Repubs win 2 house seats, Dems lose Weiner

[werepossum]

In theory, yes, but I actually doubt many businesses are making hiring decisions based on whether a D or an R is in the White House, and certainly not on a longview political strategy. It isn't the way businesses think. Certainly conservatives would have us believe that every time a D is in the White House, businesses worry about increased regulations and stop hiring. They said this about Clinton as well. If it were true, you'd expect macro-economic data to show a better economy with the R in the White House as opposed to the D, over time, but that isn't the case. Clearly, businesses are making their decisions based on whatever is profitable in the moment, an equilibrium between demand and supply. Whoever is in the White House or Congress is at best a secondary consideration.

To be sure, some business people will CLAIM that they aren't hiring because they worry about regulations since this providers conservatives with an anti-regulatory talking point, and obviously the businesses would rather not be regulated. But that isn't the same thing.

Some of the projects that we had in preliminary stages were canceled citing uncertainty about future regulatory costs (especially the effects of cap-&-tax on energy costs) and Obamacare costs and effects. (These were health care and energy-related projects for the most part.) Another big factor is the credit squeeze; small to medium size companies are being required to put up a LOT more cash to get a loan for a new building or process line at a time when cash represents safety. And of course the economic uncertainty is big; neither Obama nor Perry has/will have control of the economy no matter their intentions. I have no idea of the relative importance of each of these factors, which will vary wildly between industries and companies anyway, but they are all significant I think.

Businesses don't have to have a reason to not hire or not expand, they need reasons to do those things. The more uncertain their future costs, the more conservative their evaluations of new hires & new projects and the fewer will be approved. Personally I think Obama demonstrated with his blocking of the new EPA regulations that he understands this dynamic and is committed to not hurting the economy through new regulatory costs that aren't in his opinion absolutely necessary, but businesses may believe this only applies through his reelection. But even if a business believes in Obama 100% and thinks he is truly the Messiah, it still needs a workable business model to justify new hires and/or expansion. This requires actual recovery, and government deficit spending stimulus programs won't substitute. Stimulus plan spending is artificial and goes away.

 

[zsdersw]

So, what you're all saying is... policies and positions you support are what this country needs, and policies and positions you don't support are what this country must avoid.

There's a shocker.

Keep spinning, plates...

 

[werepossum]

So, what you're all saying is... policies and positions you support are what this country needs, and policies and positions you don't support are what this country must avoid.

There's a shocker.

Keep spinning, plates...

To a large extent, it's uncertainty. If Obama unveiled and implemented everything he wanted tomorrow, there would be some industries and companies who are losers, some who are winners, and some who are unaffected. But not knowing affects all of them. If the economy was stronger, this would be much less of a factor, but again, businesses don't need a reason not to spend money. Businesses need a reason to spend money.

 

[senseamp]

Corrected that for you.

Actually, Reaganomics doesn't work at all.

Corrected that for you.
It was Reaganomics that got us to this depression. We still have Bush tax cuts in place, trickle down is not working. But you are right, watering down Reaganomics with a small fiscal stimulus, which is what Obamanomics is, is not working that great. What we need is New Deal 2.0.

 

[spidey07]

So, what you're all saying is... policies and positions you support are what this country needs, and policies and positions you don't support are what this country must avoid.

There's a shocker.

Keep spinning, plates...

I don't know if you've been paying attention, but the policies of this administration have been a fucking disaster. So much so that people voted for a republican in this district. It's an historic victory and historic rejection of Obama. We The People flat out REJECT this president. REJECT his policies. Fuck be upon him.

 

[CrackRabbit]

Corrected that for you.
It was Reaganomics that got us to this depression. We still have Bush tax cuts in place, trickle down is not working. But you are right, watering down Reaganomics with a small fiscal stimulus, which is what Obamanomics is, is not working that great. What we need is New Deal 2.0.

The New Deal worked about as well as Reaganomics.
Which is to say not at all.
The New Deal kept masses of people from starving and rioting, but it did little to actually stimulate the economy.

