Obama was terrible for economic growth

No that is quite wrong. The bad loans were written privately under Bush II's mortgage market de-regulation.

The Fannies actually had sound lending practices, but the secondary market crashed when over-loaded with the privately written junk.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/11/22/5086/#64309411f92f

 

You want evidence that a country's economy can recover in a relatively short time without the meddling interference of an unconsitutional 'central bank'? How about the last 10,000 years of human history BEFORE central banks slimed their way into the control of most economies throughout the world (except for Russia and China).

It's actually a very simple process, Nerd... some bunch of corrupt, stupid big-wig Wall Street clowns drive their corporations into such grave financial instability that they're right at the brink of a chaotic bankruptcy. Free market forces are like 'blind justice' -- they don't buy into all this horseshit about "too big to fail", so, when they're unable to meet their obligations, they go belly-up and a new set of owners and managers take over. The corrupt, corporate criminals give up their ski lodges in Beaver Creek, Colorado and hit the local charity soup kitchens instead. Unless YOU want to "rescue" them like the Federal Reserve does...?

Meanwhile, back in the real world of business, IF the demand for those companies' products is real, then they go right on making them and selling them. If other companies or individuals need to borrow money to buy those products, they borrow at rates that are determined by DEMAND, without a central bank flooding the planet with trillions of imaginary currency units based on nothing but whims and fairy-farts. Life goes on! Production goes on! People buy things, and they consume things! And life goes on quickly -- almost invariably right back to full-throttle prosperity and productivity. Think: just because some klatch of big-wig stock market gamblers go belly-up doesn't mean that the whole world grinds to a halt. New money (REAL money) takes over the assets (REAL assets), and life goes on.

But, when a damned central bank takes over you get situations like the one in Japan, which has been under suffocating control of the Bank of Japan, and their economic "downturn" has lasted for nearly all of the last twenty years! Our own central bank, the Federal Reserve, has been mismanaging our economy for the past ten years, with no sign that this internationaliist banking cartel will ever give up their total control now.

You want people wasting away on subsistence welfare, turning into useless, hopeless parasitic slugs? Just go right on living under the dictates of the Federal Reserve System. You'll get your utopian, liberal-Democrat wish!

 

I would still rather have a steady 2% growth than these 5% boom years that always end in the bubble bursting.

 

Obama was terrible in almost every respect as a President. Foreign Policy he was particularly horrible with and his economic policies were not much better. Obama created a lot of the poor and the welfare recipients of today.

Worst President we have ever had.

 

The job loss rate bottomed out the month Obama moved to the White House. The recession ended by June long before any stimulus was initiated. All Obama and the Democrats policies and lack thereof did was keep us from getting into a full recovery. And the Democrats took majority control of the government in 2007 NOT 2009.

 

Three things for you:

This, which you saw:


This:


And this:
https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/...ed_to_stop_barack_obama_not_to_work_with_him/

 

Unless you slept at a Holiday Inn last night and became a psychic economist, there is no way to prove whether growth would have been faster without the actions taken. A number of economists were predicting a double dip recession at the time.

 

Try addressing what I posted first.

And BTW Gingrich actually supports exactly what I said.

 

I must make this reply brief because of other things I must do, but, yes, you're right. I'm being subjective, but I'm also being objective. The country had suffered year after year with "Stagflation" all during the 70's, and no, I certainly won't blame Carter for ALL of that.

Please remember that, on top of everything else, Reagan had to build the nation's military forces back up to strength. You probably remember, as I do, how weak and downfallen our military was after the Vietnam debacle. And then came the big, phony "energy crisis", "stagflation", and all the rest of it -- in addition to the Nixon scandals, the lackluster Ford "caretaker" government, and a confused, mostly useless Carter administration.

Reagan pumped a LOT of money into the military, but, it paid off. The Soviet Union began collapsing during his second term. Sorry, I've got to go. Your post deserved a better response.

 

And some say we never got out it and yes I have history of economics to show we could have entered into a full recovery soon and I have the Democrats themselves and their failed actions and then sitting back more concerned with blaming Bush rather than admitting the failure and changing course as Bush43 did in 2003.

 

"Not only did Obama have the worst growth record of all the post-WWII presidents, he had, at best, the 4th worst economic record of ALL the presidents and he was the first and only president to fail to preside over 3% GDP growth for a single year:"

He was also the only postwar President to face a global economy that was showing every sign of completely collapsing. Thanks to thirty years of deregulation and the Wall Street casino, we were looking at 1929 all over again.

Right wingers want to forget that. It's an inconvenient truth. Just as they never blame Wall Street for their misfortune, and celebrate the fact that Goldman Sachs is now firmly in the White House along with their Clown Prince.

 

Bush 43 changed course????? When was that?

 

There is no "history of economics" for recovery rates after the Great Recession of 2007. You have suppositions and personal feelings, that is all.

 

Nowhere did I say I was for bailing out "too big to fail". In fact, I was not and I sent a protest e-mail to my congress person at the time.

But, this is, in fact, a very different story than the FED, which basically was responsible for low interest rates since the great recession. Now, please explain to me how interest rates could have been higher in the last 8 years? The fact is that the FED can only set interest rates different from the market rate for short times. The reason for those low interest rates was, thus, not the FED, but rather too much money searching for safe return. In other words, during those years, it was more important for capital to preserve capital rather than to generate return.

And that's actually the situation Japan is in. They are still in a debt deflation period brought about by too much consumer debt, coupled with a shrinking population. Tell me how you generate growth when the population is shrinking and aging? Also tell me how the Japanese economy would have looked without a central bank?

 

Yes there is a history of recovery rates after recessions if you want to ignore it so be it.

 

I'm quite familiar with the right's habit and history of spinning and twisting and cherry-picking to "prove" their point. So all I will waste time on any further is to address your request that I "explain to me why you think the main ELECTION goal of the Republicans after winning back the House in 2010 should have been to get Obama reelected."

Reply: Strawman. Nobody ever said republicans should work to get a democrat reelected. But republicans and democrats should execute their office with the adult maturity demanded by the office, and the historical adult maturity has been to negotiate, debate, and then vote. But instead, republican leaders kept bills from republican congressmen and refused that historical and mature adult obligation. That is what is wrong, along with your characterization of my objection as one of expecting republicans to help get Obama reelected. Just do your job!

 

I am the one who has NOT cherry picked and quoted his statements in their entirety and in context and not made the false claims the statement was before he even took office and including the fact that he and the Republicans said they were more than willing to work with him. And it is no strawman since the complaint is the Republicans were going to work to get THEIR GUY ELECTED AND NOT OBAMA in the next election........DUH. And the usual response from the left when this myth is exposed is......"well I'm just not going to discuss it anymore then".

 

The Bush years had the slowest job growth of almost any Administration in recent memory. And look at you pretending to be an economist by linking causation and correlation without any actual substantial argument to link the Democrats taking majority control in January 2017 and the housing market crashing in December of the same year. How cute.

 

The reality is obama inherited an economy skidding off an icy cliff... he did what he had to do to save the financial system.

 

Not when the Republicans were in control, why do you guys keep pretending the Democrats didn't take control of the government in 2007, but the fact is when you have full employment during a growing economy growth is limited to the available labor force. What we had was solid economic growth with that full employment and average LFPR along with rising productivity. And for over 50 months, which caused incomes to rise and tax revenues to soar and they took the one year recession deficit of $400B to their final paltry $161B deficit in 2007. Then the Democrats took control of the government and we see the disaster that produced. And the housing market crash was a result in large part to government policy and while the financial side was taken care of with TARP the Democrats failed to take actions to get us through that and finally the markets did. Let's not forget we had the HUGE tech bubble burst adding to the 2000/2001 recession. With proper government policies the effects of recessions can be somewhat mitigated and the economy sent back into a recovery and growth. That did not happen with the Democrats 2007-2015.

 

The reality is he and his fellow Democrats led us into that and it was Bush who saved the financial system all Obama had to do was get out of the way.

 

I have been distracted by domestic duties this morning, so I have been coming back here to post a bit and then run, return and post a bit more and run, etc. So I've been giving this to you piecemeal.

On your quoted statement here, you're deflecting and revising your story once again. You did not say, and I did not respond, to your new rewording of "the complaint is the Republicans were going to get THEIR GUY ELECTED AND NOT OBAMA in the next election.......DUH". Rather, your actual words were more specifically that it was unreasonable to think Republicans would work to get Obama reelected. I addressed that and I guess you didn't like it, so you changed the approach now.

And regarding your assertion that McConnell made that statement in 2010 as though he only said it once, your recounting of the story has him saying it in an interview -an interview that appeared in the National Journal, -but I posted a video of him saying it, not in an interview, but as part of a speech or commentary he was making.

Your excuses and claims are not doing well.

 

Nice spin. It was Bush who created and left the disaster that faced us!! And the Republicans were not involved in the stimulus work Obama was doing because of the Republican commitment to not help Obama do anything but to obstruct all they could, so Republicans abstained from participating of their own free will.

 

2003 when they accelerated the tax rate reduction phase in's. The economy went into high gear.

 

What spin Bush got TARP passed and the prevent the financial collapse. And the Republicans were more than willing to work with Democrats on an economic recovery plan but were told they lost the election and elections have consequences, remember. The failed stimulus was all Democrat.

And scroll back about the debunked Republicans refused to work with Obama nonsense.