Right Wing Claims Stock Market Declined Because Obama Was Nominated For President
Right Wing Claims Stock Market Declined Because Obama Was Nominated For President
Since the presidential election last November, the right wing has seized nearly every opportunity to link any sharp decline in the stock market (without any basis in fact) to Barack Obama. Yesterday, losses on Wall Street forced the Dow Jones industrial average to close “below 7,000 for the first time since 1997” and like clockwork, the right (and some on Wall Street) jumped to blame Obama. The Wall Street Journal claimed today that “Obama’s policies have become part of the economy’s problem.”
Laura Ingraham said today that Obama’s policies “are not giving us the confidence we need to get back into the market.” Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity touted the line as well, but added that the market’s problems started when Obama was nominated to be the Democratic Party’s candidate for president in the middle of last year:
LIMBAUGH: To say that Obama has been in office only one month is not accurate from an effect on the world and an effect on the country standpoint. Barack Obama has been the controlling political authority on the economy for six months.
HANNITY: Now if we go back to May 6th when it was apparent that he was going to probably be the Democratic nominee the stock market was over 13000, and if we go to October just before the election…the stock market was, what, around the 11000 plus mark.
Watch the compilation:
Of course, the Limbaugh-Hannity theory carries little weight as the market decline started well before Obama’s nomination. The market peaked in October 2007 and “came tumbling down last spring, when the bursting of the housing bubble started to add up to massive losses for Wall Street banks and other financial services firms tied to bad mortgages.”
In fact, yesterday’s decline came as “investors reacted to reports that construction and industrial activity had continued to decline and to a $61.7 billion loss posted by the insurance giant, the American International Group.” Moreover, the main issue surrounding the market’s fall is decreased company profits as a result of a weak economy, not Obama’s policies. As USA Today noted this morning, “[p]rofits are down sharply” which is “driving stock prices down sharply.”
President Obama noted earlier today that “the banking system has been dealt a heavy blow” to the market. “We dug deep hole for ourselves, he said. “There was a lot of bad decisions that were made. We’re cleaning up that mess. … But its going to get cleaned up.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
.
The hate is palpable…
… NO?
.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:21 pmThe stupid is palpable, no? ;)
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:22 pmDear Lord, These people are getting even more pathetic. It was Bush who was in office when this fiasco reared it’s ugly head. And if I recall correctly, he didn’t do a damn thing about it. He sat in the White House pining away the days till he could ride off in the sunset with the country in tatters. Christ! I need a drink!
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:23 pmThat says a lot for Bush, doesn’t it.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:26 pmStuck on stupid.
¶ AIO
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:26 pm.
I stopped listening when the tub-o-lard said “He won the Democrat Party’s nomination…”
If (R)ush seeks some level of “CREDIBILITY” he might just want to employ proper English.
.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:28 pmZooey,
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:29 pmplease don’t make me taste (R)ush to compare, K? ;)
Keep letting the stock market fail….I can’t wait til it hits 3000 and watch idiots like Hannity and Rush loose all there investments.
Why do you think they push republican ideals???? STOCKS STOCKS !!! Let them fail. If you want a casino, go to vegas. Leave the rest of the nation alone while we produce something of value instead of playing with money that doen’t exist!!!
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:29 pmWhich is why it must be stated every time a Democrat speaks that President Obama inherited the financial collapse, the debt and deficit, the wars, the negative view of America held by dozens of nations, and a Constitution that had been ignored for eight year.
It must be repeated because the GOOP has it’s marching orders from Rush to go after, and blame, Obama for anything and everything. God, I hate that PhatPhuck!
PEACE
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:30 pmBut, but, but in October Hannity said that McCain was going to ride in to rescue the economy.
¶ AIO
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:30 pmANYONE WITH 401K’S…..GET OUT NOW!!! BEFORE YOU HAVE ZERO!!!
Don’t be stupid!!
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:31 pmMax-1 Says:
Zooey,
please don’t make me taste (R)ush to compare, K? ;)
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:29 pm
Would I do that to you? :D
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:31 pmI guess that means it’s not Clinton’s fault any more.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:32 pmYou should see the “reporters” on CNBS All day they pushed this story. Their buddies on wall st break the world and they whine about how Obama can’t fix it fast enough and now he’s making things worse.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:32 pmIf we want to look at the psychological underpinnings of the current panic-driven meltdown of the right wing (and I do), I’d suggest that the loss of power is only the surface driver of the meltdown. The true, deep force at work is the failure of their magical thinking to make things happen the way they want them to.
The economy is in the shitter not because Bush’s tax cuts widened the gap between rich and poor, not because lack of oversight of financial markets caused an overheated housing market spurred by hidden risks, not because consumer and government borrowing had become unsustainable — it’s all because a black man was nominated by one party for president.
I think at this point it must require so much mental energy just to maintain that delusion, that they get frazzled by everything else so much more quickly.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:32 pmGoogle “Putin Platform” – you will see the way of the future! To bad banks wont be in the picture with the new system.
Wont be by choice….but forced upon us by the rest of the sane world!!!!
SAY GOOD BYE FEDERAL RESERVE….HAPPY DAYS ARE HERE AGAIN!!!!!
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:33 pmIngrahm and Hannity knee jerk (emphasis on the jerk)inciters
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:35 pmRush has said himself “I hope Obama fails” and this commentary is evidence of that…he will continue to lie and stretch the truth from his show…..What gets me is when I hear anyone say he has 20 mil listeners a day. He doesn’t, it’s closer to 15 mil a week. They add up the #’s from every show for a week and come to 20 mil. Even if you drop into his program for a mere 2 mins you are counted as a listener of at least a qtr hour and this gives them the #’s they are looking for. Actually, his audience is rather small, but he can do a lot of damage, esp with the MSM giving him street cred (thank you hip hop RNC Steele.)
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:36 pmLimbaugh is an entertainer with a big mouth and a stupid audience. Unfortunately he’s not going to go away, but then neither am I and neither are you.
Paging JK for his daily idiotic BOLD faced lies.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:37 pmI have to laugh at these right-wing rant-jockeys. Back in 2001, they variously explained away the market decline after GDumbya took office as (1) “it’s Clinton’s fault” and/or (2) “the President really isn’t responsible for the ups and downs of the stock market”.
Now, their story has changed to fit their pre-concieved bias.
Personally, I hope that folks like Limpballs, Little Seanie Vanity and Michael Weiner-Savage are fully invested in AIG, Fannie Mae and Citigroup. They will be paupers next week.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:39 pmNext it will be Obama’s fault they sealed all the windows on Wall Street businesses. Not that any of the present residents would ever consider the old fashioned answer to stupid investment.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:40 pmI’ll bet they thought we’d never see this coming. ;)
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:43 pmHow wonderful it must be to make statements with no basis in fact, no factual or logical support and have so many people believe you!
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:44 pmThis must be Rovian Economics or the Rovian Calendar, because I am confused. Can someone tell me how we are dividing up the responsibility for events during the Bush Administration, which issues belong to Clinton and which to Obama? Are we using certain time frames, is it dependent upon the type of issue, or is it some time-issue continuum?
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:45 pmDr. Hussein Matt Says:
RUSH RULES!! LIBS DROOL!!!!!
That’s my JK impression…how did I do?
*takes a bow*
Good start! How’s this one:
LMAO you DemoCRAPS! Look at how the b-balling brotha O is causing the next Great Depression!
Nothing but net!!!
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:46 pmhypocrisy
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:46 pmWow – Rush & Hannity – rightwing crazies are really desperate! Now they’re trying to blame the market crash on President Obama who has only been office for about 45 days?!
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:46 pmROTFL!
Well, to be fair, this is also Jimmy Carter’s fault. I think he wrote an article or was on a book tour 6 months ago as well.
In all seriousness and not to be alarmist, despite Obama’s best efforts, 2009 at the very least is going to be pretty rough. Get where you want to be to hunker down near the people you love and trust and start a Bailout Botanical Garden w/ fruits and veggies if you can find even a tiny patch of land. You won’t regret it.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:47 pmThis proves to any who just had this as a hypothesis….
Neo-Conservatives don’t use facts in their arguments.
These new “fiscal conservatives” want more G.W. Bush/Phil Gramm economic policies and their road to Mexico financial planning.
We’re dealing with a wanna-be aristocracy made up of the rich and the inbred poor.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:48 pmPatrioticLiberalChristian Says:
This must be Rovian Economics or the Rovian Calendar, because I am confused. Can someone tell me how we are dividing up the responsibility for events during the Bush Administration, which issues belong to Clinton and which to Obama? Are we using certain time frames, is it dependent upon the type of issue, or is it some time-issue continuum?
I believe it was Tracist who yesterday claimed that W’s recession is on Obama’s watch and that the recession of the 70’s was on Carter until 1981 when Reagan became President.
It’s a shifting temporal mosaic depending on how easily the edges are blurred to fit Republican talking points.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:48 pmavchavis Says:
Wow – Rush & Hannity – rightwing crazies are really desperate! Now they’re trying to blame the market crash on President Obama who has only been office for about 45 days?!
ROTFL!
What’s with Hannity? Why are his eyes so beady and close together?
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:48 pmThe number of robins observed in my backyard the day Obama was nominated was zero.
Therefore, the stock market is crashing.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:49 pmRightwing mission statement:
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:49 pmFacts? Facts! We don’t need no stinkin’ facts!
http://WWW.SILVERBEARCAFE.COM …..Understand what is coming.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:49 pmThere are no logical economic explanations for up and down movements in the stock market. The average person doesn’t have a chance with the stock market because there is so much inside information available to a select few who can influence market movement in their favor up or down. Talking heads on business cable channels are programmed to assign events to explain market movements but it is all bullshit. The select few with their inside information are currently waiting on the sidelines
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:50 pmfor this market to go down more and then come in when their info tells them to buy all this cheap stock and make a killing again on the run up. In the meantime the average schmuck who is scared shitless is trying as best as he or she can to dump stock from slow executing mutual funds in their 401 k’s at horrifying losses. Moral of the story: unless you have inside information, stay the hell away from the stock market.
Poor quality killed investing and the Republican Party. Abysmal management infects board rooms and our hallowed halls of government.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:51 pmGreed., leverage and “too damned much money” in our election/lobbying system played a key role. Hair of the dog medicine won’t get us out.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:52 pmMarie Says:
Rightwing mission statement:
Facts? Facts! We don’t need no stinkin’ facts!
Tucker Carlson should win some award for exposing that fact at CPAC, even if it was involuntary.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:53 pmIt’s very simple…it’s the principle of Republican Personal ResponsibilityTM. A recession caused by a Republican can be blamed either on the previous Democratic administration or the following…as long as the Democratic administration gets blamed…Tracy did a good job in lecturing us in Personal Responsibility 101 GOP style…
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:54 pmWhat’s with Hannity? Why are his eyes so beady and close together?
It’s a condition that has developed over time because he has his head up his arse except when he needs to eat.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:56 pmucsbclassics53 Says:
It’s very simple…it’s the principle of Republican Personal ResponsibilityTM. A recession caused by a Republican can be blamed either on the previous Democratic administration or the following…as long as the Democratic administration gets blamed…Tracy did a good job in lecturing us in Personal Responsibility 101 GOP style…
It’s the “I loved this Salmon, french fries and chocolate birthday cake, Mr. President…but since I have no K-Y for the stewards, thanks but no thanks.”
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:57 pmClearly, Obama’s birth in 1961 and the Hawaiian certificate associated with that birth have been the single largest factor in the current fiscal disaster. If it had not been for that birth, the glorious policies of G.W. Bush would still be producing unicorns that fart rainbows, as those policies have since the time of Moses.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:58 pmYes, it’s too bad we don’t have ol’ man McCain fixin’ this economy. We’d all be living in more homes than we can count, driving a new car every week and there’d be no more new helicopters for anyone – especially the president!
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:00 pmyes because we all know at the time of W’s birth, there was a flying Pegasus that flew across the rainbow…
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:00 pmjustme Says:
Clearly, Obama’s birth in 1961 and the Hawaiian certificate associated with that birth have been the single largest factor in the current fiscal disaster. If it had not been for that birth, the glorious policies of G.W. Bush would still be producing unicorns that fart rainbows, as those policies have since the time of Moses.
I say we see if the person who let Dumbya into Yale is still alive and egg their house. It would be much harder to be president from Bumf–k State Bible University.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:02 pmDr. Hussein Matt Says:
The extinction of the dinosaurs and the crucifixion of Jesus are both B. Hussein’s fault too, you betcha!
Don’t you know that Glenn Beck got into a time machine and shot all the dinosaurs in the head?!
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:05 pmAs everyone knows ['cept maybe dittohaids] the recession began in Dec of 2007.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:09 pmHaaretz news flash:
Kerry: Iran program is not only an anxiety, it`s existential threat for Israel
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/ShowTickers.jhtml
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:11 pmLOL, Bush added 700+ billion in his last month or so in office, thats like light speed!
Plus we have to remember the war that DIDNT pay for itself and thats still costing us today and well into 2011 or 12.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:11 pmSorry about the last post, I thought I was on ThinkFast.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:12 pmIf tax investor more, crumbple ekonomie.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:15 pmYou’ll be able to gauge something about the perspectival proclivities of a person by her or his readiness/willingness to adopt this bite. You may safely–and in fact, should–ignore anyone who repeats this in any tone of voice other than ridicule and amazement.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:16 pmFunny stock market started to go down in September. 14000 to 8000 all under Bush. Banks failing, Merrill Lynch going under and AIG sinking. Apparently, this is all Obama’s fault!
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:19 pmPatrioticLiberalChristian Says
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:45 pm
This must be Rovian Economics or the Rovian Calendar, because I am confused. Can someone tell me how we are dividing up the responsibility for events during the Bush Administration, which issues belong to Clinton and which to Obama? Are we using certain time frames, is it dependent upon the type of issue, or is it some time-issue continuum?
________________________________________________________
It’s even more complex than that, because you’re only talking about dividing up the negative issues. In addition to dividing up the negative things among the Democrats, you also need to divide up the positive things among the Republicans.