 

[FerrelGeek]

To a large extent, it's uncertainty. If Obama unveiled and implemented everything he wanted tomorrow, there would be some industries and companies who are losers, some who are winners, and some who are unaffected. But not knowing affects all of them. If the economy was stronger, this would be much less of a factor, but again, businesses don't need a reason not to spend money. Businesses need a reason to spend money.

This

 

[senseamp]

The New Deal worked about as well as Reaganomics.
Which is to say not at all.
The New Deal kept masses of people from starving and rioting, but it did little to actually stimulate the economy.

Except we got out of the first Great Depression with the New Deal, while Reaganomics got is into the second one.

 

[CrackRabbit]

Except we got out of the first Great Depression with the New Deal, while Reaganomics got is into the second one.

World War II and it's aftermath got us out of the depression, the New Deal just kept the masses from becoming outright hostile to the government.

 

[senseamp]

I don't know if you've been paying attention, but the policies of this administration have been a fucking disaster. So much so that people voted for a republican in this district. It's an historic victory and historic rejection of Obama. We The People flat out REJECT this president. REJECT his policies. Fuck be upon him.

You, aka "the people" are wrong. Policies supported by you, aka "the people" got us into the messes this country is in. So write down what you, aka "the people" support, then start supporting the polar opposite, then maybe there is hope for America.

 

[spidey07]

To add more history to the historic election.

The congressional district that gave us Geraldine Ferraro and Chuck Schumer just elected a Republican

 

[senseamp]

World War II and it's aftermath got us out of the depression, the New Deal just kept the masses from becoming outright hostile to the government.

New Deal got people working and building the infrastructure that powered the economic boom to follow.

Accomplishments of the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC)

Bridges: 46,854
Lodges and museums: 204
Historic structures restored: 3,980
Drinking fountains: 1,865
Fire lookout towers: 3,116
Wells and pumphouses: 8,065
Forest roads: 2,500 miles
Roads and truck trails: 7,442 miles
Cabins: 1,477
Bathhouses: 165
Large Dams: 197
Water supply lines: 5,000 miles
Fences: 27,191 miles
Fish rearing ponds: 4,622
Beaches improved: 3,462
Trees planted: 3 billion
Fires fought: 6.5 million days
Lives lost fighting fires: 47

(Sources: National Association of Civilian Conservation Corps Alumni, "Did You Know?" (Jefferson Barracks, Mo., NACCCA, n.d.); Alison T. Otis, William D. Honey, Thomas C Hogg, and Kimberly K. Larkin, The Forest Service and the Civilian Conservation Corps (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1986), 19; Conrad Wirth, Parks, Politics, and People (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1980), 145.)

Accomplishments of the Civil Works Administration (CWA)

New roads: 44,000 miles
Road repairs: 200,000 miles
Drainage and irrigation ditches: 9,000 miles
Levees: 2,000 miles
New water mains: 1,000 miles
Sanitary and storm sewers: 2,700 miles
Bridges: 7,000
Large culverts: 10,000
Sanitary privies: 150,000
Pumping stations: 400
Playgrounds: 2,000
Swimming pools: 350
Athletic fields: 4,000
Schools, new or improved: 4,000
Airports, new or improved: 1,000

(Sources: Harry Hopkins, Spedning to Save (New York: W. W. Norton, 1936), 121, 168; Bonnie Fox Scwartz, The Civil Works Administration, 1933-1934: The Business of Emergency Employment in the New Deal (Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press, 1984), 183.)

Contributions to civil infrastructure through the Works Progress Administration (WPA), 1935-43

