How about spend money on strictly infrastructure for starters? Cut other programs to pay for it? Going on a spending spree is going to leave us with a nice bill at the end with little to show for it.
How about spend money on strictly infrastructure for starters? Cut other programs to pay for it? Going on a spending spree is going to leave us with a nice bill at the end with little to show for it.
No, that is my suggestion not the republicans.
Enough for what? Perhaps we as a nation should realize we will have recessions and learn to cope instead of spending trillions in a futile attempt at staving off the inevitable?
Enough for what? Perhaps we as a nation should realize we will have recessions and learn to cope instead of spending trillions in a futile attempt at staving off the inevitable?
Red Dawn
Elite Member
- Jun 4, 2001
- 57,530
- 3
- 0
So you think the economists, politicians and a lot of the other so called experts were just being paranoid and alarmists and nothing really needed to be done? Man if that's the case the American public was really led down the primrose path by both parties.
Politicians? Absofuckinglutely! Are you kidding me? Why would a politician not want to grab more power by expanding the govt? Economists? Like who, Paul Krugman? We can spend this money and in 4 years I'd like somebody to show us with concrete proof it did anything other than raise our debt at alarming rates.
The only legitimate worry IMO is\was the credit crunch. That has been and is being dealt with. The pork bill from last week is seperate from that.
Let's be honest, we know Bush never included the costs of Iraq and Afghanistan in his budgets....ever.
We are doing that now, so the number is higher by definition even if everything else stays the same.
We are doing that now, so the number is higher by definition even if everything else stays the same.
I'm not so sure about that, we're creeping closer to bank nationalization practically hour by hour. We've not dealt with this core problem, the credit markets are still hosed and getting worse.
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
Yes. President Obama being the prime example of being a paranoid alarmist. After dedicating his entire presidency so far to having the "stimulus" bill passed, proclaiming that every day it was not delayed was a day too late, and that the bill was needed to avert a "catastrophe" in his own words.
After congress passed the bill, Obama took the bill and flew halfway across the country, dined with his wife and vacationed for three days, then decided to sign the bill. Emergency?
exactly.
in addition, had Bush saved up enough during our nations' good time, we would have had enough reserves to fund our stimulus plan in bad times such as now.
spread the wealth, future generations, timely targeted and temporary, values, tax cuts, big government spending liberal, pork
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
Damn straight...and if Clinton also saved up enough during our nations' good times, we'd have even more reserves to fund our stimulus plan in bad times such as now. It's all so simple isn't it? :roll:
To blame all this all on Bush is pure BDS. You'll find that there's plenty of blame to go around assuming you've made an any attempt to understand what happened. Here's a news flash...both parties failed us.
For the record, I'm glad to see Obama talk about the deficit being a problem and making an effort to deal with it. A definite improvement over the previous administration IMO.
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
Lol...and thanks for taking to time to share your 'objective' and 'highly intelligent' evaluation of this issue. But you might want to work a little bit on the 'objective' part...unless, of course, you've already sold your mind and soul to something that means absolutely nothing.
bamacre
Lifer
- Jul 1, 2004
- 21,030
- 2
- 61
Bush brought this country down even further with 8 solid years of pure war spending without any income from the war.
But you are correct, according to Keynesian Effect, we should be paying back / save up reserves during good times. So far, we have always used Keynasian deficit spending in bad times, but never paid back the money in good times...
it may be too early ( as we might still be in recession/depression in 4 yrs), but at least it looks like Obama is going to try to cut the deficit as according to Keynasian theory.
Feel free to explain securitization and leverage in your defense of lassez-faire. Do you even know what lassez-faire means?
Maybe then you can explain to all of us at AT the explosion of default swaps from less than $10 trillion to $65 trillion in 5 or six years.
In your explanation of securitization please be sure to explain how financial institutions used this tool. And then possibly you may explain the actions taken by the FDIC, the Treasury, the Fed, the SEC, or anyone for that matter, to identify abuse and take prudent action.
We'll be waiting for your answer.
Thanks for your contribution
heyheyboboo is just coming to grips with the fact Obama is going to make Bush look like a fiscal conservative. Which is something previously thought impossible.
Righties are so deep in denial that they'd claim night was day, if they thought they'd be believed by anybody who has a few functional grey cells.
Here's the real picture, sans all the usual deficit vs actual debt fol-de-rol, and it's not a pretty picture for the "Free market! Deregulate!""smaller govt" "cut taxes and increase spending" crowd that cheered GWB every inch of the way to disaster-
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/...bt/histdebt_histo5.htm
Notice that actual indebtedness increased >$1T in FY2008, thanks in part to the need to socialize losses after privatizing profits in the financial sector. The simple fact that a Republican Administration found it necessary to basically nationalize the banks at the end of the looting spree they sponsored really tells us all we need to know- that they failed America in spectacular fashion. But, that's obviously somebody else's fault, right?
How lame, and how truly foolish. Ideology has trumped reality on the Right for a very, very long time, however, so I suppose it's unrealistic to expect that any of the adherents would actually admit to abject failure... to being blind-ass chumps of the financial elite...
Here's the real picture, sans all the usual deficit vs actual debt fol-de-rol, and it's not a pretty picture for the "Free market! Deregulate!""smaller govt" "cut taxes and increase spending" crowd that cheered GWB every inch of the way to disaster-
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/...bt/histdebt_histo5.htm
Notice that actual indebtedness increased >$1T in FY2008, thanks in part to the need to socialize losses after privatizing profits in the financial sector. The simple fact that a Republican Administration found it necessary to basically nationalize the banks at the end of the looting spree they sponsored really tells us all we need to know- that they failed America in spectacular fashion. But, that's obviously somebody else's fault, right?
How lame, and how truly foolish. Ideology has trumped reality on the Right for a very, very long time, however, so I suppose it's unrealistic to expect that any of the adherents would actually admit to abject failure... to being blind-ass chumps of the financial elite...
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
Facebook
Twitter