130 total posts
(Page 1 of 5)
What do you expect with the high unemployment?
Well, I expect...
...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.
The problem with that seems to be
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.
Republicans and Bailout
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?
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.
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.
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!
Two wrongs don't make a right.
I would expect
the President to stop lying about the problem and stop doing the things that haven't helped the economy !!!
What do you suggest he do - get specific?
For starters, yes.
Platitudes never fed a hungry child !!
OK, how would you feed the hungry child?
He could slow down his record spending
Spending money we don't have won't fix anything.
OK, you've said what he should stop doing
Now, what should he do?
What should he do??
For starters, stop his record spending.
That would be enough
How is that going to feed the hungry child?
The stopping would be a good start...
Maybe if he didn't do anything he would cause less harm.
Leaving the Bush tax cuts intact...
and maybe making them permanent.
I don't mean this to sound smarmy.....
....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?
Democrats would NOT have supported them !!!
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?
I believe the time limit was imposed
so they could get enough votes.
that wasn't too hard to figure out.
Obama has spent a shocking amount.
... 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...
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?
4 trillion across 8 years?
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.
where did I say Obama was a saint?
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.
but hopefully they'll be driving to the edge slower.
Do you hope to be there when they go off the cliff?
Then you could say
"I told you so."
THAT would be sweet.
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.
"Pay as you go"
Obama just happened to be at the helm
I thought it was all Carter's fault? Or was that Clinton?
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.
Back to Speakeasy forum
(Page 1 of 5)