• 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!

Can a President go 4 years without it ever being his "economy"?

Can a President go 4 years without it ever being "his economy"?

  • Total voters
    10
B

Badmutha

Banned
Joined
Jan 27, 2011
Messages
1,951
Reaction score
395
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I feel it must be asked.....since were already 2 years into Barack HusSame Obama's Failed Presidency.......and according to all the Liberal experts......its still George Bush's economy......and Obama inherited everything.

Can a President go 4 years without it ever being his/her economy?

We must remember......nothing ever done by Senator Obama had any negative impact on the economy......just as the actions and inactions of the Democrat controlled Congress from 2007-2011 had absolutley no negative impact on the economy what so ever.......it was all the fault of George Bush and the Republican Minority in Congress......Obama inherited everything.

So to all those in the Obama Inheritance crowd........

......please let us know when its Obama's Economy......for the first time in his adult life......Barack HusSame Obama will be accountable for something.


Unemployment Rate Since President Obama took office
UnemploymentRate.gif

.
.
.
.
 
Last edited:
You are building a straw man. It's not "Bush's economy", not "Obama's" economy. The effects from Bush's presidency can be felt yet, but so can the effects of Obama's. Further, you present a simplistic and misleading view. Job losses when Obama took over where huge, and now the economy is actually gaining jobs each month. It's not enough yet to offset the need for new jobs, but it is a large step in the right direction.

Further, the crash that led to the huge job losses each month when Obama took over was not entirely(probably not even mostly) Bush's fault, but had their beginnings in events from before Bush ever became president, maybe as far back as Reagan. It's not a simplistic thing as you try and present it.
 
Presidents have very little direct impact on the state of the economy. They can provide a little temporary support through economic stimulus programs, and can provide more indirect support through nominating competent people to the Federal Reserve...but there's nothing they can do to turn a recession into a boom. The economy moves in natural cycles.
 
Redress said:
You are building a straw man. It's not "Bush's economy", not "Obama's" economy. The effects from Bush's presidency can be felt yet, but so can the effects of Obama's. Further, you present a simplistic and misleading view. Job losses when Obama took over where huge, and now the economy is actually gaining jobs each month. It's not enough yet to offset the need for new jobs, but it is a large step in the right direction.

Further, the crash that led to the huge job losses each month when Obama took over was not entirely(probably not even mostly) Bush's fault, but had their beginnings in events from before Bush ever became president, maybe as far back as Reagan. It's not a simplistic thing as you try and present it.
Click to expand...

It's sad that people fail to understand that most economic policy takes years to actually effect the economy.
 
Kandahar said:
Presidents have very little direct impact on the state of the economy. They can provide a little temporary support through economic stimulus programs, and can provide more indirect support through nominating competent people to the Federal Reserve...but there's nothing they can do to turn a recession into a boom. The economy moves in natural cycles.
Click to expand...

For 4 years we have heard the ongoing liberal mantra around "George Bush's Economy"..........
.
.
.
.
 
Your Star said:
It's sad that people fail to understand that most economic policy takes years to actually effect the economy.
Click to expand...

Tell that to Barack "shovel ready" Obama.......and his empty promises of immediate relief from PORKULUS.....as well as keeping unemployment below 8%.
.
.
.
 
Badmutha said:
For 4 years we have heard the ongoing liberal mantra around "George Bush's Economy"..........
.
.
.
.
Click to expand...

For 9 years we have heard about Bush causing 9/11. Doesn't make it true, nor does it make giving those people any credit. Birthers, truthers, people who comment on economy without understanding it, none of those should be given any kind of credence.
 
Kandahar said:
Mmmk. Wonderful. This has what to do with my post?
Click to expand...

That economies move in natural cycles.........unless its an economic downturn while a Republican is in the Whitehouse.
.
.
.
.
 
Badmutha said:
That economies move in natural cycles.........unless its an economic downturn while a Republican is in the Whitehouse.
.
.
.
.
Click to expand...

Actually the government can have significant impact on those cycles. They are not random. However, you are building a straw man since that is not what any one is saying.
 
Badmutha said:
That economies move in natural cycles.........unless its an economic downturn while a Republican is in the Whitehouse.
Click to expand...

