• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

At what point will the economy be Obama's fault?

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

rudeguy

Lifer
Dec 27, 2001
47,371
14
61
I sitll don't know why something that happened half a year-1 year before he was elected should be his fault.

please explain this to me.

I think this isn't entirely Bush's fault, either.

It is Obama's fault that things aren't as dire as they were predicted to be.We didn't, and will not suffer the dreaded depression that we were heading to.

It is also his fault that things aren't as good as they could be....but how good could they be? really? Can any of you even imagine how good, or bad, the economy is supposed to be?

don't b e so daft. lulz.
check out the OP date of this thread. It was at the height of the Left Wingers telling us all how Bush had ruined the economy forever with his spending. Its meant to be a time capsule, a reminder, and an open ended question.

I thought thread would die when Obama said he wasn't going to blame his predecessors but that didn't even last a week.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
105,937
20,887
136
check out the OP date of this thread. It was at the height of the Left Wingers telling us all how Bush had ruined the economy forever with his spending. Its meant to be a time capsule, a reminder, and an open ended question.

I thought thread would die when Obama said he wasn't going to blame his predecessors but that didn't even last a week.
yeah, I know this thread.

but, lol...why the fuck shouldn't he blame his predecessors? Do you not agree that he inherited a catastrophe that certainly was not his?

THe people that bitch the loudest about how things are going (nothing is spectacular--I agree), would surely decimate this country if they were in charge. They wear silly hats and sit on street corners, bitching about shit when they could be working and actually doing something. fuck those asshats. :D
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,830
1
0
Obama is trying to FIX the economy. His hands have been tied by Republicans and conservative Democrats for his entire term so far.

At what point do you blame a mother changing her baby's diaper for spewing shit everywhere? AT NO POINT
 

rudeguy

Lifer
Dec 27, 2001
47,371
14
61
Obama is trying to FIX the economy. His hands have been tied by Republicans and conservative Democrats for his entire term so far.

At what point do you blame a mother changing her baby's diaper for spewing shit everywhere? AT NO POINT
how long did the Dem's have complete control? Its the Republicans fault that Obama decided to force through Obamacare instead of focus on the economy and jobs?

Open your eyes man...
 

wayliff

Lifer
Nov 28, 2002
11,716
7
81
how long did the Dem's have complete control? Its the Republicans fault that Obama decided to force through Obamacare instead of focus on the economy and jobs?

Open your eyes man...
I'll say that the administration (all branches) failed to pass what was needed when democrats had the power to make it so. I suspect political reasons because there is no excuse.

However I'll also say that what was inherited was not good either.
I'll dare to say that if McCain was elected back in 2008, he'd be on the grill too for similar reasons.

I will also say that I don't believe that we've seen the effects of many of Obama's policies yet he is on the grill already. Everybody wants cuts and fixes just as long as it does not affect them, when that happens then they will cry foul play.

Time to man up and do what it takes which is probably a moderate combination of what both parties are trying to force through.
 
Last edited:

brencat

Platinum Member
Feb 26, 2007
2,170
3
76
Obama is trying to FIX the economy. His hands have been tied by Republicans and conservative Democrats for his entire term so far.
If by 'Fix' you mean pass cap & tax, take over healthcare, regulate the hell out of business, significantly raise taxes, create even more uncertainty, and attempt to turn the USA into a socialist European-lite utopia,

then I'll be happy to see his real agenda tied up for the remainder of his (hopefully) 1 term.
 

wayliff

Lifer
Nov 28, 2002
11,716
7
81
If by 'Fix' you mean pass cap & tax, take over healthcare, regulate the hell out of business, significantly raise taxes, create even more uncertainty, and attempt to turn the USA into a socialist European-lite utopia,

then I'll be happy to see his real agenda tied up for the remainder of his (hopefully) 1 term.
what is so scary about 'socialism'?
This does not necessarily reflect my preference, I just want to ask you that.
 

lupi

Lifer
Apr 8, 2001
32,539
260
126
It was his responsibility to fix when he got elected. That's a separate question of who's to blame for fucking it up in the first place, which is not a simple answer either.

As to whether he's fixed it to anyone's satisfaction will be a pretty simple question to answer. If he wins in Nov 2012, then people are happy enough with his actions.
That thought would have more truth if a significant portion of people weren't voting for him solely because he's black or has a D by the name.
 

brencat

Platinum Member
Feb 26, 2007
2,170
3
76
what is so scary about 'socialism'?
This does not necessarily reflect my preference, I just want to ask you that.
The biggest problem I have with it is that it takes from those who have and gives to those who don't have; that it presumes those who don't have 'deserve' to share in the work product of those that do, regardless of the effort or expense expended by those that achieved to attain where they are.

Socialism prioritizes 'equality of outcome' over 'equality of opportunity' as a foundation for social stability, when it fact in the end all it really does is lead to misery for all.

And lastly, socialism assumes people will be happy being 'equal' when in fact humans are not built to be equal. Deep down we all want to be better than each other and differentiate ourselves through achievement. I resent the idea that a government entity can actually tell me I have to be 'more equal' with my underachieving brother for the good of society.
 
Last edited:

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
10,924
1,088
126
If by 'Fix' you mean pass cap & tax, take over healthcare, regulate the hell out of business, significantly raise taxes, create even more uncertainty, and attempt to turn the USA into a socialist European-lite utopia,

then I'll be happy to see his real agenda tied up for the remainder of his (hopefully) 1 term.
Here's how you know brencat doesn't understand ... well anything. Healthcare wasn't taken over the Affordable Healthcare Act not even close, it was all done using the private insurance companies. Taxes haven't been raised under Obama, the stimulus package gave the single largest one time tax break in the history of the US. He currently wants to remove some of the tax breaks that Bush gave which are part of the reason why Bush started with a surplus and ended with a massive deficit. Regulate business complaint, one of my favorite, because we all know that without regulation the free market never makes a single mistake! (BP, economic meltdown of 2008, Enron, Worldcom) Nope, the free market does everything perfect if you don't regulate it and the common man isn't totally fucked over at all! And then socialism complaints ... well, this one isn't even worth talking about because if he understood socialism in the faintest, he wouldn't make this complaint.

However brencat has done one thing here. He's show why we don't need to defund the department of education and in fact need to increase the funding and pay teachers better.
 

wayliff

Lifer
Nov 28, 2002
11,716
7
81
The biggest problem I have with it is that it takes from those who have and gives to those who don't have; that it presumes those who don't have 'deserve' to share in the work product of those that do, regardless of the effort or expense expended by those that achieved to attain where they are.

Socialism prioritizes 'equality of outcome' over 'equality of opportunity' as a foundation for social stability, when it fact in the end all it really does is lead to misery for all.

And lastly, socialism assumes people will be happy being 'equal' when in fact humans are not built to be equal. Deep down we all want to be better than each other and differentiate ourselves through achievement. I resent the idea that a government entity can actually tell me I have to be 'more equal' with my underachieving brother for the good of society.
I respect and understand your point and I also see no problem with people wanting to be better and having wealth that is above others. If people have talent to become rich, were born in the right family or whatever...I don't take that away from them. I'd say that is within their rights.

However I also think that we as a society from poor to rich, have the responsibility to fund a minimum level of welfare programs (or however you want to call it) that everyone can utilize (healthcare, unemployment, disability, etc).

These programs need to be funded by everyone and yes that would also mean that certain people would end having to contribute more. At the same time, certain programs, such as unemployment, need to be better restricted...many of these can be easily abused. I dislike freeloading but I realize that no matter which system there is in place, or how tight it is put in place, freeloaders will find a way to abuse a system.

I do not support a system where people who have nothing, for x, y or z reason, have no chance of getting out of there because there was no jumping board even if that board is rather small\low.
I also do not support a system where the system gets milked like there's no tomorrow.

I am certainly not an expert and there are probably defects with my theory but that is what I think - :)
 
Last edited:

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
Well all of the spending bills so far have been passed by the presidents super majority. When you are the president and you had a super-majority for 2 years, you have no one to blame but your own party! Dont feed us your baloney.
 

brencat

Platinum Member
Feb 26, 2007
2,170
3
76
However I also think that we as a society from poor to rich, have the responsibility to fund a minimum level of welfare programs (or however you want to call it) that everyone can utilize (healthcare, unemployment, disability, etc).

These programs need to be funded by everyone and yes that would also mean that certain people would end having to contribute more. At the same time, certain programs, such as unemployment, need to be better restricted...many of these can be easily abused. I dislike freeloading but I realize that no matter which system there is in place, or how tight it is put in place, freeloaders will find a way to abuse a system.

I do not support a system where people who have nothing, for x, y or z reason, have no chance of getting out of there because there was no jumping board even if that board is rather small\low.
I also do not support a system where the system gets milked like there's no tomorrow.

I am certainly not an expert and there are probably defects with my theory but that is what I think - :)
Don't disagree with anything you've said here :thumbsup:

Your positions are reasonable and moderate and if you did a search of some of my posts, you would find most of mine also advocate a balanced and reasonable approach as well. I am definitely right of center though, but am completely fed up with both parties at this point. Both sides have totally unworkable/unrealistic ideologies that are going to wreck this country long term and the spending is out of control.

