Did GOP Deliberately Crash the US Economy??
gimmesometruth27
St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 25,077
this article makes a pretty compelling case that they did...
i believe that they did. they want to defeat obama so badly that they are willing to do anything to make sure he loses.... polls are now saying that a majority of americans believe that the gop is tanking the economy for political gain...
discuss...
Did Republicans deliberately crash the US economy?
Be it ideology or stratagem, the GOP has blocked pro-growth policy and backed job-killing austerity – all while blaming Obama
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... us-economy
So why does the US economy stink?
Why has job creation in America slowed to a crawl? Why, after several months of economic hope, are things suddenly turning sour? The culprits might seem obvious – uncertainty in Europe, an uneven economic recovery, fiscal and monetary policymakers immobilized and incapable of acting. But increasingly, Democrats are making the argument that the real culprit for the country's economic woes lies in a more discrete location: with the Republican Party.
In recent days, Democrats have started coming out and saying publicly what many have been mumbling privately for years – Republicans are so intent on defeating President Obama for re-election that they are purposely sabotaging the country's economic recovery. These charges are now being levied by Democrats such as Senate majority leader Harry Reid and Obama's key political adviser, David Axelrod.
For Democrats, perhaps the most obvious piece of evidence of GOP premeditated malice is the 2010 quote from Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell:
"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."
Such words lead some to the conclusion that Republicans will do anything, including short-circuiting the economy, in order to hurt Obama politically. Considering that presidents – and rarely opposition parties – are held electorally responsible for economic calamity, it's not a bad political strategy.
Then again, it's a hard accusation to prove: after all, one person's economic sabotage is another person's principled anti-government conservatism.
Beyond McConnell's words, though, there is circumstantial evidence to make the case. Republicans have opposed a lion's share of stimulus measures that once they supported, such as a payroll tax break, which they grudgingly embraced earlier this year. Even unemployment insurance, a relatively uncontroversial tool for helping those in an economic downturn, has been consistently held up by Republicans or used as a bargaining chip for more tax cuts. Ten years ago, prominent conservatives were loudly making the case for fiscal stimulus to get the economy going; today, they treat such ideas like they're the plague.
Traditionally, during economic recessions, Republicans have been supportive of loose monetary policy. Not this time. Rather, Republicans have upbraided Ben Bernanke, head of the Federal Reserve, for even considering policies that focus on growing the economy and creating jobs.
And then, there is the fact that since the original stimulus bill passed in February of 2009, Republicans have made practically no effort to draft comprehensive job creation legislation. Instead, they continue to pursue austerity policies, which reams of historical data suggest harms economic recovery and does little to create jobs. In fact, since taking control of the House of Representatives in 2011, Republicans have proposed hardly a single major jobs bill that didn't revolve, in some way, around their one-stop solution for all the nation's economic problems: more tax cuts.
Still, one can certainly argue – and Republicans do – that these steps are all reflective of conservative ideology. If you view government as a fundamentally bad actor, then stopping government expansion is, on some level, consistent.
So, let's put aside the conspiracy theories for a moment, and look more closely at how the country is faring under the GOP's economic leadership.
As Paul Krugman wrote earlier this week, in the New York Times, while a Democrat rests his head each night in the White House, the United States is currently operating with a Republican economy. After winning the House of Representatives in 2010, the GOP brokered a deal to keep the Bush tax cuts in place, which has reduced the tax burden as a percentage of GDP to its lowest point since Harry Truman sat in the White House. At the insistence of the White House, Congress also agreed to extend unemployment benefits and enact a payroll tax cut – measures that provided a small but important stimulus to the economy, but above all, maintained the key GOP position that taxes must never go up.
But as Congress giveth, Congress also taketh. The GOP's zealotry on tax cuts is only matched by its zealotry in pursuing austerity policies. In the spring of 2011, federal spending cuts forced by Republican legislators took much-needed money out of the economy: combined with the 2012 budget, it has largely counteracted the positive benefits provided by the 2009 stimulus.
Subsequently, the GOP's refusal to countenance legislation that would help states with their own fiscal crises (largely, the result of declining tax revenue) has led to massive public sector layoffs at the state and local level. In fact, since Obama took office, state and local governments have shed 611,000 jobs; and by some measures, if not for these jobs, cuts the unemployment rate today would be closer to 7%, not its current 8.2%. In 2010 and 2011, 457,00 public sector jobs were excised; not coincidentally, at the same time, much of the federal stimulus aid from 2009 ran out. And Republicans took over control of Congress.
