The Obama Economy

[The evil fish]

Oh yeah..I forgot that the root of the REAL problem right now was...a WHOLE LOT of peoples living beyond their means. I see this on both sides of the political fence as well as both sides of the poverty line.

THEN a whole bunch of rich dudes (read CEOs & CREW)...sent the jobs away that these workers were so diligently attending to (I know many such workers personally)...they sent them away so they could make more money...

MONEY (actually the "love of/LUST AFTER" of money) is the particular root of this evil.

FUNNY...that mostly Protestant Christians are at the top of this particular pyramid. (When you consider the etymology.)

Hey Rev - I say what you highlighted because most people who claim to be in poverty don't know what real poverty is. And at the same time - people who grab at the hand outs (most of the time) don't use it to better themselves, only buy brand new expensive shinny things to make them appear to be in a financial status they are not.

[n0Mad]

actors are just that actors... that should be the first red flag in your face... they are paid to act not think. They don't have the qualifications to say what is right or wrong for the country

I wish I could find the quote, or knew off the top of my head, but Bruce Willis said something to the effect of, "Why should we trust an actor's viewpoint on anything just because they're on TV?" Doesn't make them any smarter than anyone, but often dumber.

I like NPR and PBS! But they are liberal heavy to the extreme!

Canadian radio is decent and you can get an English translation of Der Spiegel on the internet that has some good reporting.

[The evil fish]

I wish I could find the quote, or knew off the top of my head, but Bruce Willis said something to the effect of, "Why should we trust an actor's viewpoint on anything just because they're on TV?" Doesn't make them any smarter than anyone, but often dumber.

Canadian radio is decent and you can get an English translation of Der Spiegel on the internet that has some good reporting.

Yeah - don't you wish you had a world wide media forum you could just speak your opinion on? Geessss maybe they'd get the hint if we all could get on CNN or TMZ for a day!

[Rev.Reverence]

Hey Rev - I say what you highlighted because most people who claim to be in poverty don't know what real poverty is. And at the same time - people who grab at the hand outs (most of the time) don't use it to better themselves, only buy brand new expensive shinny things to make them appear to be in a financial status they are not.

I see few that use little for their betterment..I mean REAL betterment..not just shiney new shit..

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Analysis: Obama recovery plans sowing some unease

By TOM RAUM – 15 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama offered his domestic-policy proposals as a "break from a troubled past." But the economic outlook now is more troubled than it was even in January, despite Obama's bold rhetoric and commitment of more trillions of dollars.

And while his personal popularity remains high, some economists and lawmakers are beginning to question whether Obama's agenda of increased government activism is helping, or hurting, by sowing uncertainty among businesses, investors and consumers that could prolong the recession.

Although the administration likes to say it "inherited" the recession and trillion-dollar deficits, the economic wreckage has worsened on Obama's still-young watch.

Every day, the economy is becoming more and more an Obama economy.

More than 4 million jobs have been lost since the recession began in December 2007 — roughly half in the past three months.

Stocks have tumbled to levels not seen since 1997. They are down more than 50 percent from their 2007 highs and 20 percent since Obama's inauguration.

The president's suggestion that it was a good time for investors with "a long-term perspective" to buy stocks may have been intended to help lift battered markets. But a big sell-off followed.

Presidents usually don't talk about the stock market. But the dynamics are different now.

A higher percentage of people have more direct exposure to stocks — including through 401(k) and other retirement plans — than ever.

So a tumbling stock market is adding to the national angst as households see the value of their investments and homes plunge as job losses keep rising.

Some once mighty companies such as General Motors and Citigroup are little more than penny stocks.

Many health care stocks are down because of fears of new government restrictions and mandates as part a health care overhaul. Private student loan providers were pounded because of the increased government lending role proposed by Obama. Industries that use oil and other carbon-based fuels are being shunned, apparently in part because of Obama's proposal for fees on greenhouse-gas polluters.

Makers of heavy road-building and other construction equipment have taken a hit, partly because of expectations of fewer public works jobs here and globally than first anticipated.

"We've got a lot of scared investors and business people. I think the uncertainty is a real killer here," said Chris Edwards, director of fiscal policy for the libertarian Cato Institute.

Some Democrats, worried over where Obama is headed, are suggesting he has yet to match his call for "bold action and big ideas" with deeds.

In particular, they point to bumpy efforts to fix the financial system under Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

Obama may have contributed to the national anxiety by first warning of "catastrophe" if his stimulus plan was not passed and in setting high expectations for Geithner. Instead, Geithner's public performance has been halting and he's been challenged by lawmakers of both parties.

Republicans and even some top Democrats, including Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, have questioned the wisdom of Obama's proposal to limit tax deductions for higher-income people on mortgage interest and charitable contributions.

Charities have strongly protested, saying times already are tough enough for them. The administration suggests it might back off that one.

Even White House claims that its policies will "create" or "save" 3.5 million jobs have been questioned by Democratic supporters.

"You created a situation where you cannot be wrong," the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Montana Democrat Max Baucus, told Geithner last week.

"If the economy loses 2 million jobs over the next few years, you can say yes, but it would've lost 5.5 million jobs. If we create a million jobs, you can say, well, it would have lost 2.5 million jobs," Baucus said. "You've given yourself complete leverage where you cannot be wrong, because you can take any scenario and make yourself look correct."

Republicans assert that Obama's proposals, including the "cap and trade" fees on polluters to combat global warming, would raise taxes during a recession that could touch everyone. "Herbert Hoover tried it, and we all know where that led," says House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio.

The administration argues its tax increases for the households earning over $250,000 a year and fees on carbon polluters contained in its budget won't kick in until 2011-2012, when it forecasts the economy will have fully recovered.

But even those assumptions are challenged as too rosy by many private forecasters and some Democratic lawmakers.

Many deficit hawks also worry that the trillions of federal dollars being doled out by the administration, Congress and the Federal Reserve could sow the seeds of inflation down the road, whether the measures succeed in taming the recession or not. The money includes Obama's $3.6 trillion budget and the $837 billion stimulus package he signed last month.

Polls show that Obama's personal approval ratings, generally holding in the high 60s, remain greater than support for his specific policies.

"He still has a fair amount of political capital, so the public is willing to cut him some slack and go along with him for a while," said pollster Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center. "But the public will have to get some sense that the kinds of things he's proposing are going to work, or are showing some signs that they are working."

Allan Sinai, chief global economist for Decision Economics, a Boston-area consulting firm, said the complexity and enormity of the crisis make it hard to solve.

"There's no way to get it all right, regardless of which president is making policy," Sinai said. "The problem is the sickness got too far. The actions taken, medicine applied, were mainly the wrong actions. So it's just worse, and it gets harder to deal with. At this stage, there is no easy answer, no easy way out. It's a question of how we fumble through."

[Reaper]

Yeah, it seems to me that Obama has gone back on a few things he was campaigning for. But one thing he DID campaign for was raising taxes and people were stupid enough to think that he wasn't really going to do it; that it was just campaign redirect.

[Soulrev]

Yeah, it seems to me that Obama has gone back on a few things he was campaigning for. But one thing he DID campaign for was raising taxes and people were stupid enough to think that he wasn't really going to do it; that it was just campaign redirect.

It does seem democrats tend to tax more and try to fix things that way.

[The evil fish]

It seems to be getting worse day by day... it is all over the media and people are now throwing "Tea Parties" in protest already.... good for them.

[candyman]

It seems to be getting worse day by day... it is all over the media and people are now throwing "Tea Parties" in protest already.... good for them.

Sorry to possibly burts your bubble here but...since when did democrats start giving a shit about what people really want? Do they even know what voting is?