Like so:
Skyrocketing gas prices and fuel shortages of 1973 — LBJ
Double digit inflation of late 70’s — Carter
Egypt/Israel peace accord — Reagan
Fuel shortages of 1979 — Carter
Capture of US hostages in Iran — Carter
Release of US hostages in Iran — Reagan
Recession of early 80’s — Carter
Tripling of national debt in 80’s — spendthrift Democrats
Black Monday 1987 — Jesse Jackson (who had just announced his candidacy for POTUS)
First WTC attack — Clinton
No WTC attacks for rest of decade — Bush 41
Economic dot-com boom of 90’s — Reagan
Crime rate drop of 90’s — Reagan
Balancing of federal budget in 90’s — Reagan
Attacks of 9/11 — Clinton
No more attacks on skyscrapers since then — Bush 43
Capture and execution of Saddam Hussein — Bush 43
Clusterf@ck in Iraq — Clinton (and liberal bloggers)
Skyrocketing gas prices of 2008 — Obama
Economic collapse of 2008 — Obama
See the pattern? If it’s a good thing, credit goes to the Republican currently in power. If the current POTUS is a Democrat, credit goes to the Republican last in power (or the last really, really popular Republican). The Republican next in power gets credit if it happened less than two years before he took office.
If it’s a bad thing, blame goes to the Democrat currently in power. If the current POTUS is a Republican, it goes to the Democrat last in power. The Democrat next in power gets the blame if it happened less than two years before he took office.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:20 pmHay Dimbulb, I thought Reagan said deficits dont matter?
Ooo, guess what else, so did Cheney!
“Reagan proved deficits don’t matter,” Vice President Cheney said in 2002 when pushing for a fresh round of tax cuts.
Bush came into office with an advantage few presidents have enjoyed — a $230 billion surplus. But due to a $1.35 trillion tax cut in 2001, a $1.5 trillion tax cut in 2003, and a massive defense buildup through the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, Bush quickly blew through that surplus. The next president will “inherit a fiscal meltdown,” Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-ND) warned in February 2008, as the Bush administration projected a budget deficit of $400 billion. After the financial crisis emerged last fall and the ensuing bailouts, Bush’s budget deficit ballooned to over $1 trillion.
Deficits dont matter! So what Reagan and Cheney and Bush were saying is “Generational theft doesnt matter, pile it on!”
Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan: “In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation . . . Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights . . .
Seems Greenspan didnt much care about generational theft either…
What ever happened to the Reagan ‘deficits dont matter’ crowd?
They have turned hypocrites and are now bad mouthing Reagan!!
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:20 pmAll he has to do is lower taxes and we would all be better off.
BO-
Please explain how a supply side stimulus… (a tax-cut to boost production to you) is appropriate in an economy that is stagnant due to an OVER-supply of goods and an under-supply of demand?(for housing, cars, televisions, etc.)
Thanks.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:22 pmI did notice the stock market took a dive after CNN let Limbaugh rant for over an hour.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:23 pmha, the earth is still flat!
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:25 pmLowering taxes on business will allow them a greater profit margin, more executive bonuses, etc.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:30 pmLowering taxes on working folks will allow them to spend the money on groceries, clothing, etc, and fuel the economy.
barack obomber Says:
Great! Thanks… now please explain how Bush’s corporate tax cuts have failed to yield these results and seem to have driven us further into debt…
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:31 pmThanks again!
The stock market is in decline because the speculators refuse to buy in hopes that this whole mess will be blamed on Pres. Obama when it was they who ripped of millions in real-estate schemes and pozi loans and who now will be going to jail or unable to rip anyone else off now that regulations will be put in place again to save people from ever being exposed to these “jackals” again.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:32 pmOf course not. Reagan’s first recession was Carter’s fault. Reagan’s second recession was God’s fault (natural econimic cycle). Bush Sr.’s recession was Clintons’s fault. Bush Jr.’s first recession was also Clinton’s fault. Bush Jr.’s second recession is Obama’s fault.
Try to keep it straight. There will be a pop quiz later.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:36 pmAnd the ReichWingers will believe every lie Rush the Pervert Drug Addict and Shawn the dropout bartender tells them.
The Repukes are trying their best to blame everything that Bush and the Republicans caused onto Obama, they never want to have the blame on them, where it truly belongs.
FCUK THE REPUBLICANS
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:36 pmAlso BO?
Can you explain this?
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601102&sid=ayfSl9n9YfUM&refer=uk
I thought that low corporate tax rate was gonna be a BOON to all industries, including the drinking and gambling industries?
I’m confused…
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:37 pmHe cuts taxes for my corporation they can hire more people , maybe giving me a raise or a bonus -BO-
Well, that didnt happen as employment dropped under the Bush admin even with the trillion dollar tax cuts
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:39 pmracist trollname says:
All he has to do is lower taxes and we would all be better off.
Government isn’t the answer boys and girls That is why Obamas first 100 days suck , and please feel free to start the lame name calling, it cracks me up.
How’d that tax lowering do the last 6 times bush did it? Republican government isn’t the answer, that’s for sure. but you keep whining and sooner or later the grown-ups will have finished cleaning up your mess and you can come back and pretend to be all moral and adult and stuff.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:40 pmAll you have to do is look at Ireland where their corporate tax rate is half, and it is no wonder why they eant to move there. -BO-
Are you watching the news? Irelands economy is tanking.
THE difference between Ireland and Iceland, so the current joke goes, is one letter and six months. A Dublin economist responds that the real difference lies in a four-letter word: euro. Ireland is in, and Iceland is not. A former European commissioner from Ireland, Peter Sutherland, thinks that Europe’s single currency has kept Ireland afloat. Even so, GDP is expected to contract by 5% and the unemployment rate to rise to over 9% this year. And Ireland is bracing itself for a credit downgrade on its sovereign debt.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:41 pmChickenhawk nailed the working life of the oligarchy @ 40. This would be a perfect time for the press to explain how little the stock market indicators have to do with life for us little people, but nooooooooooooo.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:42 pmDamnit, those yurps are keeping Irelands economy afloat.
Where do you work Barry Bomber?
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:44 pmPretty simple as I stated. He cuts taxes for my corporation they can hire more people ,
You like to assume the hotshots are eager to do good things. Truth is, for ever $1 spent on tax cuts for big corporations, far less than a $1 the return.
Sorry you’re stuck on your failed ideology. Enjoy your job shipped overseas and seeing your executives add another 100x load to their pay?
Your ideology was voted out. It does work. Now quit whining. Shut up.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:44 pm*It doesn’t work.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:45 pmI strongly suggest Barry Bomber stop listening to Rush and start using the internet to seek answers instead of getting inane talking points broadcast into his haid by a self serving pundit
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:46 pmBy March 14th, 2000=George W Bush wins enough primaries to be declared nominee for Republican Party
One week later, March 21, 2000=Dow closes lower than previous year for first time since 1982.
On Aug 3rd, 2000 W accepted the nomination….
A month later:
Sept 17, 2000 8920 The biggest one day fall (685 points)
Sept. 21, 2001 8235 Dow’s second worst week ever -14.26%
Dec 31, 2001 10021 Dow up 21.7% from Sept. 21 low but down 7.2% on the year
July 23, 2002 7702 Low close of break below post 9/11 low.
Sept 30, 2002 7591 New 2002 low – All treasury yields (except 30-year bond) at 2002 lows.
Oct 9, 2002 7286 New 2002 low – Dow down 37.8% from Jan 14, 2000 all time high.
Oct 31, 2002 8397 Dow up 806 points (10.6%) for Oct. First “up” month since March.