These cuts have a larger societal impact. When teachers are laid off, for example (and nearly 200,000 have lost their jobs), it means larger class sizes, other teachers being overworked and after-school classes being cancelled. So, ironically, a policy that is intended to save "our children and grandchildren" from "crushing debt" is leaving them worse-prepared for the actual economic and social challenges they will face in the future. In addition, with states operating under tighter fiscal budgets – and getting no hope relief from Washington – it means less money for essential government services, like help for the elderly, the poor and the disabled.
This is the most obvious example of how austerity policies are not only harming America's present, but also imperilling its future. And these spending cuts on the state and local level are matched by a complete lack of fiscal expansion on the federal level. In fact, fiscal policy is now a drag on the recovery, which is the exact opposite of how it should work, given a sluggish economy.
This collection of more-harm-than-good policies must also include last summer's debt limit debacle, which House speaker John Boehner has threatened to renew this year. This was yet another GOP initiative that undermined the economic recovery. According to economists Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers, "over the entire episode, confidence declined more than it did following the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc in 2008." Only after the crisis did the consumer confidence stabilize, but employers "held back on hiring, sapping momentum from a recovery that remains far too fragile." In addition, the debt limit deal also forced more unhelpful spending cuts on the country.
Since that national embarrassment, Republicans have refused to even allow votes on President Obama's jobs bill in the Senate; they dragged their feet on the aforementioned payroll tax and even now are holding up a transportation bill with poison-pill demands for the White House on environmental regulation.
Yet, with all these tales of economic ineptitude emanating from the GOP, it is Obama who is bearing most of the blame for the country's continued poor economic performance.
Whether you believe the Republicans are engaging in purposely destructive fiscal behavior or are simply fiscally incompetent, it almost doesn't matter. It most certainly is bad economic policy and that should be part of any national debate not only on who is to blame for the current economic mess, but also what steps should be taken to get out from underneath it.
But don't hold your breath on that happening. Presidents get blamed for a bad economy; and certainly, Republicans are unlikely to take responsibility for the country's economic woes. The obligation will be on Obama to make the case that it is the Republicans, not he, who is to blame – a difficult, but not impossible task.
In the end, that might be the worst part of all – one of two major political parties in America is engaging in scorched-earth economic policies that are undercutting the economic recovery, possibly on purpose, and is forcing job-killing austerity measures on the states. And they have paid absolutely no political price for doing so. If anything, it won them control of the House in 2010, and has kept win Obama's approval ratings in the political danger zone. It might even help them get control of the White House.
Sabotage or not, it's hard to argue with "success" – and it's hard to imagine we've seen the last of it, whoever wins in November.
:fp:
i believe that they did. they want to defeat obama so badly that they are willing to do anything to make sure he loses.... polls are now saying that a majority of americans believe that the gop is tanking the economy for political gain...
discuss...
Did Republicans deliberately crash the US economy?
Be it ideology or stratagem, the GOP has blocked pro-growth policy and backed job-killing austerity – all while blaming Obama
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... us-economy
So why does the US economy stink?
Why has job creation in America slowed to a crawl? Why, after several months of economic hope, are things suddenly turning sour? The culprits might seem obvious – uncertainty in Europe, an uneven economic recovery, fiscal and monetary policymakers immobilized and incapable of acting. But increasingly, Democrats are making the argument that the real culprit for the country's economic woes lies in a more discrete location: with the Republican Party.
In recent days, Democrats have started coming out and saying publicly what many have been mumbling privately for years – Republicans are so intent on defeating President Obama for re-election that they are purposely sabotaging the country's economic recovery. These charges are now being levied by Democrats such as Senate majority leader Harry Reid and Obama's key political adviser, David Axelrod.
For Democrats, perhaps the most obvious piece of evidence of GOP premeditated malice is the 2010 quote from Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell:
"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."
Such words lead some to the conclusion that Republicans will do anything, including short-circuiting the economy, in order to hurt Obama politically. Considering that presidents – and rarely opposition parties – are held electorally responsible for economic calamity, it's not a bad political strategy.
Then again, it's a hard accusation to prove: after all, one person's economic sabotage is another person's principled anti-government conservatism.
Beyond McConnell's words, though, there is circumstantial evidence to make the case. Republicans have opposed a lion's share of stimulus measures that once they supported, such as a payroll tax break, which they grudgingly embraced earlier this year. Even unemployment insurance, a relatively uncontroversial tool for helping those in an economic downturn, has been consistently held up by Republicans or used as a bargaining chip for more tax cuts. Ten years ago, prominent conservatives were loudly making the case for fiscal stimulus to get the economy going; today, they treat such ideas like they're the plague.
Traditionally, during economic recessions, Republicans have been supportive of loose monetary policy. Not this time. Rather, Republicans have upbraided Ben Bernanke, head of the Federal Reserve, for even considering policies that focus on growing the economy and creating jobs.
And then, there is the fact that since the original stimulus bill passed in February of 2009, Republicans have made practically no effort to draft comprehensive job creation legislation. Instead, they continue to pursue austerity policies, which reams of historical data suggest harms economic recovery and does little to create jobs. In fact, since taking control of the House of Representatives in 2011, Republicans have proposed hardly a single major jobs bill that didn't revolve, in some way, around their one-stop solution for all the nation's economic problems: more tax cuts.
Still, one can certainly argue – and Republicans do – that these steps are all reflective of conservative ideology. If you view government as a fundamentally bad actor, then stopping government expansion is, on some level, consistent.
So, let's put aside the conspiracy theories for a moment, and look more closely at how the country is faring under the GOP's economic leadership.
As Paul Krugman wrote earlier this week, in the New York Times, while a Democrat rests his head each night in the White House, the United States is currently operating with a Republican economy. After winning the House of Representatives in 2010, the GOP brokered a deal to keep the Bush tax cuts in place, which has reduced the tax burden as a percentage of GDP to its lowest point since Harry Truman sat in the White House. At the insistence of the White House, Congress also agreed to extend unemployment benefits and enact a payroll tax cut – measures that provided a small but important stimulus to the economy, but above all, maintained the key GOP position that taxes must never go up.
But as Congress giveth, Congress also taketh. The GOP's zealotry on tax cuts is only matched by its zealotry in pursuing austerity policies. In the spring of 2011, federal spending cuts forced by Republican legislators took much-needed money out of the economy: combined with the 2012 budget, it has largely counteracted the positive benefits provided by the 2009 stimulus.
Subsequently, the GOP's refusal to countenance legislation that would help states with their own fiscal crises (largely, the result of declining tax revenue) has led to massive public sector layoffs at the state and local level. In fact, since Obama took office, state and local governments have shed 611,000 jobs; and by some measures, if not for these jobs, cuts the unemployment rate today would be closer to 7%, not its current 8.2%. In 2010 and 2011, 457,00 public sector jobs were excised; not coincidentally, at the same time, much of the federal stimulus aid from 2009 ran out. And Republicans took over control of Congress.
These cuts have a larger societal impact. When teachers are laid off, for example (and nearly 200,000 have lost their jobs), it means larger class sizes, other teachers being overworked and after-school classes being cancelled. So, ironically, a policy that is intended to save "our children and grandchildren" from "crushing debt" is leaving them worse-prepared for the actual economic and social challenges they will face in the future. In addition, with states operating under tighter fiscal budgets – and getting no hope relief from Washington – it means less money for essential government services, like help for the elderly, the poor and the disabled.
This is the most obvious example of how austerity policies are not only harming America's present, but also imperilling its future. And these spending cuts on the state and local level are matched by a complete lack of fiscal expansion on the federal level. In fact, fiscal policy is now a drag on the recovery, which is the exact opposite of how it should work, given a sluggish economy.
This collection of more-harm-than-good policies must also include last summer's debt limit debacle, which House speaker John Boehner has threatened to renew this year. This was yet another GOP initiative that undermined the economic recovery. According to economists Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers, "over the entire episode, confidence declined more than it did following the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc in 2008." Only after the crisis did the consumer confidence stabilize, but employers "held back on hiring, sapping momentum from a recovery that remains far too fragile." In addition, the debt limit deal also forced more unhelpful spending cuts on the country.
Since that national embarrassment, Republicans have refused to even allow votes on President Obama's jobs bill in the Senate; they dragged their feet on the aforementioned payroll tax and even now are holding up a transportation bill with poison-pill demands for the White House on environmental regulation.
Yet, with all these tales of economic ineptitude emanating from the GOP, it is Obama who is bearing most of the blame for the country's continued poor economic performance.
Whether you believe the Republicans are engaging in purposely destructive fiscal behavior or are simply fiscally incompetent, it almost doesn't matter. It most certainly is bad economic policy and that should be part of any national debate not only on who is to blame for the current economic mess, but also what steps should be taken to get out from underneath it.
But don't hold your breath on that happening. Presidents get blamed for a bad economy; and certainly, Republicans are unlikely to take responsibility for the country's economic woes. The obligation will be on Obama to make the case that it is the Republicans, not he, who is to blame – a difficult, but not impossible task.
In the end, that might be the worst part of all – one of two major political parties in America is engaging in scorched-earth economic policies that are undercutting the economic recovery, possibly on purpose, and is forcing job-killing austerity measures on the states. And they have paid absolutely no political price for doing so. If anything, it won them control of the House in 2010, and has kept win Obama's approval ratings in the political danger zone. It might even help them get control of the White House.
Sabotage or not, it's hard to argue with "success" – and it's hard to imagine we've seen the last of it, whoever wins in November.
:fp:
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
-
unsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487Overspending is killing the economy. Endless printing of the dollar is killing the economy. Big Government is killing the economy. Endless wars are killing the economy.
Get over this one party is doing this or that. You are smarter than that. BOTH are doing it.0 -
no
so not wanting tax increases, trying to manage the deficit in a different way than spending more to get out of debt, and attempting cuts (not real cuts mind you, just decreases in the projected increase in spending) is seen as deliberately crashing the economy?
and thank god Krugman weighed in on the topic...I mean...it is startling to see he blamed the problems squarely on the GOP considering Obama signs the bills.
And the blame-go-round keeps on spinning.
Who honestly thinks that the democrats can be removed from this equation?that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan0 -
true, both parties are to blame, but one is significantly more at fault here. no comment on the gop's tactics?unsung wrote:Overspending is killing the economy. Endless printing of the dollar is killing the economy. Big Government is killing the economy. Endless wars are killing the economy.
Get over this one party is doing this or that. You are smarter than that. BOTH are doing it.
no comment on politicizing the issues facing the economy and job growth, ie the stonewalling and refusal to even vote on things that have passed the house? no comment on how they would rather see obama fail than do anything to help? no comment on how they will not give him an opportunity to lead? no comment on how they are killing bills that would create jobs? no comment on changing what they supported just prior to obama taaking office?
you might think i am smart and i appreciate that, but i always thought you had the ability to call a spade a spade."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
everything the gop is wanting to do has been proven to not only not help the situation, but actually worsen it. did you read the article?mikepegg44 wrote:no
so not wanting tax increases, trying to manage the deficit in a different way than spending more to get out of debt, and attempting cuts (not real cuts mind you, just decreases in the projected increase in spending) is seen as deliberately crashing the economy?
and thank god Krugman weighed in on the topic...I mean...it is startling to see he blamed the problems squarely on the GOP considering Obama signs the bills.
And the blame-go-round keeps on spinning.
Who honestly thinks that the democrats can be removed from this equation?
lindsey graham, a republican, defied norquist yesterday and said that to get past the gridlock and try to offset the deficits that taxes are going to have to be raised."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
mikepegg44 wrote:no
so not wanting tax increases, trying to manage the deficit in a different way than spending more to get out of debt, and attempting cuts (not real cuts mind you, just decreases in the projected increase in spending) is seen as deliberately crashing the economy?
and thank god Krugman weighed in on the topic...I mean...it is startling to see he blamed the problems squarely on the GOP considering Obama signs the bills.
And the blame-go-round keeps on spinning.
Who honestly thinks that the democrats can be removed from this equation?
you cannot deny that the GOP would be against anything Obama supported. if Obama said the sky was blue the GOP would dispute it. now i agree i don't obsolve the Dems and Obama of their blame, but from day 1 the republican agenda was to stymie Obama at all costs.0 -
thank you!pjhawks wrote:you cannot deny that the GOP would be against anything Obama supported. if Obama said the sky was blue the GOP would dispute it. now i agree i don't obsolve the Dems and Obama of their blame, but from day 1 the republican agenda was to stymie Obama at all costs."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
yeah ... this is what i've been trying to get at ...
i'm not sure how many republicans you will get to admit this tho ...0 -
Sure havent done anything to help...0
-
gimmesometruth27 wrote:
everything the gop is wanting to do has been proven to not only not help the situation, but actually worsen it. did you read the article?mikepegg44 wrote:no
so not wanting tax increases, trying to manage the deficit in a different way than spending more to get out of debt, and attempting cuts (not real cuts mind you, just decreases in the projected increase in spending) is seen as deliberately crashing the economy?
and thank god Krugman weighed in on the topic...I mean...it is startling to see he blamed the problems squarely on the GOP considering Obama signs the bills.
And the blame-go-round keeps on spinning.
Who honestly thinks that the democrats can be removed from this equation?
lindsey graham, a republican, defied norquist yesterday and said that to get past the gridlock and try to offset the deficits that taxes are going to have to be raised.
yep I did.
I have heard it all before. Shrinking federal spending is the only way we are going to succeed in the future. When you hybridize the philosophies and spend what you don't have, you tax people with inflation. There really is a lot of money changing hands in our economy...10 years ago it would have been plenty...but what we are seeing is the result of a constant inflation of the dollar.
So no, there isn't only one way to get out of a crisis...one might make it worse in the short term, but long term we will be much better off. Constantly trying to fix the short term has us chasing a dragon.
Do you think that the road we are on is sustainable and will keep the dollar as the reserve currency for the world economy? which is pretty important I might add
I read the article, my question to you is, do you believe the article's premise and do you believe the only way out of this is gov't spending?
why are European nations with higher tax rates and smaller populations facing some of the same issues...could it be irresponsible gov't?that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan0 -
They may have stonewalled, but if the GOP had as much control as the Dems had in the first two years, would they have been stonewalled by the Dems or would they have steamrolled them?gimmesometruth27 wrote:
true, both parties are to blame, but one is significantly more at fault here. no comment on the gop's tactics?unsung wrote:Overspending is killing the economy. Endless printing of the dollar is killing the economy. Big Government is killing the economy. Endless wars are killing the economy.
Get over this one party is doing this or that. You are smarter than that. BOTH are doing it.
no comment on politicizing the issues facing the economy and job growth, ie the stonewalling and refusal to even vote on things that have passed the house? no comment on how they would rather see obama fail than do anything to help? no comment on how they will not give him an opportunity to lead? no comment on how they are killing bills that would create jobs? no comment on changing what they supported just prior to obama taaking office?
you might think i am smart and i appreciate that, but i always thought you had the ability to call a spade a spade.Be Excellent To Each OtherParty On, Dudes!0 -
this is a bullshit premise that i am tired of refuting. the dems did not have a slam dunk majority in obama's first 2 years. on paper, and on paper only, they had more D's, but there is an entire faction called blue dogs who are conservative democrats from red states who voted with republicans 90% of the time. they are small d democrats who supported most of bush's initiatives. they are very much like joe lieberman, who called himself a democrat, caucused with the dems, yet voted against them most of the time. thankfully most of the blue dogs have been voted out of office and lieberman is now an independant. they had a majority numberswise, but not philosophywise. obama was stupid for trying to be bipartisan those first 2 years. he had to be naive or just plain fucking stupid to think that the gop was going to go along with him on anything. even those things they had voted for in the past. it took him 3 years to figure that out, when most people knew it from the outset....Jason P wrote:They may have stonewalled, but if the GOP had as much control as the Dems had in the first two years, would they have been stonewalled by the Dems or would they have steamrolled them?"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
pjhawks wrote:mikepegg44 wrote:no
so not wanting tax increases, trying to manage the deficit in a different way than spending more to get out of debt, and attempting cuts (not real cuts mind you, just decreases in the projected increase in spending) is seen as deliberately crashing the economy?
and thank god Krugman weighed in on the topic...I mean...it is startling to see he blamed the problems squarely on the GOP considering Obama signs the bills.
And the blame-go-round keeps on spinning.
Who honestly thinks that the democrats can be removed from this equation?
you cannot deny that the GOP would be against anything Obama supported. if Obama said the sky was blue the GOP would dispute it. now i agree i don't obsolve the Dems and Obama of their blame, but from day 1 the republican agenda was to stymie Obama at all costs.
That's the sense I get out of this as well.
"scorched-earth economic policies"- I'm glad to see the article considers, even if abstractly, the effect on the planet."It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
pjhawks wrote:mikepegg44 wrote:no
so not wanting tax increases, trying to manage the deficit in a different way than spending more to get out of debt, and attempting cuts (not real cuts mind you, just decreases in the projected increase in spending) is seen as deliberately crashing the economy?
and thank god Krugman weighed in on the topic...I mean...it is startling to see he blamed the problems squarely on the GOP considering Obama signs the bills.
And the blame-go-round keeps on spinning.
Who honestly thinks that the democrats can be removed from this equation?
you cannot deny that the GOP would be against anything Obama supported. if Obama said the sky was blue the GOP would dispute it. now i agree i don't obsolve the Dems and Obama of their blame, but from day 1 the republican agenda was to stymie Obama at all costs.
They are against his policies. Did you think they would be for them? Do you think that Reagan and Clinton had legislators clamoring to support everything they did? No, they got what they wanted in different ways...
Both parties are terrible. it is what you get when you have party politics. I would actually blame the senate and house leadership from the first two years for their inability to get legislation drafted and passed that supported the president's plans more than those who are opposed to the legislation blocking it.
but to say they are sabotaging the economy on purpose is a whole different charge than to say they disagree with him politically.
Are the GOP numbskulls a problem?...undoubtedly...but they aren't alone...
Mac said it best, "And what? Vote for the democrat who's going to blast me in the ass? Or the republican who's going to blast my ass? Either way, politics is all one big ass blasting"
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan0 -
That's just it. They had bad leadership ... too many chiefs heading in different directions and they could not get the troops organized. Don't blame the GOP because they had a strategy and organization.gimmesometruth27 wrote:
this is a bullshit premise that i am tired of refuting. the dems did not have a slam dunk majority in obama's first 2 years. on paper, and on paper only, they had more D's, but there is an entire faction called blue dogs who are conservative democrats from red states who voted with republicans 90% of the time. they are small d democrats who supported most of bush's initiatives. they are very much like joe lieberman, who called himself a democrat, caucused with the dems, yet voted against them most of the time. thankfully most of the blue dogs have been voted out of office and lieberman is now an independant. they had a majority numberswise, but not philosophywise. obama was stupid for trying to be bipartisan those first 2 years. he had to be naive or just plain fucking stupid to think that the gop was going to go along with him on anything. even those things they had voted for in the past. it took him 3 years to figure that out, when most people knew it from the outset....Jason P wrote:They may have stonewalled, but if the GOP had as much control as the Dems had in the first two years, would they have been stonewalled by the Dems or would they have steamrolled them?
But anyway, not much was done in the first two years in regards to fixing the economy anyway. A whole year was wasted on a healthcare program that doesn't even address the problems in the current healthcare system.Be Excellent To Each OtherParty On, Dudes!0 -
I've been saying this for years. I think it's quite obvious and Repubs have just about plainly stated that this is their strategy; thus the McConnell quote.
It's been proven over and over and over that tax cuts for the rich do not help generate jobs. When will you wingnuts learn? :roll:Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24; Pittsburgh 5/16/25; Pittsburgh 5/18/25
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/160 -
Johnny Abruzzo wrote:I've been saying this for years. I think it's quite obvious and Repubs have just about plainly stated that this is their strategy; thus the McConnell quote.
It's been proven over and over and over that tax cuts for the rich do not help generate jobs. When will you wingnuts learn? :roll:
what is the right number that someone else should pay? That of course is assuming you do not belong to the top tax bracket.
If you do belong to it, can I have a job?
Signed,
a wingnut who believes that people should keep the vast majority of the money they earn.that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan0 -
mikepegg44 wrote:pjhawks wrote:mikepegg44 wrote:no
so not wanting tax increases, trying to manage the deficit in a different way than spending more to get out of debt, and attempting cuts (not real cuts mind you, just decreases in the projected increase in spending) is seen as deliberately crashing the economy?
and thank god Krugman weighed in on the topic...I mean...it is startling to see he blamed the problems squarely on the GOP considering Obama signs the bills.
And the blame-go-round keeps on spinning.
Who honestly thinks that the democrats can be removed from this equation?
you cannot deny that the GOP would be against anything Obama supported. if Obama said the sky was blue the GOP would dispute it. now i agree i don't obsolve the Dems and Obama of their blame, but from day 1 the republican agenda was to stymie Obama at all costs.
They are against his policies. Did you think they would be for them? Do you think that Reagan and Clinton had legislators clamoring to support everything they did? No, they got what they wanted in different ways...
Both parties are terrible. it is what you get when you have party politics. I would actually blame the senate and house leadership from the first two years for their inability to get legislation drafted and passed that supported the president's plans more than those who are opposed to the legislation blocking it.
but to say they are sabotaging the economy on purpose is a whole different charge than to say they disagree with him politically.