[phee]

Sorry to possibly burts your bubble here but...since when did democrats start giving a shit about what people really want? Do they even know what voting is?

Or any politician for that matter....

[candyman]

Or any politician for that matter....

Oh don't get me wrong I hate them all...but I have seen more empty threats from republicans than from democrats...and, at least in my state, once the democrats took over its been nuts. Voting is pretty much out the window and the taxes are rising faster than my risk of getting lung cancer from every cigarette I smoke! Now this is just an example but...the republicans that are in office said that they are against smoking, but that its up to the PEOPLE of the state to decide if a ban is needed or not and that the cigarette taxes need to stop. What did the democrats have to say about this? Oh, after the three times the smoking ban was voted down they got together and said "the people really do want it they just don't know it yet" and now they are passing it without the vote...they also said "we should also raise the tax on cigarettes for the 5th time this year"...they also lowered a few taxes on alcohol and the punishment for any alcohol related crimes...

but then again that is just in my state...and it could just be the bunch...i still hate them all but some of them deserve a greater kick to the groin than others...

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Do they even know what voting is?

Of course they know what voting is. If they didn't, how would they steal elections?

[phee]

Of course they know what voting is. If they didn't, how would they steal elections?

Ask the Bush Team!

[The evil fish]

Sorry to possibly burts your bubble here but...since when did democrats start giving a shit about what people really want? Do they even know what voting is?

Oh - you didn't bust by bubble - I'm siting back smiling. They voted for what they wanted and now they're getting it. I never thought I'd see a country vote to have more money taken from they're pockets.

[Rev.Reverence]

Or any politician for that matter....

...well...down to the 99...

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Vaunted Obama message machine is off-key

By Steve Holland - Analysis

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - When billionaire investor Warren Buffett says President Barack Obama's economic message is muddled and undermining public confidence, it's worth listening.

Halfway through his first 100 days in office, ace communicator Obama has struggled to find the right tone in talking about the economy, twinning bleak warnings with optimism about the future.

On the campaign trail, Obama said a president must be able to do more than one thing at a time, and his White House has been doing that.

He and his aides have interspliced comments about the economy while launching theme-of-the-day initiatives on healthcare, stem cell research and on Tuesday, education.

Last week the White House spent some time accusing conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh of being leader of the Republican Party.

But Obama, together with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, White House economic guru Lawrence Summers and others have so far failed to explain how they plan to rescue American banks, some of which are teetering on the brink of collapse.

There is talk of "stress tests" for troubled banks, or nationalizing them or letting some fail -- but no clear plan.

Buffett, an informal Obama adviser considered a financial seer on Wall Street, told CNBC on Monday the message has to be "very, very clear as to what government will be doing."

"And I think we've had, and it's the nature of the political process somewhat, but we've had muddled messages and the American public does not know. They feel they don't know what's going on, and their reaction then is to absolutely pull back," he said.

At the White House, spokesman Robert Gibbs reacted defensively, saying Obama has only been in office seven weeks and it should be no surprise that "all of the problems that took many years to take hold haven't necessarily been solved."

Obama, at Tuesday's education event, rejected criticism that he is trying to do too many things at once, citing three predecessors who managed to juggle challenges on many fronts --Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt and John Kennedy.

"President Kennedy didn't have the luxury of choosing between civil rights and sending us to the moon. And we don't have the luxury of choosing between getting our economy moving now and rebuilding it over the long term," he said.

Obama is benefiting from high popular support. Polls give him a 60 percent approval rating and experts say voters seem willing to give him time to get his sea legs.

"You've got a public that is going to cut the president some slack and understands this is a deep-seated problem," said American Enterprise Institute political analyst Norman Ornstein.

"But if there's no sign of progress of any sort, no sign that the policies he implemented beginning in January and February are doing anything by June, July or August, then he's going to have a bigger political problem," Ornstein said.

University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato said the administration has left the public confused about what will happen to the banks and may be inadvertently sending a message that "the problem may be too big for government to solve."

"I can't figure out what they're talking about on the banks," he said.

Tony Fratto, a former Treasury and White House spokesman for former President George W. Bush, said a muddled message was not the only problem.

"It's not just a message problem. It's partially a fact problem, and that is the market is not getting clear information on what Treasury's intentions are for the rest of this program," he said.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Warren Buffett Calls on President, Lead Democrats to Focus on Economy

Warren Buffett joined another investment guru, Mort Zuckerman, and many economists in calling on President Obama and Congress to focus on fixing the economy. Zuckerman is a real estate guru and publisher of U.S. News & World Report and the New York Daily news. On Sunday's Meet the Press, Zuckerman called on the president to focus on the economy.

Buffett and Zuckerman called on Obama, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Congressional Democrats to stop using the crisis to advance their liberal agendas. While Buffett refused to tell a CNBC interviewer this morning which programs should be deferred, he said everything but fixing the financial crisis and the recession should be put on the back burner.

Both Buffett and Zuckerman were differential to Obama for obvious reasons, but they both said the president is trying to do too much and is confusing the public and markets.

He said it is wrong for the White House to declare that it will use the crises to advance its agendas on health, education, energy and union agendas such as card checks.

Buffett opposes card checks even though "we have loads of unions" at Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A) (BRK.B). Card checks long sought by unions and Democrats would deprive workers of secret ballots during elections held to determine whether their employers would be unionized.

Except for the possible exception of Citigroup ©, banks will fix themselves, Buffett predicted. He believes the banks' toxic assets that have been marked to market are worth a lot more than their current values.

He reinforced his support for mark to market accounting, which keeps companies honest.

Corporate America, he declared, has played games when reporting their financial results and its misbehavior has helped cause the financial crisis.

Buffett believes that banks, which have cut their dividends in recent weeks, will generate the capital and cash flow from earnings that they will need to recover on their own.

Buffett also knocked investing gold, which "just sits there" and has to be stored and insured. Companies generate earnings, he said.

The investment guru refused to look back and comment on the efforts of the Bush administration to bailout banks and automakers.

He believes in looking forward and in looking for business and investment opportunities.

While Buffett said Obama is smart and the best president we could have to deal with the economic crisis, he didn't comment on the president's obvious economic ignorance and lack of understanding of what the bearish stock markets and scared consumers are telling him. Indeed, CNBC failed to deal directly with economic ignorance issue.

Earlier in the morning, Buffett reportedly said inflation could be worse than it was in the 1970s. Later in the program, he said the best protection for individuals is their own earning power and owning a business directly or by investing in stocks.

On taxes, Buffett said billionaires like him should pay more than a 17% effective marginal tax rate, but overall, taxes should be lower. He said concerns about reducing deductions on charitable contributions as proposed by Obama would not be a big deal.

As for the carbon tax, he said utilities would pass the tax through. Although he talked around the issue, he clearly is against the carbon tax. Jobs one, two and three, he repeated, is fixing the economy.

Like president Obama, the public generally doesn't understand the economic problem. While Buffett didn't say this about Obama, he said there is a communications problem. It's the president's job to educate the public, he said.

But until Obama gets it himself, even teleprompters won't help him educate the public.

[phee]

interesting stuff

[Simon Bar Sinister]

*bump*

Dow Jones index closed at 11,117 today. Up about 3,600 points from its low point in early 2009. Place whatever worth on that you want.

Job growth is still painfully slow, however.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

but the value of our Dollar is still way down.

[IsleofRhodesEnt]

If he were to do things right, I'd be right there supporting him. He isn't.

according to you, Gaf.....which please remind me....whats your degree in again?

Is it economics?

Or Marketing?

Or anything relative to?

I'll wait.

*looks at clock*

Yeah...done waiting.

You're familiar with the adage "you have to spend money to make money" correct?

Here's a shocker: that's an economic truth.

I've seen your sources, and I find a flaw in many of them: either the papers, or the writers themselves, have a track record of being "anti-obama" from the start. Problem with that is as follows: they already had their mind made up, so much like you, it doesn't matter...they will take a fly from the spiderweb and place it in the vasoline, just so they can say they found the fly in the ointment.

Their looking for the tiniest flaw to exploit. No one in the Obama Administration ever said that these measures they are taking are perfect, infact, it's been said on more then several occasions that the road to recovery is not a straight one. There are going to be problems, and tweeks will need to be made, but at least the man is giving us a START...and before you say a damn thing, yes, I can prove that the economy has actually been on an UPSWING SINCE Obama got into office, infact, after the first 6 months he was President. However, I doubt you would be forward thinking to take my proof, as you would try to pick it apart...and you could...because it's simplistic in nature...but it stands as fact none-the-less.

You'll tout it as bullshyt and moronic, because thats what you like to do, but the facts will still be there...no matter how much you grumble and whine and deny.

so go ahead and laugh...because you think your the only intelligent, proper thinking person on earth...or at least one of the few.

Craigslist...and every other place online that you can look up employeement oppertunities. I will bet you my last breath that there is close to 50% MORE employement postings, every week, then there was at the end, or hell, even the middle, of the Bush Administration. And I am going on a week-by-week average, so to break it down: if you could go back 4-5 years, and look at all the job hunting engines, and take a "new posting" average week by week, and compare it to what the average is NOW, on those same engines, I gurantee at least a 40%+ rise in postings.

and no...."more people realize their out there" doesn't count...just as many business's were aware of Monster, Yahoo JObs, etc back then as they are now...the reason is that there are just MORE JOBS. Period.

Edited April 21, 2010 by IsleofRhodesEnt

[Epic_Fail_Guy]

[quote name='IsleofRhodesEnt' date='20 April 2010 - 09:53 PM' timestamp='1271821993' post='689266'

and no...."more people realize their out there" doesn't count...just as many business's were aware of Monster, Yahoo JObs, etc back then as they are now...the reason is that there are just MORE JOBS. Period.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

according to you, Gaf.....which please remind me....whats your degree in again?

Is it economics?

Or Marketing?

Or anything relative to?

I'll wait.

*looks at clock*

Yeah...done waiting.

You're familiar with the adage "you have to spend money to make money" correct?

Here's a shocker: that's an economic truth.

I've seen your sources, and I find a flaw in many of them: either the papers, or the writers themselves, have a track record of being "anti-obama" from the start. Problem with that is as follows: they already had their mind made up, so much like you, it doesn't matter...they will take a fly from the spiderweb and place it in the vasoline, just so they can say they found the fly in the ointment.

Their looking for the tiniest flaw to exploit. No one in the Obama Administration ever said that these measures they are taking are perfect, infact, it's been said on more then several occasions that the road to recovery is not a straight one. There are going to be problems, and tweeks will need to be made, but at least the man is giving us a START...and before you say a damn thing, yes, I can prove that the economy has actually been on an UPSWING SINCE Obama got into office, infact, after the first 6 months he was President. However, I doubt you would be forward thinking to take my proof, as you would try to pick it apart...and you could...because it's simplistic in nature...but it stands as fact none-the-less.

You'll tout it as bullshyt and moronic, because thats what you like to do, but the facts will still be there...no matter how much you grumble and whine and deny.

so go ahead and laugh...because you think your the only intelligent, proper thinking person on earth...or at least one of the few.

Craigslist...and every other place online that you can look up employeement oppertunities. I will bet you my last breath that there is close to 50% MORE employement postings, every week, then there was at the end, or hell, even the middle, of the Bush Administration. And I am going on a week-by-week average, so to break it down: if you could go back 4-5 years, and look at all the job hunting engines, and take a "new posting" average week by week, and compare it to what the average is NOW, on those same engines, I gurantee at least a 40%+ rise in postings.

and no...."more people realize their out there" doesn't count...just as many business's were aware of Monster, Yahoo JObs, etc back then as they are now...the reason is that there are just MORE JOBS. Period.

Perhaps you should read some actual employment numbers for the last 20 years. You don't trust any source I would produce, no matter who it was. You would find fault. So find your own numbers. Not some wild scenerio like you propose, but actual employment numbers. Tell me exactly when during the Bush years, unemployment ever reached 10.2%.

Go ahead and take another week or two to come up with a response. Really make it a doosy and put me in my place.

[IsleofRhodesEnt]

Perhaps you should read some actual employment numbers for the last 20 years. You don't trust any source I would produce, no matter who it was. You would find fault. So find your own numbers. Not some wild scenerio like you propose, but actual employment numbers. Tell me exactly when during the Bush years, unemployment ever reached 10.2%.

Go ahead and take another week or two to come up with a response. Really make it a doosy and put me in my place.

"Perhaps you should read some actual employment numbers for the last 20 years. You don't trust any source I would produce, no matter who it was. You would find fault. So find your own numbers." Gosh...EXACTLY what you do...but your right everytime you do it...

and btw...do you HONESTLY think that the unemployment rate we had at the beginning of Obama's term, or what we had now, suddenly appeared because he took office? Seriously, Gaf....please learn to THINK first. It't not a wild Scenario (which btw...called you on it)...it's just what it is, but ok...I'll take a look at the unemployment rate for the last year of Bush, and compare it to what we have today.

2007:

the numbers

2010:

the numbers

Problem is, at least for you, is that the numbers SUPPORT my "wild scenario", at least in part, because while, yes, the unemployment rate is higher in 2010, you will notice, according to the numbers, that is is FALLING instead of growing, where as in 2007, you can see the problem GROWING. You also do not have anything akin to the talk of "disgruntled workers", a term added due to the large unemployment rate...which was NOT caused by Obama, but rather by Bush, where it GREW. Obama's administration has caused the job market to GROW.

yes, the unemployment rate last year was the highest that our country had seen it in 25 years. That is correct...but to think that it was caused by a SINGLE year of Obama's term is ludicris.

chart

as you can see from the chart in the link, there is a severe spike between the Clinton-to-Bush administration, and yes, those first few years I will attribute to 9-11. Then, we have a steady 4.5-5.0 run, tipping here and there, but pretty steady month to month...but it hardly drops....infact, in the LAST YEAR OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION, it jumps from it's average 5.0 to a whopping 7.4. BUSHES LAST YEAR IN OFFICE SEES THE START OF THE INSANE UNEMPLOYMENT CLIMB WITH A 2.4 point JUMP in a year....and you expected it to stop right there?

I actually APPLAUDE Obama, because if it was going the same as it was before, we would see a 13.6 at the end of this year. Instead...he has a drop...not a big drop...but a drop in Unemployment...and recorded GROWTH of jobs.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

I didn't say the raise in unemployment was Obama's fault. I fully admit the raise started in Bush's last year. The spike and following rise are directly linked to the housing/banking crisis. I don't blame Obama for that either. I lay that blame on Frank, Rangel, Dodd and the other members of Congress who crafted the regulations that forced banks to give out loans to people who did not qualify. I also blame the investments bankers at Goldman-Sacks who were bilking the populace out of their money.

I blame Obama for the second bailout that lowered the value of the Dollar without adding the millions of jobs it was supposed to. He was the one that claimed that if we didn't pass that second stimulus (the majority of which has still not been spent) unemployment would reach 8.5%. I blame Obama for doubling the national debt (you know, that thing that you ranted about when it increased under Bush) in his first 6 months.

Did you know that if you subtract all the temporary jobs that were added by the Census department that the job growth you speak of goes away? Did you know that Goldman-Sacks just reported record profits?