I can tell you are going to be one of our more intellectual posters. :2wave:
 
Obviously, it wasn't Obama's economy when he took office in 2008. Therefore, any comparisons that are made for purposes of "grading" Obama need to be made in comparison to at least that point in time. We are now, of course, in Obama's economy, but what Obama's economy is cannot reasonably be assessed without reference to what happened immediately before he inherited it. To do otherwise would be, at best, idiotic. Obama has had to deal with things Republicans and Democrats simply didn't have to give a second thought to from 2000-2008. Frankly, the analysis is so complicated it is almost pointless trying to draw any comparisons at all. Better to point out what might have been done better by another leader. But, as has been noted many times, the opposition party hasn't been been too forthcoming with that type of analysis. Presumably, that is because, as I suspect, nobody really knows what to do, and at the end of the day there isn't a whole heck of a lot that can be done right now except wait.
 
Last edited:
The economy is Carters, Reagans, Bush's, Clinton's, Bush's (jr), and Obama's. More importantly, it is also the baby of every other person who can affect policy from CEOs to the Fed to Congress to Government Agencies to Etc.
 
Badmutha said:
I feel it must be asked.....since were already 2 years into Barack HusSame Obama's Failed Presidency.......and according to all the Liberal experts......its still George Bush's economy......and Obama inherited everything.

.
.
Click to expand...

How was the economy when Bush left office? Is it better or worse now?



Sorry to inform you, but we are still suffering from the effects of the last administration.
 
Last edited:
megaprogman said:
The economy is Carters, Reagans, Bush's, Clinton's, Bush's (jr), and Obama's. More importantly, it is also the baby of every other person who can affect policy from CEOs to the Fed to Congress to Government Agencies to Etc.
Click to expand...

You forgot Nixon.
 
USA_1 said:
You forgot Nixon.
Click to expand...

Actually, it goes back to at least the new deal and likely before, I just didn't want to type the name of every president since at least 1930
 
Kandahar said:
Presidents have very little direct impact on the state of the economy. They can provide a little temporary support through economic stimulus programs, and can provide more indirect support through nominating competent people to the Federal Reserve...but there's nothing they can do to turn a recession into a boom. The economy moves in natural cycles.
Click to expand...
Temporary, if at that. We all know then long term consequences of the stimulus With that being said then why does the government try to infiltrate on every little situation anymore?
 
megaprogman said:
Actually, it goes back to at least the new deal and likely before, I just didn't want to type the name of every president since at least 1930
Click to expand...

Things were pretty good before Nixon. After WWII the country was prospering and becoming the greatest nation on earth. It all went to hell after Vietnam.
 
DontDoIt said:
Temporary, if at that. We all know then long term consequences of the stimulus With that being said then why does the government try to infiltrate on every little situation anymore?
Click to expand...

To smooth out the economic cycle.
 
USA_1 said:
How was the economy when Bush left office? Is it better or worse now?

Sorry to inform you, but we are still suffering from the effects of the last administration.
Click to expand...

Well whenever it becomes "Obama's Economy"......make sure you let us know.....
.
.
.
.
 
Badmutha said:
Well whenever it becomes "Obama's Economy"......make sure you let us know.....
.
.
.
.
Click to expand...

It will never become Obamas or the next presidents economy until we get over the damage done during the Bush years. It amazes me that Obama still gets blamed for the economic collapse that started in '07. Had McCain won would he get the blame?
 
USA_1 said:
And to prevent a depression so bad we could never recover.
Click to expand...

Hoax........

StimulusProj.jpg

.
.
.
.
....and Change.

Unemployemnt Rate Since Obama's "Stimulus/Jobs Bill"
UnemploymentRate.gif

.
.
.
............by Obama's own measurement.......it not only didnt help......it made things worse.


Without Obama blowing Billions of dollars on Subprime Democrat Projects to Nowhere.......

.............300 million Americans would have layed down and died.
.
.
.
 
Data without understanding leads to nothing
 
USA_1 said:
It will never become Obamas or the next presidents economy until we get over the damage done during the Bush years. It amazes me that Obama still gets blamed for the economic collapse that started in '07. Had McCain won would he get the blame?
Click to expand...

Do the actions or inactions of Congress have any impact on an economy?
.
.
.
.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom