Speakeasy forum

General discussion

Numbers up under Obama....

by C1ay / September 11, 2010 9:16 AM PDT

The number of people in the U.S. who are in poverty is on track for a record increase on President Barack Obama's watch, with the ranks of working-age poor approaching 1960s levels that led to the national war on poverty....

LINK

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Numbers up under Obama....
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Numbers up under Obama....
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
(NT) What do you expect with the high unemployment?
by Diana Forum moderator / September 11, 2010 11:46 AM PDT
Collapse -
Well, I expect...
by James Denison / September 11, 2010 9:07 PM PDT

...the government to give banks more money at no interest rates, and do more bailouts of large bloated businesses, that's what I expect. Now if you ask what I'd like to see, it would be more along the lines of actually getting money into the pockets of workers and removing barriers blocking increases in the number of jobs.

Collapse -
The problem with that seems to be
by Diana Forum moderator / September 12, 2010 7:17 AM PDT
In reply to: Well, I expect...

that the GOP had no problem with bailing out the banks and AIG but is up in arms about helping by extending unemployment insurance or voting for money to repair infrastructure (unless it's in their district) or health insurance or helping homeowners or small businesses. All they want to know is where is the money coming from. Of course that wasn't the question when they were spending money on banks and wars, etc.

Now they want to tax breaks to continue for their wealthy friends by pretending to worry about the poor small businessman who makes over $200,000. They don't mention that most small business owners might gross over $200,000 but don't net that much.

Diana

Collapse -
Republicans and Bailout
by James Denison / September 12, 2010 11:12 AM PDT
http://www.esquire.com/the-side/richardson-report/republicans-stop-bailout-010609

January 6, 2009, 7:43 AM
The Anti-Bailout Republicans' Highway to Economic Hell

Rewriting history, warmongering, dragging around piglets -- and Obama hasn't even been seated yet. Just how far will absolutists go in the Battle Against the Bailout?

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/29/house-republicans-lambaste-bailout-bill/

September 29, 2008, 12:39 pm
House Republicans Lambaste Bailout Bill
By ANAHAD O'CONNOR

Republican members of the House of Representatives don?t seem too happy today.

As the House prepared to vote on the $700 billion measure intended to ease the growing credit crisis, Republican lawmakers took turns lambasting the bill on the House floor. Many stood at the podium in outrage, loudly urging their fellow representatives to shoot down the measure.

http://www.thenextright.com/patrick-ruffini/republicans-should-vote-against-the-bailout

Republicans Should Vote Against the Bailout

Submitted by Patrick Ruffini on Sun, 09/21/2008 - 21:25

Republican incumbents in close races have the easiest vote of their lives coming up this week: No on the Bush-Pelosi Wall Street bailout.

God Himself couldn't have given rank-and-file Republicans a better opportunity to create political space between themselves and the Administration. That's why I want to see 40 Republican No votes in the Senate, and 150+ in the House. If a bailout is to pass, let it be with Democratic votes. Let this be the political establishment (Bush Republicans in the White House + Democrats in Congress) saddling the taxpayers with hundreds of billions in debt (more than the Iraq War, conjured up in a single weekend, and enabled by Pelosi, btw), while principled Republicans say "No" and go to the country with a stinging indictment of the majority in Congress.

http://articles.cnn.com/2008-09-17/politics/aig.bailout.congress_1_bailout-taxpayer-exposure-aig?_s=PM:POLITICS

September 17, 2008|From Ted Barrett, Deirdre Walsh and Brianna Keilar CNN

* Some lawmakers complained Wednesday they didn't know a bailout of AIG was in the works.

Key Republicans on Capitol Hill blasted the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve on Wednesday for orchestrating an $85 billion bailout of insurance giant American International Group, and the White House for not informing them of the plan.
=======================

So, run, don't walk, to your local election office and make sure you are registered as a Republican!
Collapse -
(NT) Two wrongs don't make a right.
by C1ay / September 12, 2010 5:37 PM PDT
Collapse -
I would expect
by Mike_Hanks / September 11, 2010 11:36 PM PDT

the President to stop lying about the problem and stop doing the things that haven't helped the economy !!!

Collapse -
(NT) What do you suggest he do - get specific?
by Diana Forum moderator / September 12, 2010 7:20 AM PDT
In reply to: I would expect
Collapse -
For starters, yes.
by Mike_Hanks / September 12, 2010 7:36 AM PDT

Platitudes never fed a hungry child !!

Collapse -
(NT) OK, how would you feed the hungry child?
by Diana Forum moderator / September 13, 2010 12:58 AM PDT
In reply to: For starters, yes.
Collapse -
He could slow down his record spending
by C1ay / September 12, 2010 5:36 PM PDT

Spending money we don't have won't fix anything.

Collapse -
OK, you've said what he should stop doing
by Diana Forum moderator / September 13, 2010 12:54 AM PDT

Now, what should he do?

Diana

Collapse -
What should he do??
by Mike_Hanks / September 13, 2010 1:28 AM PDT

For starters, stop his record spending.
That would be enough

Collapse -
(NT) How is that going to feed the hungry child?
by Diana Forum moderator / September 13, 2010 12:31 PM PDT
In reply to: What should he do??
Collapse -
The stopping would be a good start...
by EdHannigan / September 13, 2010 1:29 AM PDT

Maybe if he didn't do anything he would cause less harm.

Collapse -
Leaving the Bush tax cuts intact...
by EdHannigan / September 13, 2010 1:31 AM PDT

and maybe making them permanent.