Urban streets
Hard surfaces: 30,000 miles
Other: 37,000 miles
Sidewalks
New: 24,000 miles
Improved: 7,000 miles
Curbs
New: 25,000 miles
Improved: 3,000 miles
Road and street lighting
New: 838 miles
Improved: 1,641 miles
New traffic signs erected: 937,000
Rural roads
Hard surface: 57,000 miles
Other: 515,000 miles
Bridges, viaducts
New: 78,000
Improved: 46,000
Culverts
New: 29,805,000 linear feet
Improved: 3,288,000 linear feet
Roadside drainage ditches
New: 79,000 miles
Improved: 84,000 miles
Tunnels
Vehicular: 26
Pedetrian: 193
Railway, sewer, cattle underpasses: 800
Parks, new or improved: 8,000
Athletic fields, new or imporved: 5,600
Stadiums, grandstnads, new or improved: 3,300
Playgrounds, new or improved: 12,800
Schools
New: 5,900
Additions: 2,170
Renovated: 31,300
Libraries
New: 151
Additions: 67
Renovated: 856
Auditoriums, gymnasiums, recreation buildings
New: 9,300
Renovated: 5,800
Swimming pools: 900
Wading pools: 1,000
Skating rinks: 1,200
Ski jumps: 80
Golf courses
New: 2,800 holes
Improved: 5,000 holes
Band shells: 170
Hospitals
New: 226
Additions: 156
Renovated: 2,168
Office and administrative
Buildings: 6,400
New: 1,536
Additions: 323
Renovated: 4,524
Dormitories: 7,000
Storage buildings: 6,000
Armories
New: 400
Renovated: 500
Firehouses: 2,700
Jails and prisons: 760
Airports
New: 350
Enlarged: 700
Runways, new or improved: 5,925,000 linear feet
Taxiways: 1,129,000 linear feet

(Source: Federal Works Agency, Final Report on the WPA Program, 1935-1943 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1946), 50-52, 131-133.)

Physical infrastructure projects completed by the Public Works Administration (PWA) (federal and nonffederal)

Streets and highways: 11,428
Engineering structures
Bridges and viaducts: 388
Wharves, piers, docks: 115
Subways and tunnels: 14
Other: 137
Aviation projects
Airports: 384
Improvements to landing fields: 193
Other aids: 101
Railroads: 32
Sewer projects
Disposal plants: 894
Sanitary sewers: 535
Storm Sewers: 121
Combined sanitary and storm: 75
Garbage and rubbish disposal plants: 225
Water projects
Reservoirs: 203
Filtration plants: 119
Water mains: 290
Complete waterworks: 1,970
Electrical power projects
Electrical distribution systems: 92
Power Construction projects: 283
Gas Plants: 26
Water navigation aids
Channels and levees: 170
Dams and canals: 31
Locks: 35
Lighthouses: 212
Other: 293
Flood control
Channels: 21
Dams and canals: 181
Storage reservoirs: 26
Water power development: 26
Soil erosion: 96
Flood control: 25
Miscellaneous: 95
Game and fish protection: 193
Nonmilitary vessels: 100
Improvements to federal land: 285
Surveying and mapping: 610

(Source: Public Works Administration, America Builds: Te Record of the PWA (Washignton, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1939), tables 10, 11, 13, 19, and 20, 279-82, 288-91.)

Cultural infrastructure projects completed by the Public Works Administration (PWA) (federal and nonffederal)

Educational building projects
Primary/secondary schools: 6,656
College/university: 698
Other educational buildings: 86
Public libraries: 105
Courthouses and city halls: 659
Auditoriums and armories: 103
Post offices: 406
Penal institutions: 253
Social and recreational buildings: 159
Residential buildings: 558
Office and administrative buildings: 341
Warehouses, laboratories, shops: 761
Parks: 61
Swimming pools: 65
Fire and police stations: 128
Markets: 21
Abattoirs: 4
Farm buildings: 7
Miscellaneous: 756

(Source: Public Works Administration, America Builds: Te Record of the PWA (Washignton, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1939), tables 14, 19, and 20, 283, 288-9.)

Health projects completed by the Public Works Administration (PWA) (federal and nonfederal)

General Hospitals: 261
Tuberculosis hospitals: 134
Hospitals for epileptics: 12
Insane asylums: 205
Schools for the feeble-minded: 29
Homes for the aged: 40
Other hospital projects: 81
Federal hospitals and institutions: 151
Pest and disease control: 146

(Source: Public Works Administration, America Builds: Te Record of the PWA (Washignton, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1939), tables 12, and 20, 280, 290.)

Not to mention TVA dams and rural electrification that powered the economic engine. You can't sell a fridge and a microwave to someone with no electricity. The New Deal is what made the US a modern country.

 

[spidey07]

You can make this stuff up. Hey white house! His entire platform was stopping and repealing Obama and his policies!

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-09-14-11-36-28

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The White House says it does not view a Democratic candidate's defeat in a New York City special congressional election as a referendum on President Barack Obama.

