After getting the fat ass bills spending passed and with a couple of up days in the stock market, President Obama is feeling it and pronounces the economic crisis, ‘not as bad as we think.’
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D96SP30G5&show_article=1
On the other hand, according to the WSJ, a panel of 54 economists give Obama and Giethner an ‘F’
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123671107124286261.html
I think I side with the economists.
**I think I side with the economists. **
While their practice includes a bit of business sense along with some math knowledge, thrown in with some hocus pocus, do you generally side with economists?
Is the point of your posting this article that we aren’t nationalizing the banks fast enough?
Economists were divided over whether the $787 billion economic-stimulus package passed last month is enough. Some 43% said the U.S. will need another stimulus package on the order of nearly $500 billion. Others were skeptical of the need for stimulus at all.
However, economists’ main criticism of the Obama team centered on delays in enacting key parts of plans to rescue banks. “They overpromised and underdelivered,” said Stephen Stanley of RBS Greenwich Capital. “Secretary Geithner scheduled a big speech and came out with just a vague blueprint. The uncertainty is hanging over everyone’s head.”
The economists didn’t just single out the U.S. for criticism; 70% of participants said the response of governments around the world to the global recession has been inadequate. “The Europeans or Japanese don’t seem to be doing near enough to kickstart their economies,” said Nariman Behravesh of IHS Global Insight. “It could be we’ve done all the right things, but the rest of the world goes down the tubes.”
I do in this case.
I think the President is in over his head.
**I think the President is in over his head. **
Any President would be in over his head with all the shit happening. Would you prefer McCain and Palin at the helm? Oh. My. God.
I think if McC and Palin did nothing that would be a C-.
McCain would have bombed Iran by now to get our minds off this economics nonsense. But I doubt it would have worked. That type of distraction didn’t work so hot for Clinton in '98.
**I think if McC and Palin did nothing that would be a C-. **
And if Obama and Biden did nothing with the same circumstances?
I thought McC and Palin would be a continuation of the do-nothing Bush policies, which in this case, might be the best thing for the economy.
What grade do you give Pres. Obama on the economy?
**I think the President is in over his head. **
Any President would be in over his head with all the shit happening. Would you prefer McCain and Palin at the helm? Oh. My. God.
Reagan faced a FAR worse financial situation that President Obama. Interest rates were over 20%, double-digit unemployment, incredible inflation, plus, the start of the Cold War. Reagan turned it around doing EXACTLY the opposite of what the Obama Administration is doing.
Obviously, the Reagan Administration was not in over its head. How quickly we forget …
I don’t think you needed to include “Obama” at the end of your title, it’s pretty obvious he’s all you’ve been thinking about lately.
Under Reagan we “grew” our way out of the financial problem. Doubt that’s going to work this time. Over-consumption and unsustainable world economic growth (both of which really got rolling in the 1980s) are the main reasons we got into this mess.
China can’t keep doubling its middle class every few years any more than automakers can expect to keep doubling SUV sales every few years or homeowners expect to double their house prices every few years. A long hard recession and recalibration may be the only remedy. No one wants to face that, though, whether you idolize Reagan or whether you idolize Obama.
Under Reagan we “grew” our way out of the financial problem. Doubt that’s going to work this time. Over-consumption and unsustainable world economic growth (both of which really got rolling in the 1980s) are the main reasons we got into this mess.
China can’t keep doubling its middle class every few years any more than automakers can expect to keep doubling SUV sales every few years or homeowners expect to double their house prices every few years. A long hard recession and recalibration may be the only remedy. No one wants to face that, though, whether you idolize Reagan or whether you idolize Obama.
Understood and acknowledged. Hard to compare to the two situations, I admit. But, it is interesting that they reacted in competely different manners.
That said, the point of my post was to rebut fitzie’s assertion that ANY president would be over his/her head. History has shown that not to be the case. Reagan is simply the most recent example, but, not the only example.
**How quickly we forget … **
Reagan lowered taxes top rate from 70% to 28%, Obama lowers taxes $292 billion
Reagan raised deficit spending to the highest level since WWII moved us from the largest international creditor to the largest debtor nation, Obama raises govt spending
Reagan deregulated (and Carter). Obama calling for more regulation on financial industry.
Reagan moved toward an expansionary monetary policy to get out of the recession, Obama moves toward expansionary monetary policy.
**What grade do you give Pres. Obama on the economy? **
When Obama was elected in November, no one knew how much worse it was going to get.
To answer your question, I give him a B-. He’s doing what he can, but Congress is the big problem.
That’s hilarious…
**I think the President is in over his head. **
Any President would be in over his head with all the shit happening. Would you prefer McCain and Palin at the helm? Oh. My. God.
Reagan faced a FAR worse financial situation that President Obama. Interest rates were over 20%, double-digit unemployment, incredible inflation, plus, the start of the Cold War. Reagan turned it around doing EXACTLY the opposite of what the Obama Administration is doing.
Obviously, the Reagan Administration was not in over its head. How quickly we forget …
The cold war started under Reagan? That’s a new one.
I thought McC and Palin would be a continuation of the do-nothing Bush policies, which in this case, might be the best thing for the economy.
…
So AIG, the banks, stimulus 1 and 2, GM and Chrylser were do nothing policies of Bush?
I think I side with the economists.
That’s surprising.