Nov 6, 2002 8771 Fed cuts rates for first time since Dec. 2001 – 0.50% – Fed Funds 1.25% – Discount 0.75%
Dec 31, 2002 8341 Dow down 16.8% for 2002. First three consecutive year loss since 1939-41
May 23, 2003 8601 Senate passes bill raising the Treasury debt limit by $US 984 Billion to $US 7.384 TRILLION
June 25, 2003 9011 Fed cuts rates by 0.25% to a post 1958 low of 1.00%
Dec 31, 2003 10453 Dow up 25.32% in 2003 – Dollar down 14.67% in 2003
October 3, 2006 11727 Dow exceeds its January 14, 2000 high of 11723
October 9, 2007 14164 New all time high on the Dow
July 2, 2008 11215 Dow closes more than 20% below its Oct. 2007 high – bear market
And the rest is history…eh?
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:50 pmThis is enough to demonstrate the serious problems with Mr. Bomber’s economic theory.
Economics isn’t “simple”.
It’s a complex study of a dynamic interplay of forces both natural and man-made over time. Anyone who thinks it’s “simple” and can be explained thus has nothing of value to add to the conversation.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:50 pmHe cuts taxes for my corporation they can hire more people , maybe giving me a raise or a bonus -BO-
That is the biggest fraud in the whole supply side sham. No company hires employees based on the tax code. They hire people to produce products and/or services based on demand. Period.
Supply side economics is a ponzi scheme because it focuses solely on capital, and ignores labor. Now you see what happens when the poinzi scheme implodes.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:51 pmDO I HAVE TO POST THIS ON EVERY BLOG?
http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/quickchart/quickchart.asp?symb=djia&sid=1643
Read-em and weep Goopers. The decline began in mid-September.
All the dipshit-idiot-boy-king did was try and stall the inevitable with his retarded $300 per taxpayer giveaway.
If you don’t like it, GO SHOPPING.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:53 pmGovernment isn’t the answer boys and girls That is why Obamas first 100 days suck , and please feel free to start the lame name calling, it cracks me up. -Body Odor-
What? Do you recall this?
Your way to easy to debunk Body Odor. Please find a better pundit to parakeet.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:54 pmHe cuts taxes for my corporation they can hire more people , maybe giving me a raise or a bonus -BO-
They wouldnt give you a raise or bonus they, according to your logic, would simply move to Ireland so they could get a bigger raise or bonus
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:58 pmbarack obomber Says:
Pretty simple as I stated. He cuts taxes for my corporation they can hire more people….
Man, are you an idiot or what?
Here is how it works, fool, cut taxes for corporations, they have a full stock of supplies that are not selling, they hold out till the market improves, they DO NOT HIRE WORKERS they DON’T NEED…you are an idiot.
You don’t have any idea how this stuff works, you just parrot what Rush the Druggy pervert and Sean the Dropout bartender tell you.
No wonder your side is so back with “teh stupid”
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:58 pmThats a good list Woke, thanks. Im saving that one.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:59 pmbarack obomber at post 58 says “to start the lame name calling, it cracks me up”
I now produce a piece of evidence from a previous thread:
barack obomber Says:
fags, butt slammers, homos just give up and do not get married.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:06 pm Add Karma Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
So, your lame name calling cracks you up?
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:59 pmWell, isn’t that special.
Get that Body Odor?
[[you wanted to be called names, I usually dont take part in them]]
Dubya said that the ‘free market’ would end in disorderly bankruptcy.
Its why he bailed out Madoff Street.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:01 pmThe economy crashed while Bush and his crime family were running things into the ground. Rush is on drugs and never forget that. Drug addicts do not recover without going into recovery programs. Rush is still doing drugs, count on it.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:02 pmInteresting. I am not a Right Winger and I think that the market is crashing because of obama too.
Lets be real folks. When you threaten the prosperous with high taxes simply because they are prosperous then they will take their money elsewhere.
Why would they want to risk their wealth on investing in the market if the government is simply going to confiscate it from them? Why would the small business owner want to expand and hire more people if obama is going to take away their profits?
Heck, it is no suprise to me that the market is going down, and has been since everyone figured out that obama was going to be president.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:06 pmThe stock market crashed because you greedy fuc*ers perpetrated a fraud on the american people. Your ponzi schemes and bad debt peddling have caused our economy to crater.
All of them need to be in jail. If you don’t think this game was rigged, why is Madoff still free?
Maybe no one wants to invest when they know the market is run by nothing but crooks. I sure wouldn’t.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:08 pmTim43 Says:
Interesting. I am not a Right Winger and I think that the market is crashing because of obama too
Funny how you claim to NOT be a right-winger and the expound right-wing economic theory. Doesn’t quite add up there pud.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:10 pmYes, you are a right-winger, if your posts here are any indication of your leanings, and you’re a particularly dim one, too if you honestly think the stock market is tanking because of Obama.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:11 pmInteresting. I am not a Right Winger and I think that the market is crashing because of obama too.
The recession began in december of 2007 Tim. Did you read Wokes list above?
I guess Enron was Obamas fault too? I guess he passed the legislation that created the Enron loophole which led to high energy prices? And those same loopholes created by (R) Phil Gramm led to the speculation that led to high fuel prices?
I guess you would rather keep paying four dollars a gallon for fuel, which BTW knocked quite a few businesses out.
I also recall that some 360 mortgage lenders went out of business under the Bush Admin..I guess thats Obamas fault too?
Think what you will, but really, do a little study, ln your own before jumping to conclusions about how we got where we are today. Thanks
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:12 pmLets be real folks. When you threaten the prosperous with high taxes simply because they are prosperous then they will take their money elsewhere.
Let’s be real, timmeh.
If the ‘prosperous’ were only using their money it’d be no problem… but they made that money using our infrastructure and they used our money to move capital around in hedge funds and now our economy is collapsing… why should they get be American and use America’s bounty when it suits them and leave the rest of us holding the bag when it doesn’t?
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:14 pmWasn’t it these guys who didn’t admit there was an economic problem until October 2008??? Now they claim the economic troubles started when Obama had a good possibility at becoming President?? These guys can never keep their talking points straight. They take whatever opportunity they can to sling mud.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:14 pmThe problem with the GOPers is all they can do is point fingers. They take no personal responsibility for anything.
I would listen to Rush if he used actual facts, but he doesnt because it would wreck the non-reality based bubble he occupies and destroy his income when people learned what a fraud he really is.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:15 pmTim43 Says:
Interesting. I am not a Right Winger…yeah, right…LOL
Why would they want to risk their wealth on investing in the market if the government is simply going to confiscate it from them?
Wooooo, confiscate what? Idiot.
In 2010 their 3% tax break will run out, yeah, that’s going to make them invest somewhere else…and like where would that be?
You are an idiot, like all conservatives, stupid to the core.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:16 pmTim43 Says:
Lets be real folks. When you threaten the prosperous with high taxes simply because they are prosperous then they will take their money elsewhere.
The same tax rates that worked for everyone during the Clinton administration? High taxes? It’s an increase of about 4%. This isn’t going back to Eisenhower days where the top bracket was taxed at like 90%. Tired and lame talking point from the “non-right” winger.
Why would they want to risk their wealth on investing in the market if the government is simply going to confiscate it from them? Why would the small business owner want to expand and hire more people if obama is going to take away their profits?
The VAST majority of small businesses don’t make in excess of $250,000 in profit. And the tax hike you refer to applies to individuals and families NOT businesses.
Heck, it is no suprise to me that the market is going down, and has been since everyone figured out that obama was going to be president.
It started well before that chum. BTW, the VAST majority of small businesses aren’t publicly traded companies. Also, stock share pricing is highly related to profitability. So Obama is making companies lose profits how exactly? Oh…you can’t answer that? Darn.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:17 pmSorry Tim, but that is really stupid. No company bases their hiring on the tax code. They hire based on demand for their products. If an employer has demand for his/her product and refuses to hire enough people to produce the product, just because he/she will have to pay taxes on the increased profits from the sale of more products, he/she is an idiot and will not be in business for long.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:18 pmOnce again, missmolly demonstrates (post 62) her extensive knowledge of complex events and issues, which she can clearly articulate and communicate to others. Thank you!
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:21 pmHow could anyone continue to refer to “the market” and “companies” as if both weren’t deeply responsible for the mess? As if their activities were all on the up-and-up?
Really, guys – there’s no connection between the financial mess and the Ken Lay, Arthur Anderson, Bernie Madoff type guys at all – really, really.
How can you pretend to take yourself seriously, spouting that kind of unadulterated bunk??
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:25 pmDon’t be too hard on Tim. He’s just a fuc*ing idiot.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:25 pmThe very sad side of this is that the people who listen to Limbaugh and Hannity lack the ability for analytical thinking. They’ve been taught to fear rational thought and to give themselves over to prophets who appeal to their most selfish interests and prejudices. These are the same people who shun science and therefore never learned how to examine data. Someone should equate this kind of reasoning with the riculous ideas that existed in the dark ages regarding illness and natural events. Of course these same people don’t want to fund public schools because they are afraid of what their children might learn there.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:26 pmThat would certainly appear to be the case, yes.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:28 pmI suppose when things finally turn around it will be becuase the Bush administration laid the foundation for recovery. It was obvious that the idiots were going to claim this silly shit
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:33 pmThink Progress….. I have a major “Rush-is-a-putrid-gas-bag” headache!
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:37 pmCan’t we talk about someone else for a change? I’m starting to perceive MSM-obesession-like patterns here. It’s very disturbing.
krystalviews Says:
There are other threads not about Rush and other blogs. No one is asking you to stay here nor for your comments.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:52 pmHere’s an idea… how about we stop wasting our time on blaming people, and start actually doing something that matters?!
Our country is in bad shape right now, and it’s important to figure out how to fix it. However, people in impoverished countries around the world are feeling the effects of this drastic financial crisis even harder than we are. The number of people going hungry each day is increasing at a steady rate as food prices rise. We have the capability to do something about it. Learn more at the BORGEN PROJECT website, http://www.borgenproject.org.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:53 pmWhat a joke. Does the right-wing want to use this argument for past Presidents? How about we judge Reagan’s success versus Clinton’s based on how well the Dow Jones performed. How about we measure the Dow under Clinton versus the Dow overall under Bush? In each case, the Dow performed better under Clinton.
I mean, the Dow was around 3300 when Clinton entered office, and he left it above 11,000. Are Rush or Hannity going to mention that fact and praise Clinton???
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:56 pmYou cannot reason nor argue with these people…just keep repeating, “I want Rush Limbaugh to fail and, the republican party to continue failing, never to darken the doors of our democracy again”!
March 3rd, 2009 at 5:03 pmThey already gave Reagan credit for that.
March 3rd, 2009 at 5:04 pmHardball has Tom Delay on right now to discuss Lintball.
March 3rd, 2009 at 5:06 pmThe Obama Administration should point out how the right-wing used the same exact arguments against Clinton that they are using against Obama now. Clinton came into office and immediately restructured taxes, giving the working and middle classes extra cuts while increasing taxes on upper incomes. Republicans said most businesses would leave the USA. They screamed “socialism”. They said Clinton’s new tax code would lead to massive job cuts and a stagnation of the economy. Sound familiar? Meanwhile, far from stifling investment, the Clinton tax restructuring gave the working and middle class masses more buying power. Suddenly new businesses started up (especially new dotcoms/techs) to fill the need for increased demand.
Then, we saw the effect of the tax cuts for the upper income under Bush. It created the largest budget deficits in history, and now has nearly collapsed our economy. It did not stimulate new business creation, or news jobs.
In other words, the economy trickles UP, not down.
But Republicans would rather we ignore history and statistics entirely, and instead just stick to talking points from pundits. They want us to pretend like we have no evidence to judge the Clinton/Democrat versus the Bush/Republican tax/budget model.
March 3rd, 2009 at 5:07 pmHi alenka
March 3rd, 2009 at 5:07 pmwhat happened to astegga and why do you all have such unique names?
So why did someone on CNBC talk about a two year decline?
March 3rd, 2009 at 5:09 pmThe Stock Mkt. is Down and Business is in the tank, because there aren’t enough CUSTOMERS.
And why aren’t there enough Customers???
Because the median Income of working people has been Flatlined for 8 years…and now someone took away their credit cards.
Mail everyone a credit card with ” No payments until 2109″, and watch the Economy come roaring Back.
March 3rd, 2009 at 5:21 pmYes, it reasonable to expect that eight years of bush / Cheney / Neo Con financial policies which have “starved” the middle class are not responsible for what we have today, which, BTW conservatives never questioned.
The reality is that conservatives will never accept responsiblity for any failures of their beliefs as long as they can continue to line their pockets with money.
March 3rd, 2009 at 5:29 pmLook how far down the stock market has gone since Limbaugh has been in charge of the GOP (the “business” party).
March 3rd, 2009 at 6:37 pmgreggp is wise and I believe is onto something. Take greggp’s wisdom to your water cooler tomorrow…
March 3rd, 2009 at 6:45 pmThe reichwing must be figuring out the numbers, they are in the minority and losing ground daily. I predict a few more days of massive unhinging. Watch out for flying objects that may be body parts of tr0//s.
March 3rd, 2009 at 6:52 pmI love how it goes from Clinton to Obama, never mind eight years of the Criminal Bush.
March 3rd, 2009 at 7:58 pmDJIA up 350% under Clinton.
Under Bush, from about 10,600 to about 7,900.
But what’s really important are wages and benefits for your average worker: Up under Clinton and down under Bush. A major economic problem is that a very large number of Americans just have no money to spend after they pay their bills. They really got hit hard on healthcare and gasoline under Bush.
And unemployment went from 7.5% to 4.0% under Clinton,
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:01 pmFrom 4.0% to 7.6% under GWBush.
ALWAYS improves going from Republican to Democratic. ALWAYS worsens going from Democratic to Republican.
“There’s another reason for working inside the system. Dostoevski said that taking a new step is what people fear most. Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and change the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution.
Tax the hell out of everybody, drive the market to collapse, bankrupt all businesses and then swoop in and buy private assets. Everything will be government owned, government run, even you!
Obama knows exactly what he’s doing! Liberals are just too stupid to know and too morally challenged to care.
You’ll make nice slaves though.
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:07 pmdrive the market to collapse, bankrupt all businesses and then swoop in and buy private assets. Everything will be government owned, government run, even you!
Obama knows exactly what he’s doing!
Wait… Obama conspired with Sen. Gramm and George Bush to bankrupt our economy so that he could seize ultimate power and turn us liberals into slaves?
Well, I for one did not see that coming… Obama is the master manipulator…
Well played sir, well played.
RecallObama?
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:17 pmDostoyevsky? How long has this plot been perking?
And Recall?
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:24 pmWhy is it only you guys who are reading Saul Alinsky these days?
Is it like your hard on for the non-existent push to reinstate the fairness doctrine? A distraction from your own total and complete political irrelevance and culpability in the current economic climate?
Where is the news media on this – factchecking ?
Just go to Yahoo and click on “Finance” – you can plot out an index or individual stock for the desired timeperiod.
Just remember, the stock market fall under Bush was anticipatory for Obama .
The rate of fall leading into the Obama Presidency was nothing compared to the, at most, leveling at the end of Clinton.
It was Clinton’s fault.
It was FDR’s fault.
IOKIYAR.
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:28 pmGeorge Bush staged sit-ins at banks to force them to loan money to people who could never hope to pay it back?
Obama did exactly that.
George Bush created Fannie & Freddie and blocked all attempts at regulating them?
George Bush created the community reinvestment act?
If you force banks to make stupid loans and then allow them to sell those stupid loans to Fannie & Freddie removing all risk for those banks, you shouldn’t be shocked when they do exactly that and make a mint in the process.
Who’s the criminal, the guy that takes advantage of stupid rules, or the guy that makes stupid rules?
Democrats make stupid rules, they think they’re helping people but it never works out that way.
Pay women to have children out of wedlock again like you did in the sixties and seventies. Destroy the very people you claim to want to help………………..again.
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:30 pmPlease explain the role that foreign investment in and demand for Mortgage Backed Securities played in the current crisis, Recall…
Also, what role did the banking de-regulation spurred by 1999’s Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act play?
Thanks!
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:32 pmBelac,
I’m not worried about the Republicans not being in power right now. Fixing that is very easy, just let Democrats be Democrats, that’s all we have to do.
Unlike the Clinton Presidency, there is no Republican Congress to save you from yourselves.
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:34 pmIt’s Jimmy Carter all over again!
The only thing left to be decided is:
Who is the next Ronald Reagan?
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:36 pmYou didn’t explain, Recall…
I thought you were an expert…
I’m not worried about the Democrats being in power right now. All they have to do is let the Republicans keep listening to Rush and we’ll gain further seats next time around!
Thanks Rush!
Who is the bigger fool, the fool or the Republicans who follow him?
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:37 pmbelac, as much as I admire the attempt, it looks like our new friend Recall refuses to engage you in a reasonable discussion.
Perhaps because he’s unable to, equipped mainly with bizarre literary references and a confused reading of history.
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:39 pmI know ralph… and I wanted to talk about so many things…
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:41 pmIt’s weird how Republicans keep showing themselves to be complete degenerates. It’s obvious they have no pride whatsoever. Either they’re complete idiots or they’re willing to lie. I’m not sure which is worse.
When Republicans ask themselves why Americans have sent them to the outhouse, they need to seriously ask themselves why and recognize the fact that they have been coming off as ten dollar thugs. These people often end up at the end of a rope.
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:44 pmWhat would you like to talk about?
Your destruction of the black family?
Man said, we gonna build some new apartments for y’all…….and people ask me why I sing the blues – B.B. King
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:48 pmJoe the Philosopher,
You keep babbling while Obama keeps driving down the dow.
Too many cooks spoil the broth and Obama and his advisors don’t know if they should shit, or wind their watches.
Open mouth, drive down the stockmarket.
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:51 pmWhat would you like to talk about?
I thought I was pretty clear… let me try again…
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:52 pm
Also… I know the blues as well… you left off this little gem…
…why the Republican resistance to education funding in the stimulus? B.B. King seemed like he was for it…
Oh, you don’t wanna argue with blues riffs anymore?
Cool…
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:58 pmThere’s plenty of room for kid’s in school and plenty of money too. When a child’s Mother doesn’t give a rat’s ass and his Father is non-existent.
Explain to me what Democrat policies have done to the black family and I’ll explain to you how Oriental children can go to those EXACT same schools and come away with great educations.
Foreign investment drove the housing bubble up higher than it should ever have been, just like the community reinvestment act and banks that had all risk removed by Barney Frank & CO.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:05 pmWould it spoil the party if someone asked RecallObama to tell me what should be done? I ask in advance as I certainly don’t wish to be a lightbulb to a roach
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:08 pmEducation funding in the stimulus?
We spend about 2 1/2 times the amount of money on education as the rest of the world and still get our arses handed to us.
Clearly money is not the problem.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:09 pmWhen a child’s Mother doesn’t give a rat’s ass and his Father is non-existent
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:10 pm–
Geez, I regular old Horatio Alger tale. Sort of the weird bullshit rags to riches American Dream story you cling to eh?
We spend about 2 1/2 times the amount of money on education as the rest of the world and still get our arses handed to us.
Clearly money is not the problem.
–
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:11 pmhat do you think is my learned friend?
The banking de-regulation pushed be Sen. Gramm is the fault of Barney Frank?
Where is your school district?
My son’s Kindergarten class had 24 children, 1 teacher and no aides… and no money…
Show me how Democrat policies have starved our schools of funding.
I’ll ignore your ridiculous stereotyping about ‘Oriental children’ for the moment…
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:11 pmWould it spoil the party if someone asked RecallObama to tell me what should be done? I ask in advance as I certainly don’t wish to be a lightbulb to a roach
Cut taxes and spending by 30%, like John F. Kennedy did. That would certainly do it, certainly.
Trying to get money back from a Democrat who has already stolen it for use on worthless programs is nearly impossible though. This isn’t a party John F. Kennedy would even recognize.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:11 pmIS it a deficit of “w”’s?
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:11 pmCut taxes and spending by 30%, like John F. Kennedy did. That would certainly do it, certainly.
Okay- explain to me how your supply side solution will fix a problem of over supply of goods?
If no one is buying, not even the Government, how is that good for the economy?
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:13 pmBelac,
I live in Wisconsin, we spend upwards of 12,000 dollars a student per year. Milwaukee has the worst school system in the state despite a budget of a billion dollars!!
Clearly money isn’t the answer.
When your kids gets home from school you have to help them with their homework. Demand it get done, demand they get good grades.
That’s not being done very often, that’s the problem with our schools……………….parents.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:18 pmRecall, you realize, don’t you, that when John kennedy cut taxes, the top marginal rate was 91%?
And he cut it to about 70%?
Is that the kind of tax structure you’re looking to recreate?
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:22 pmBelac,
Your taxes get cut 30% you’ll be buying.
Your business taxes get cut 30% they’ll be buying too, and producing.
Explain to me how taxes spur an economy.
Increased production from a decrease in taxes actually add up to an increase in revenue for the government.
Obama’s got it ass backward and I’ve got to believe he knows that and wants the economy to tank so the government can take everything over. He’s a smart man……..right? Then that’s the only explanation for his behavior.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:24 pmClearly money isn’t the answer.
Class size is the answer, study after study confirm it.
Reducing class size means more teachers and more schools… budget doesn’t tell you anything. What is the class size?
It is the most accurate predictor of future academic success.
Smaller Classes = More Classrooms = More Money = Higher Academic Performance.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:26 pmHow did the corporate tax rate cuts under Bush translate into economic growth?
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:28 pmSupply side has been tried since the early eighties and she ain’t getting the job done… Profits and Executive Salaries are UP, UP, UP! Middle Class is shrinking…
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:29 pmWhen your kids gets home from school you have to help them with their homework
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:29 pm–
You might want to do a little research about “homework” Alfie Kohn might be a place to start. Actually forget all that, just do stuff with you kids. Take them places, read with them. Cancel your cable, feed them real food. Having them fill in worksheets is a waste of everyones time. Convenient sure You and I both want the children to learn right?