Are the GOP numbskulls a problem?...undoubtedly...but they aren't alone...
Mac said it best, "And what? Vote for the democrat who's going to blast me in the ass? Or the republican who's going to blast my ass? Either way, politics is all one big ass blasting"
i don't say they are sabotaging the economy on purpose, but i do believe they are sabotaging the 1st black president in the history of the country on purpose. and i do believe that race plays a part of it.0 -
yes, we do have to cut spending. we have to cut it from all areas, including cutting the military and cutting the $4 billion we are giving to israel this year. in the end it does not matter what obama wants to do because the republicans are going to oppose it. no matter what he proposes he has a majority against him in the house and 49 votes against in the senate automatically. they are going to make him a lame duck because in an election year nobody wants to vote for any controversial bills because that is the last thing the voters will remember when going into the ballot box.
dick cheney said deficits did not matter. that became the gop mantra relating to budgets. when did the mantra change?? we have to increase revenue as well. you can not just cut your way to prosperity. people in credit card debt, what do they do? they 1) stop using the card and 2) find ways to increase revenue to pay off that debt. it is a simple mathematical solution.
to answer your question, no the road we are on is not sustainable. trillions spent on war, billions out of the government via tax cuts, billions out of the economy because people can not find jobs and can not afford things like gas, groceries, and people are not buying things like home improvement. they are sitting on their money. they are hoarding it. they are not stimulating the economy because they do not have that spending money.
we have spent our way out of debt before. after world war 2 we built homes for returning soldiers and the resulting baby boom. we built highways and bridges and put people to work working on government projects. the difference between then and now is that back then we actually had factories and acutally manufactured things in this country. today those jobs are overseas and they ain't coming back.
my idea to get a small number of people back to work immediately.
1. get rid of those damn self check out lanes at the store. pay a human being to do that job.
2. large companies like insurance and utility companies should pay human beings to answer the phone and act as operators and get rid of those stupid automated answering robots.
3. approve infrastructure projects and get people hired on to work on those projects.
these are just 3 ideas off the top of my head, but at least it is a start.
and to answer your other question, no, government spending is not the only way out of it. the government needs to spend that money in the correct manner. invest it in our infrastructure. not in researching and developing stealth battleships and stealth planes and weapons of war like bombs and guns and missiles that cost billions and when they blow up that is a billion dollars up in smoke. also, other countries could not afford to buy some of the things we are building now, so there would be nobody buying it aside from our own military.
yes irresponsible government is causing those problems in europe, but i can guarantee that those countries do not have entire political parties opposing their leader just for the sake of being a dick and to make him/her look bad politically.
what is going on in this country today is an absolute joke.mikepegg44 wrote:yep I did.
I have heard it all before. Shrinking federal spending is the only way we are going to succeed in the future. When you hybridize the philosophies and spend what you don't have, you tax people with inflation. There really is a lot of money changing hands in our economy...10 years ago it would have been plenty...but what we are seeing is the result of a constant inflation of the dollar.
So no, there isn't only one way to get out of a crisis...one might make it worse in the short term, but long term we will be much better off. Constantly trying to fix the short term has us chasing a dragon.
Do you think that the road we are on is sustainable and will keep the dollar as the reserve currency for the world economy? which is pretty important I might add
I read the article, my question to you is, do you believe the article's premise and do you believe the only way out of this is gov't spending?
why are European nations with higher tax rates and smaller populations facing some of the same issues...could it be irresponsible gov't?"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
i agree with the underlined part. remember when conventional wisdom in the nfl was that black men could not play quarterback and be effective? that has changed a lot in the last 20 years. i have a feeling some of these people are thinking that black men can not be president and be effective today.pjhawks wrote:i don't say they are sabotaging the economy on purpose, but i do believe they are sabotaging the 1st black president in the history of the country on purpose. and i do believe that race plays a part of it."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
all the gop has done is provide sound bites. suckingt he cock of big business , bemoaning the great tax burden of "job creators". Fuck that shit.
DO SOMETHING MOTHERFUCKERS. Stay off the fucking news shows and WORK. come up with your own plan and implement it.
oh thats right, one term IS the plan._____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140
Categories
- All Categories
- 149.1K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.2K The Porch
- 283 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.3K Flea Market
- 39.3K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help