 

[CrackRabbit]

New Deal got people working and building the infrastructure that powered the economic boom to follow.


Not to mention TVA dams and rural electrification that powered the economic engine. You can't sell a fridge and a microwave to someone with no electricity. The New Deal is what made the US a modern country.

While I won't disagree that the CCC and WPA helped "set the table" for the growth that would come in the following decades the programs themselves were not the reason for the end of the depression.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

New Deal got people working and building the infrastructure that powered the economic boom to follow.



Not to mention TVA dams and rural electrification that powered the economic engine. You can't sell a fridge and a microwave to someone with no electricity. The New Deal is what made the US a modern country.

You should call Obama and tell him that then since very little of the stimulus went to infrastructure spending and his EPA stands in the way of virtually everything.

 

[zsdersw]

I don't know if you've been paying attention, but the policies of this administration have been a fucking disaster. So much so that people voted for a republican in this district. It's an historic victory and historic rejection of Obama. We The People flat out REJECT this president. REJECT his policies. Fuck be upon him.

Yes I have been paying attention, but you aren't. Every administration and every Congress's policies are a disaster.

Neither Obama nor any one president or Congress ruined everything. They all had a hand in the clusterfvck we have now; Obama, GWB, Clinton, GHWB, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, LBJ, JFK, Eisenhower, Truman, and finally FDR.

None of them did anything to wean the public off of the government's SS/Medicare/Medicaid teat.

What's Obama's successor (either in 2012 or 2016) going to do differently? Faced with the immense popularity of those three government programs, they won't do a damn thing beyond a rounding error.

 

[PUN]

Yes I have been paying attention, but you aren't. Every administration and every Congress's policies are a disaster.

Neither Obama nor any one president or Congress ruined everything. They all had a hand in the clusterfvck we have now.

Yes, every president and congress often makes bad decisions. But the Ultimate fail was Clinton/Emmanuel Rahm's (AKA Obama Administration) FHA housing plan, which drove our economy down the toilet.

Letting people buy a home with 0% down, and when the demand soared the prices, they took the equity out to 0% and bought an escalade instead. When the housing market tanked, they defaulted on their home and walked away with their Escalade. Does this sound right to you?

Did you know that Bush's administration went to Congress 14times during his term to make changes to the housing plan? It was shut down 14times by the democratic congress.

 

[senseamp]

You should call Obama and tell him that then since very little of the stimulus went to infrastructure spending and his EPA stands in the way of virtually everything.

I have been saying that as well. But Obama likes splitting the difference between New Deal and Trickle Down. It's like mixing chocolate and feces in the name of compromise.

 

[zsdersw]

Yes, every president and congress often makes bad decisions. But the Ultimate fail was Clinton/Emmanuel Rahm's (AKA Obama Administration) FHA housing plan, which drove our economy down the toilet.

Ah, how soon you forget about all of the other financial problems we've had throughout history. If you remembered those you'd know better.

Letting people buy a home with 0% down, and when the demand soared the prices, they took the equity out to 0% and bought an escalade instead. When the housing market tanked, they defaulted on their home and walked away with their Escalade. Does this sound right to you?

No, but neither does it sound right that all sorts of people signed those mortgages they were offered or approved for.

Did you know that Bush's administration went to Congress 14times during his term to make changes to the housing plan? It was shut down 14times by the democratic congress.

Did you know that the Republican Congress of the Bush administration pushed for, passed, and signed into law the biggest ever expansion to Medicare... the prescription drug entitlement?

 

[Fern]

Actually it makes a lot of sense for business to hold money right now and then start hiring and turing around the economy after republicans take over. It cements that lower taxes on the rich, no estate tax and no capital gains taxes will create jobs and increase prosperity even though it had little to do with it.

From recent surveys some are holding some are not.

Some want to spend more but can't, bank lending is tight.

Of the ones that are holding onto money there are various reasons cited:

1. Fear of a double dip. They see the GDP numbers, the unemployment numbers and the housing numbers

2. More banking troubles, the Euro situation is concerning many.

3. Worry over regulations, energy prices etc.

Really, you can just take your pick of a buffet of concerns.

Fern

 

[PUN]

Ah, how soon you forget about all of the other financial problems we've had throughout history. If you remembered those you'd know better.



No, but neither does it sound right that all sorts of people signed those mortgages they were offered or approved for.



Did you know that the Republican Congress of the Bush administration pushed for, passed, and signed into law the biggest ever expansion to Medicare... the prescription drug entitlement?

I am talking about this financial mess that we are in now. The root of problem is the housing market.

?!? you just proved my point. All those people should not have signed those mortgages without qualifications. Under FHA, the only qualifications were to read and sign at the dotted line, regardless of your income or liquid assets.

Medicare entitlement is a core of Democrat plan. Expanding our health care, including prescription drug entitlement approved by the congress had more to do with democratic party. Ask yourself why did Obama extend Bush's tax cut in 2010? It surely wasn't on his agenda.

 

[spidey07]

LOL! You can't make this stuff up.

http://hotair.com/headlines/archive...9-is-a-very-difficult-district-for-democrats/

Democratic party leaders insisted the loss wasn’t a harbinger of things to come. “It’s a very difficult district for Democrats,” said Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, noting its Democratic margins there tend to be the second lowest of all the districts in New York City.

House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio), dismissed that idea.

“This is a very seriously Democrat district,” Mr. Boehner said. “This is not a district that Republicans have any right to believe we could win.”

 

[CrackRabbit]

LOL! You can't make this stuff up.

http://hotair.com/headlines/archive...9-is-a-very-difficult-district-for-democrats/

We get it you enjoy your echo chamber.

 

[zsdersw]

I am talking about this financial mess that we are in now. The root of problem is the housing market.

Banks were permitted to issue ARMs thanks to a bill Reagan signed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garn%E2%80%93St._Germain_Depository_Institutions_Act

The point is that everything in the last 50-60 years has led up to this point. This financial mess we're in now wouldn't necessarily have been as bad or might not ever had happened if mistakes pre-Clinton weren't made. Obama's mistakes won't truly be noticed until long after he's out of office, even if he gets another term. These things don't usually go tits-up while the president/congress who passed them is in office.

?!? you just proved my point. All those people should not have signed those mortgages without qualifications. Under FHA, the only qualifications were to read and sign at the dotted line, regardless of your income or liquid assets.

It takes two to tango; one to offer such a loan and another to sign it.

Medicare entitlement is a core of Democrat plan. Expanding our health care, including prescription drug entitlement approved by the congress had more to do with democratic party. Ask yourself why did Obama extend Bush's tax cut in 2010? It surely wasn't on his agenda.

What part of Bush signed the prescription drug bill into law don't you understand? It also was introduced by Dennis Hastert, a Republican.

 

[werepossum]

Banks were permitted to issue ARMs thanks to a bill Reagan signed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garn%E2%80%93St._Germain_Depository_Institutions_Act

The point is that everything in the last 50-60 years has led up to this point. This financial mess we're in now wouldn't necessarily have been as bad or might not ever had happened if mistakes pre-Clinton weren't made. Obama's mistakes won't truly be noticed until long after he's out of office, even if he gets another term. These things don't usually go tits-up while the president/congress who passed them is in office.

It takes two to tango; one to offer such a loan and another to sign it.

What part of Bush signed the prescription drug bill into law don't you understand? It also was introduced by Dennis Hastert, a Republican.

Exactly right. Both parties got us here, and largely it's because we demanded the things they implemented, or rewarded them, or at the very least failed to punish them. A lot of things that seemed like good decisions (like investing in government bonds instead of the risky stock market) turned out to be bad decisions, and a lot more things that seemed to be good things were just a lot more expensive than we thought or had more significant side effects than we thought. You can't point to the Democrats' imposition of unrealistic HUD mandates without also pointing to the Republicans' dismantling of Glass-Steagall, or pointing out that each party had multiple opportunities to stop and/or overturn each. As bad as are both parties, the root problem is US, the American voters. We've developed a liking for free stuff paid for by "someone else" without realizing that we are all "someone else" to someone.

All this is probably only tangentially related to this election though, and only that because we tend to credit or blame the President for the economy when he actually has less power than Congress.