At the same time, I have been advocating for 5-6 additional marginal tax rates at the truly high end ($750k+) along with a phase out of the favorable 15% cap gains rate on investments beyond a certain income level. There are people that don't work for a living in this country with huge investment portfolios that are clipping a huge coupon and not paying a high enough effective tax rate and that has to change as a matter of fairness vs those with cash salaries.
 

Icepick

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2004
3,658
1
81
Obama is not 100% responsible for the economy as it is today. Our economy has evolved (and is still evolving) over the past two centuries. No one president can bear 100% of the blame.

That said, I still believe that the current horrible state of the economy can be traced back to 30 years of the NeoConservative agenda. How the hell can Obama be responsible for 30 years of poor fiscal planning when he's only been in office 2 years?
 

Icepick

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2004
3,658
1
81
You must be new

As Rush said, it was Obama's fault before he took office.
You know, I turned on Mike Savage the other day out of boredom. The first thing I heard was a caller (who sounded like he was taking himself seriously) said that there's no difference right now between the Democratic party and communists. Then the host (a substitute) AGREED with him! LOL. Do listeners of talk radio even know what Communism is?

Look at Canada for example. Canada is light years away from what the Soviet Union was at the height of communism. Yet, conservative Canadian politicians are further to the left (more socialist) than American liberals.
 

rudeguy

Lifer
Dec 27, 2001
47,371
14
61
well we are a little farther along.

Obama and his supporters are still blaming Bush.

Any idea when he'll man up?
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,819
1,123
126
Any idea when you will? No one gave a shit enough about this inane thread the first time. What makes you think anyone wants to see you flinging more shit? Resurrecting stupid is still stupid...
 

lotus503

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2005
6,502
1
76
well we are a little farther along.

Obama and his supporters are still blaming Bush.

Any idea when he'll man up?
Truth is this is gramm, leech, bliley and Clinton's economy.

Bush made it worse with wars off the books and ridiculous tax cuts.

Obama is not making it better putting the same people in charge of fixing it that caused it to begin with.

Reagan and supply side Econ is also partially to blame.

Mostly though it's each and every American of voting ages issue, they
elected the shitty bastards to begin with.

Economy got you down?

Blame yourself!
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
I find this thread to be uniquely delightful in capturing the annual regurgitation of excuses by blindly loyal Obama cultists. Each year that passes confirms the ineffectiveness, if not the outright malfeasance of Obama and the administration that executes his destructive economic policies. Yet for many posters here it is as though it is still 2008.
 

IamDavid

Diamond Member
Sep 13, 2000
5,863
10
81
No president is to blame for a good or bad economy. The entire thought process behind it is absurd and just shows everyone's bias for one side or the other. Very sickening if you ask me...

Bush's policies were very forward thinking and trusting of everyday peoples. He dreamed of a day where every American , or guest worker could own their own home therefore a part of America. In the end trusting in the people failed because most Americans cant understand how to balance a check book, let alone buy a home. Banks new they were lending to idiots but why not? when that's the direction they were receiving from Washington.
Obama's policies too are very forward thinking. He believes the past eight years proved Americans aren't capable of anything complex or difficult to understand, therefore government must step in and take care of us.
Both are right, both are wrong. In the end they might influence 5% of the overall economy. Irrational, simple minded, greedy, self absorbed, Americans control the rest. Visit your local Walmart or shopping center to view the wonderful citizens of our once proud nation.... Ask any recently graduated high school student simple questions like who's the vice president or what's an interest rate.
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
12,195
3,517
136
I tell ya's, watching the Repubs stall and block and filibuster and hold hostage everything and anything Obama and the Dems come up with to get the economy going AND THEN blame Obama and the Dems for why the economy is still sluggish is laughable.

It's so frick'in obvious what the Repubs are up to and yet they somehow act like they're getting away with such ruinous shennanigans.

Academy awards for the lot of them. They deserve it. They're even acting like the eight years that Bush/Cheney had to fully implement the proven failed ideology they espouse at this very moment have nothing to do with the current hard times the middle class and the poor are experiencing. The rich? The Repubs have them tax sheltered in a nuclear bomb-proof haven and spoon feeding them everything they demand.

Yeh, just what the nation needs to prosper.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,995
774
126
At what point will the economy be Obama's fault?
When the Republicans stop obstructing him, and allow Obama to pass the Jobs bill (among other bills stalled because of GOP obstructionism) and see what happens after that.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY