carter in the 70's. Clinton steered the market in a downward direction in the 90's. This is not entirely Bush's fault, but I can't expect someone as out of touch with America as folks like you and Petey are to grasp this basic concept. Maybe instead of commenting on something you know very little of, you should just stick to EU affairs.

Infract me if you want, I don't care. I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take thus bull**** anymore lying down. I certainly don't need to hear this **** from our reality challenged Americans, let alone from Europeans who don't live here, don't pay taxes here and don't know what is really going on with this administration. So far they are trying to re-write our way of life and they are doing more damage than good. I posted a simple poll to gauge what people thought of the administrations performance so far. Next time, I'll make sure to add that I only care about the opinions of those who live in this country because I could give a **** less what any European thinks.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Ridiculous.. Fox News is not even a credible source when talking about party related issues, its clearly favorable towards the republicans no matter what..

Bush and his government allowed the mortgage crisis to happen in the first place, thats what triggered the rest of the crisis. Many of those related crisis is the fault of Bush, the brought the US into deficits again, huge ones, and outside of financial credibility. HE and the republican party. As for all the other following domino crisis, those are not the Bush admin alone, but those crisis have been built up over decades of many administration, and have been ready to burst and collapse as soon as something triggered it.

Click to expand...

How could Bush have "allowed" it when he advocated for more regulation against them? How could Bush have "allowed it" when the legislation that was introduced by republicans got blocked by democrats?

Remember, even if you consider Fox biased you can still check the facts by looking up the bill and checking to see who did/didn't vote for it.

It is still far too early to judge the administration, but I have not seen anything to impress me yet.

P/N said:

I'm just curious as to where people stand now that Obama and Congress have passed the largest spending bill in history and the economy is falling deeper into recession/depression. With the stock market reaching it's lowest point in more than a decade (the Clinton years), and GM on the brink of implosion, are you happy with the performance of the Obama WH and Congress thus far?

Click to expand...

The stimulus bill was much smaller than it needed to be, and Geithner's plan for the banks (or lack thereof) has not particularly impressed me. But then, he's only been in office for a month. Hopefully we get another stimulus and a solid bank plan soon.

I'll wait until I see what Obama does about health care, and if there are any more stimulus bills coming, before I pass judgment.

Kandahar said:

The stimulus bill was much smaller than it needed to be...

Click to expand...

Agreed that it needs to be bigger. We need big spending to create jobs. Huge public works projects to completely rebuild the infrastructure of this country and create decent paying jobs. Government spending is how we are going to get out this. Got us out of the great depression, it'll get us out of this.
One could argue, as many do, that it wasn't the New Deal but WWII that got us out of the depression. But what is a World War besides madness and slaughter? Even bigger government spending! Job creation. The establishment of a middle class. If we can simply be motivated that the peril of our economic downfall is a threat, as an enemy is a threat, we can mobilize and get big things done.

Kal'Stang said:

I have no credit. I do not use credit cards and the only insurence company I use is to put full coverage insurence on my car. I pay it in full every time it's time to pay it. I do not spend more than I have. I do not buy something if I cannot afford to pay it in full. This has kept me out of debt. The only time that having no credit has affected me is when I applied for a quick refund for my taxes. They actually turned me down for the quick refund. No big...I just had to wait a couple extra weeks to pay for some things I needed.

Click to expand...

You're the clear exception in a consumer world. But think about the business world. Firms have all kinds of insurance, from mundane casualty insurance to derivatives like credit default swaps. Insurance is a huge part of our economy and letting that essentially take a shotgun blast the face will likely signal a depression.

And you do know that when something is built slowly it is stronger than if something is built quickly.

Click to expand...

Of course. AIG got to the top just that way. They really got done in by a tiny part of their London office making ill informed credit default swaps in the hundreds of billions. Talk about poor internal controls.

Might want to explain this....was not all of the money for the stimulus package not borrowed? And borrowing money is the main cause of what puts people in debt.

Click to expand...

Not all of it. Some is taxation some is just letting the printing presses go. The presses really isn't that bad in a deflationary period. It's when inflation is positive then letting the printing presses go is a horrible, horrible, horrible idea. That's the joy of owning your own press. You just print more money and say it has value! Oh Zimbabwe!

You are correct here. The value of our money is also about perception. Tell me what do you think the value of our dollar is when you see so much of it being borrowed? Who would you trust to loan money to, the person with the most borrowed money/debt...or the person with the least borrowed money/debt?

Click to expand...

The green back has historically been the currency to go to when the global economy goes to pot. People were thinking that the Euro could replace us but the banking issues and seperate country problems in the Eurozone have pretty much destroyed that notion. And the pound is tied to the Euro at this point rendering it not a viable option. The yen could have its own thread given how complicated that is. And people see the US as the largest economy. If we go under, the rest of the world will to. So it's kind of just trusting that the US is "too big to fail." And that people are irrational. People are buying US debt that has negative returns. Really. I don't know what to say to that. Frankly speaking, if their investments in the US dollar fail, then their loss really is the least of their problems if that happens.

Kal'Stang said:

How could Bush have "allowed" it when he advocated for more regulation against them? How could Bush have "allowed it" when the legislation that was introduced by republicans got blocked by democrats?

Remember, even if you consider Fox biased you can still check the facts by looking up the bill and checking to see who did/didn't vote for it.

Click to expand...

Bush was the final nail in the coffin.. But generally I blame the republican with their loose spendings and tax cuts for the long term ill effects of the American people, its something they have learned to do themselves.

But anyways, the problems is generations old like I said, and really I have put this on on the flawed capitalist system before, but its also convenient to blame the last few administrations for not doing anything, especially the moron Bush who just neglected everything to go to Iraq.

Kal'Stang said:

How could Bush have "allowed" it when he advocated for more regulation against them? How could Bush have "allowed it" when the legislation that was introduced by republicans got blocked by democrats?

Remember, even if you consider Fox biased you can still check the facts by looking up the bill and checking to see who did/didn't vote for it.

Click to expand...

Everyone saw the bubble bursting, but the Bush admin had enough to do in Iraq and never really did anything of importance.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Everyone saw the bubble bursting, but the Bush admin had enough to do in Iraq and never really did anything of importance.

Click to expand...

If everyone saw the bubble bursting then why did the democrats block the bill that was introduced to try and avert all this?

Maximus Zeebra said:

Bush was the final nail in the coffin.. But generally I blame the republican with their loose spendings and tax cuts for the long term ill effects of the American people, its something they have learned to do themselves.

But anyways, the problems is generations old like I said, and really I have put this on on the flawed capitalist system before, but its also convenient to blame the last few administrations for not doing anything, especially the moron Bush who just neglected everything to go to Iraq.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry but when Obama has authorized (even demanded) 787 billion dollars worth of money to spend on a plan that even according to him has a 30% chance of failure and yet Republicans didn't even spend 787 billion dollars on a 7 year war then are you sure that it's the republicans that can be considered "loose spenders"? And Obama has only been in office for 2 months.

Kal'Stang said:

I have no credit. I do not use credit cards and the only insurence company I use is to put full coverage insurence on my car. I pay it in full every time it's time to pay it. I do not spend more than I have. I do not buy something if I cannot afford to pay it in full. This has kept me out of debt. The only time that having no credit has affected me is when I applied for a quick refund for my taxes. They actually turned me down for the quick refund. No big...I just had to wait a couple extra weeks to pay for some things I needed.

And you do know that when something is built slowly it is stronger than if something is built quickly.

Click to expand...

Thats nice, but sometimes you have to spend more than you have or it will get much worse than it already is...

I dont really believe in these bailouts or the stimulus package (though some i do).

I think the truth of it is people are just gonna have to feel the pain what is currently happening is just an attempt to postpone it and maybe make it worse.

Despite what people say about the new deal that resulted the same way yes it created unrealistic jobs for a while but it fizzled out in the end.

mikhail said:

I dont really believe in these bailouts or the stimulus package (though some i do).

I think the truth of it is people are just gonna have to feel the pain what is currently happening is just an attempt to postpone it and maybe make it worse.

Despite what people say about the new deal that resulted the same way yes it created unrealistic jobs for a while but it fizzled out in the end.

Click to expand...

It was ultimately WWII that ended the Depression.

I agree, people need to feel the pain. Bailouts don't help in the long run. The question is, will those responsible for the collapse feel the pain. I know that millions of homeowners, and such that knowingly paid much too much for houses, inflating the market to unrealistic levels are feeling the pain, but will the big whig multi-millionaires that earn way too much in the first place going to feel the pain, because all a bail-out does is help them stay in power, and they are the ****-ups that should lose their power.

Bodhisattva said:

It was ultimately WWII that ended the Depression.

Click to expand...

WWII was the biggest government spending program in the history of the world.

Bodhisattva said:

I agree, people need to feel the pain. Bailouts don't help in the long run. The question is, will those responsible for the collapse feel the pain. I know that millions of homeowners, and such that knowingly paid much too much for houses, inflating the market to unrealistic levels are feeling the pain, but will the big whig multi-millionaires that earn way too much in the first place going to feel the pain, because all a bail-out does is help them stay in power, and they are the ****-ups that should lose their power.

Click to expand...

I agree (somewhat). Bailouts are never a long-term solution, but they can be effective in the short term. It would be a disaster if the entire banking industry went under, and no one did anything to stop it. After the economy recovers a little, if there are still individual banks that are too weak to make it on their own, I absolutely agree they should be allowed to go under