Ralph,
Everytime the tax rate has been cut it’s spurred the economy. You got something against that?
I’m a fair tax man.
Everything anybody makes over the poverty level should be taxed equally. Make a billion? Give the tax man 240 million. Make a thousand dollars over the poverty level? Give the tax man 240 dollars.
Of course the tax rate would have to be slightly higher than that, but you get the idea.
The money we save in not having to have an IRS alone would be astonishing and drive us to once again be the envy of the world.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:30 pmObama’s got it ass backward
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:33 pm–
Please don’t take this the wrong way but I get sort of weirded out when people who have shown me no expertise claim to know better than what I was told was the greatest government of the greatest nation on earth! What is wrong with you?
It’s odd how the five or six great years of economic growth under Bush just get thrown out the window as if they never occured.
Sure Bush had his housing bubble, but Clinton had his tech bubble and nobody mentions what a sham economic growth was under him.
Those guys economic accomplishmnets were nearly equal take away the effects of 9/11. Sure couldn’t tell it by the tone of the democrats though.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:37 pmHow are we going to quantify the “effects of 911″? Please don’t use rhetoric in place of math
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:42 pmbelac Says:
——————————————————————————–
Supply side has been tried since the early eighties and she ain’t getting the job done… Profits and Executive Salaries are UP, UP, UP! Middle Class is shrinking…
We’ve had a great economy since Reagan’s policies were enacted. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Socialism is not the answer.
We need another Reagan, not Hugo Chavez North.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:42 pmQuantify the effects of 9/11?
Not exactly sure how devastating it was, but it sure put a damper on things didn’t it?
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:45 pmBullshit.
Bush cut the tax rate and the economy floundered.
Clinton raised and the economy boomed.
The reason Kennedy’s tax cut had the impact it did was because the tax rate had been extremely high throughout Eisenhower’s term, in order to pay for the war, and even though the economy grew strongly under that onerous tax rate, it slid into recession in 1959. Kennedy recognized that the tax rate was too burdensome at that point, and there was plenty of room to make a meaningful cut in order to spur growth and still maintain government revenues.
This crap that tax cuts always result in growth is right-wing truism with little relationship to real-world economics.
Sometimes tax cuts are good, sometimes they’re harmful — especially when they result in a widening of the gap between rich and poor.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:54 pmRecallObama Says:
It’s odd how the five or six great years of economic growth under Bush just get thrown out the window as if they never occured.
Those guys economic accomplishmnets were nearly equal take away the effects of 9/11. Sure couldn’t tell it by the tone of the democrats though.
__________
It’s odd how fast the GOOP wants everyone to forget Botch’s endless running deficits, too.
http://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/07/straight-truth-economy/
The Straight Truth About the Bush Economy
[Guest blogger and American Progress senior fellow Gene Sperling was President Clinton’s National Economic Adviser.]
In evaluating President Bush’s recent speeches aimed at talking up the economy to the 63% of Americans who view it as either bad, very bad, or terrible, I would describe the different parts of his speech as appropriate, unwise, and downright misleading.
I think it is appropriate for the President to want to tell the 43% of the public that thinks that we are in an actual recession that we have had solid GDP and investment growth over the last couple of years. I also think it is appropriate for the President to honor our nation’s entrepreneurs, to remind people that globalization has upsides as well as downsides, and to take an optimistic tone in discussing the future.
I think it is unwise, however, to fail to acknowledge that much of the pessimism in the economy is not, as I wrote last August, a mystery we need Sherlock Holmes to solve. As Paul Krugman put it in his Monday column, Americans don’t feel good about the economy because it hasn’t been good for them.
But it’s downright misleading to ignore the economy’s weaknesses so the White House can falsely claim their fiscally reckless tax policy is an unequivocal success. When it comes to economic policy, President Bush is like the football coach with a 4-12 record who wants to tell you how his strategy has led to the four victories while pretending he has had an immaculate season. So if the President wants to claim his tax cuts have been the primary cause of our current economic performance since the end of the recession in November 2001, here are a few more economic facts he might want to consider.
WAGES
American families have consistently seen their incomes decline during the Bush Presidency, even when calculating only from the end of the last recession.
For 2005, average real weekly wages fell 0.4% from $552.75 in December 2004 to $550.60 in December 2005. Since the end of the recession, they are also down 0.4% from $552.58 in November 2001. [BLS]
For 2005, average real hourly wages fell 0.4% from $16.40 in December 2004 to $16.34 in December 2005. Since the end of the recession, they have been effectively stagnant, dropping one cent from $16.35 in November 2001. [BLS]
Since the 2003 tax cut, real hourly wages have fallen 2.2% and real weekly wages have fallen 1.6%. [BLS]
Real median household income has fallen each year Bush has been in office and by nearly $1,000 since the recession 2001 [U.S. Census Bureau, Income Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2004, Aug. 2005, Table A-1.]
EMPLOYMENT GROWTH
The President focused on job creation in both recent speeches, but employment growth in the current recovery has been the weakest on record.
Monthly private employment growth has averaged a meager 59,700 per month even excluding the last recession and the months leading into the weakest monthly average for any recovery of this length. [BLS]
The 4. 5 million job growth in the last two and a half years that the President brags about is weak by historical standards. In the last three recoveries, the economy created 7.9 million jobs during the corresponding 30 month period, 3.4 million jobs more than we’ve seen in the last two and a half years–even with a smaller workforce and smaller population. [BLS]
The only reason the unemployment rate has fallen to 5% is that a smaller share of the population is working or actively seeking work today compared to before the recession. If labor force participation were as high today, as it was before the recession the unemployment rate would be 6.6%–1.6 points higher than today’s official number [BLS]
Indeed, this is the first time on record that portion of the population holding a job is down 48 months after the end of a recession.
POVERTY
After seeing enormous gains in the fight against poverty under President Clinton, the poverty rate has risen each of Bush’s years in office, as an additional 5.4 million people have fallen into poverty since 2000. [Census, Aug. 2005, Table B-1]
The poverty rate has risen each year since the end of the recession, from 11.7% in 2001 to 12.7% last year as 4 million people fell into poverty. [Census, Aug. 2005, Table B-1]
African American poverty has also jumped, from 22.7% in 2001 to 24.7% in 2004 as nearly 1 million (864,000) African Americans have fallen under the poverty line. [Census, Aug. 2005, Table B-1]
Child poverty rate is on the rise, jumping from 16.3% in 2001 to 17.8% in 2004. As 1.3 million children under 18 have fallen into poverty [Census, Aug. 2005, Table B-2]
This is the only recovery on record where poverty increased from the second to third year after the recession. [Census, Aug. 2005, Table B-1]
SAVINGS
Though incomes have fallen, consumer spending growth has continued to propel the economy. Unfortunately, this combination has pushed the personal savings rate to historic lows, debt burdens to historic highs, and exacerbated our already unsustainable current account deficit.
The personal savings rate has plummeted this year, hitting -2.18% in August. level not seen since the Great Depression. [Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)]
Americans now pay a record 13.6% of their disposable income to service their debt. Since we’ve had to borrow at record rates to spend beyond our means, debt burdens have risen considerably. [Federal Reserve]
Thanks in part to our recent fiscal deterioration, net national savings have dropped from 4.9% when Bush took office to -1.0% last quarter– its lowest level since the Great Depression. [BEA]
The transition from budget surpluses to budget deficits was a major factor in this shift to dissavings. In January 2001, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected a more than $5 trillion 10 year surplus. Today, Goldman Sachs predicts a $5 trillion cumulative deficit over the next 10 years. They cite the extension of the tax cut as the single biggest factor underlying that prediction.
The current account has deficit exploded, hitting a record $199 billion in the first quarter this year and on pace to top $800 billion this year. [BEA, Global Insight Inc. projection in Greg Hitt, Trade Gap Eases, but Deficit Poised to Break a Record, The Wall Street Journal, 9/17/05]
We now have to borrow about $3 billion from abroad every business day to support our habits.
While President Bush may be trying to claim that everything positive in the economy is due to his tax policies, I don’t want to commit the same error by trying to tie everything negative to the Administration’s choices. But on the other hand, four years of declining wages, rising poverty and weak job growth is hardly strong validation for a tax policy that has significantly contributed to
________________
Dang… Botch appears to have been an endless, rolling disaster for the economy.
Sure couldn’t tell it by the tone of the GOOPers though.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:57 pmMore simplistic bullshit. Reagan’s “great economy” was built on an enormous expansion of the national debt, just like Bush 43’s far more tepid growth. Give me a credit card with a 3 trillion dollar limit and I can show you a good time, too.
The fundamentals that we’re dealing with now can be traced back to Reagan’s “leave ‘em alone” policy when it came to everything business. Under Reagan, we went from the world’s biggest creditor nation to the world’s biggest debtor. Not really the way to build wealth.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:58 pmRecallObama Says:
The money we save in not having to have an IRS alone would be astonishing and drive us to once again be the envy of the world.
____________
Sounds… so… sooo… sweet and sugary ‘n wunnerful ‘n all that.
Tell me… why do we, legally, have trusts?
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:00 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
Under Reagan, we went from the world’s biggest creditor nation to the world’s biggest debtor. Not really the way to build wealth.
___________
But… it sure helped make the richer richer, didn’t it?
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:04 pmArticle’s spouted out straight from thinkprogress.org……..WoW!
Somehow I question their validity.
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:07 pmWhat a surprise.
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:10 pmRecallObama Says:
Article’s spouted out straight from thinkprogress.org……..WoW!
Somehow I question their validity.
___________
Page 34 from the Big Book of Internet Trolling…
“When your argument turns to SH*T due to a lack of ‘”facts” and the Other Guy can support what he says, IGNORE IT.
Try as hard as you can to discredit the source.
___________
Com’n… disprove the facts. I DARE you.
Again, do you know why we have trusts?
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:15 pmrecall,
The stats from Sperling’s column (#171 The Republic of Stupidity) are irrefutable. You don’t believe them because they don’t support your conservative beliefs.
Under Eisenhower, the marginal tax rate for income over $100,000 per year was 91%. And corporations paid their fair share then. The corporate share of taxes (versus individuals) has declined every year since. Today over 60% of corporations pay no taxes, whatsoever.
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:39 pmbelac,
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:41 pmNo, not Dostoyevsky. He’s talking about Dostoevski!
Gee… I guess he ain’t comin’ back…
Okay… which one of you guys hurt his feelings?
Poor li’l feller…
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:06 pmI blame you, TRoS.
That was a little much, burying him with all that… information, doncha think?
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:09 pmOh, right… it’s ALL MY fault…
BTW… I have a bone to pick w/ you, LLama Boy…
I saw you takin’ ALL the credit fer gittin’ on JK’s nerves this morning.
Don’t deny it.
Hey… I’M a royal pain-in-the-Cheney too around here. JK named ME too.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:17 pmGeez, everywhere I go I have to remind you people that John Kerry is mine
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:28 pmdbadass Says:
Geez, everywhere I go I have to remind you people that John Kerry is mine
__________
Hey… when was the last time he called you out by YOU???
Huh??? I’m proud of that.
Heh… Ralphie ‘n me must really be gittin’ on his nerves.
A true Mark of Distinction™ if you ask me!
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:43 pmCalled you out by name… by name…
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:44 pmYou’re right, TRoS. He named us both…
I feel bad that he ignores dbadass after all the time and energy db put into that relationship. It’s cold, I tell ya. Stone cold.
March 4th, 2009 at 12:13 am‘Course, dbadass was on the DL those few days when JK’s docs finally got his meds right… just bad timing is all.
March 4th, 2009 at 12:15 amAlright I bow before you both. Still that idiot John Kerry sold me out
March 4th, 2009 at 12:16 amStill I would note that I was first to declare ownership….
March 4th, 2009 at 12:17 amralph the wonder llama Says:
You’re right, TRoS. He named us both…
_________
Mebbe it’s time to head for Vega, ralph… this could be the start of a beautiful relationship.
_________
I feel bad that he ignores dbadass after all the time and energy db put into that relationship. It’s cold, I tell ya. Stone cold.
__________
Sniff… sniff… stop it, ralph… just stop it. Yer makin’ me feel so bad.
All right! All right!
db? JK’s all yours… we’ll let ‘im go, ‘kay ralphie?
March 4th, 2009 at 1:20 amAre they sure, I thought everything was Clinton’s fault.
It couldn’t have anything to do with that Free market gone wild with no regulations could it.?
March 4th, 2009 at 3:54 amWhy does Rush Limbaugh hate Americans? Because unlike most Americans he’s a coward. He ducked the war in Vietnam because of a pimple on his arse? He’s against Obama’s budget because he wants to maintain his lifestyle while others suffer. He is for sever punishment for druggies, but not for him. A true leader for Republicans? I don’t think so, most, or at least some, of Republicans do not hate Americans!
March 4th, 2009 at 3:16 pmRUSH,
March 4th, 2009 at 8:11 pmI AM A D.A.V.. I WAS RECENTLY TOLD BY THE VA,NO MORE PAIN MEDS. I WAS TOLD IT WAS BECUASE OF ALL OF THE ABUSE
OF NARCOTICS. I AM A TOUGH GUY. I WAS PRESCRIBED 2 PILLS PER DAY.I ONLY TOOK THEM WHEN I NEEDED THEM SO OVER A 15 MONTH PERIOD I ONLY TOOK 70 PILLS INSTEAD OF THE PRESCIRBED 910 PILLS(one every 12 hours). BUT NOW BECAUSE OF OTHERS MISUSE OF THE SYSTEM.I CAN’T GET ANY AT ALL. WHO IS GOING TO TAKE
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS??? CAN YOU HELP ME ?????
the truth hurts …. solism has failed everywhere it has been tryed and it will fail here as well ….. start learning either chinese or arabic …..
March 5th, 2009 at 4:18 amthe truth hurts …. solism has failed everywhere it has been tryed
Solism?
Sun worship has failed?
Everywhere it’s been ‘tryed’?
What about places it’s been tried?
March 5th, 2009 at 5:32 pmgivemelibertyordeath Says:
WOW. Dude you are astonishingly stupid. Even more than the usual stupid rightwingnuts show here. I mean Timmeh and Recall Obama are world CLASS stupid. Morons of monumental proportions but you may actually be on a level all your own.
March 23rd, 2009 at 9:29 am