Collapse -
I don't mean this to sound smarmy.....
by Josh K / September 13, 2010 1:54 AM PDT

....but why weren't they made permanent when they were passed in the first place? Why did the Bush Congress put an expiration date on them?

Collapse -
EASY ANSWER!!!!!!!
by Mike_Hanks / September 13, 2010 6:50 AM PDT

Democrats would NOT have supported them !!!

Collapse -
So?
by Josh K / September 13, 2010 7:45 AM PDT
In reply to: EASY ANSWER!!!!!!!

The Republicans had a big enough majority. They passed the bill over Democratic objections as it was. They put a time limit on it. Doesn't it get challenging to try to blame EVERYTHING on the Dems?

Collapse -
I believe the time limit was imposed
by EdHannigan / September 13, 2010 7:47 AM PDT
In reply to: So?

so they could get enough votes.

Collapse -
Gee,
by Mike_Hanks / September 13, 2010 9:44 AM PDT

that wasn't too hard to figure out.

Collapse -
Was that really not clear enough for you to understand?
by C1ay / September 13, 2010 2:13 AM PDT
Collapse -
Obama has spent a shocking amount.
by grimgraphix / September 13, 2010 2:35 AM PDT

... but PLEASE... quit presenting this as strictly a problem he has created! Demanding Obama to present comprehensive goals dealing with spending, tax reform and tax income makes more sense. Doing it as a bi-partisan effort is what the country needs right now. But let's not pretend (as pretty much every post about this subject on SE does) that Obama is the cause for our economic woes.

We all know who is responsible for a litany of troubles, but until we hold both sides accountable, then "discussions" like this thread are just so much hot air.

You want to judge Obama by counting the debt from Washington to Reagan? Let us look at some of the last days of W's administration...

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500803_162-4486228-500803.html

Let's not forget that much of the bailout spending people are attributing to Obama was authorized under Bush's watch!

Frankly, pointing fingers right now is just playing politics. It creates an atmosphere of defending failed policies and dissuades talking about constructive solutions. Slamming Obama right now about spending without offering substantial constructive alternatives is just so much pandering for the coming Fall election cycle.

As long as the discussion revolves around labels - liberal, democrat, conservative, republican - then the discussion is really about consolidating power for political parties. When will the discussion come around to talking about what is good for the country? When will we all agree that nobodies policies have been working for a very long time?

Collapse -
4 trillion across 8 years?
by James Denison / September 13, 2010 6:19 AM PDT

ROFL!!!!!! There's no comparison to Obama, his over spending is in the trillions per year! That's like comparing an individual who accumlates $1,000 debt per year to another who goes into debt by $10,000 per year. Obama is right now running a 10 to 1 yearly ratio of debt increase.

Collapse -
where did I say Obama was a saint?
by grimgraphix / September 13, 2010 6:32 AM PDT

This ain't a p*ssing contest.

I never said anything in Obama's defense. What I am saying is quit sticking your head in the sand, when it comes to recognizing ALL the players who got us here.

All I see you making a case for is taking the people who drove us here for 8 years, and getting them back into the drivers seat. Same highway, same direction, same cliff on the horizon.

Collapse -
maybe
by James Denison / September 13, 2010 7:14 AM PDT

but hopefully they'll be driving to the edge slower.

Collapse -
Do you hope to be there when they go off the cliff?
by JP Bill / September 13, 2010 7:20 AM PDT
In reply to: maybe

Then you could say

"I told you so."

THAT would be sweet.

Collapse -
Huh?
by C1ay / September 13, 2010 6:45 PM PDT

Where the heck did I present this as a problem he created. I clearly pointed out elsewhere in this thread that this problem started with Jimmy Carter and the Congress that wrote the Community Reinvestment Act. You even responded to it.

Obama just keeps making it worse by signing more and more spending legislation we don't have the money for. He got elected with a spendthrift congress and together they're bankrupting the country instead of fixing the problems that existed when he was elected.

The country's on fire and he's trying to put it out with gasoline.

Collapse -
"Pay as you go"
by Mike_Hanks / September 13, 2010 9:07 PM PDT
In reply to: Huh?

That evaporated fast !!!

Collapse -
I thought it was all Carter's fault? Or was that Clinton?
by grimgraphix / September 12, 2010 2:13 AM PDT

I forget, since we have been told so many times over the years that it was never the fault of any republican...


Look, we all know that Obama hasn't done a bang up job in turning the economy around, but we also all know that the economic crisis he was handed was the most dramatic downturn in the US economy (correction, the WORLD economy) since the 1920's-30's.

We are still being spoon fed the idea that trickle down economics will save us, despite the fact that it has been proven over and over that the rich are not the benevolent overseers of the poor that this philosophy espouses. The US has gutted its economy for quick profits from risky adventures. It has borrowed money to maintain unrealistic spending habits, and the US consumer is as much to blame because we ran our own manufacturing base into oblivion by purchasing cheap foreign goods. Obama has very little to work with, and no rational support from both the Right and his own Left.

We screwed ourselves people. Blaming Obama for not turning it around quick enough is like blaming your doctor for your 3rd heart attack after he told you for 20 years that you had to quit smoking, drinking, and eating fatty foods.

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

Does BMW or Volvo do it best?

Pint-size luxury and funky style

Shopping for a new car this weekend? See how the BMW X2 stacks up against the Volvo XC40 in our side-by-side comparison.