Obama's deficit

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by Steamer, Feb 1, 2010.

  1. Chris M.

    Chris M. Member+

    Jan 18, 2002
    Chicago
    A lot. The point is that the skis were pointed down hill and we were at full speed. We are now in one of those really cool sliding stops that sprays a massive wave of snow over the crowd. Of course we also made a nice turn away from the cliff a while back as well.

    The important thing is where we have come. We lost 650,000 jobs in December 2008. One year later, the ultra-liberal Heritage Foundation notes that we lost 80,000 jobs in December 2009. On its face, the losses have slowed considerably. What they don't point out is that in December the economy also added 47,000 temp jobs.

    While that is not ideal, that is the fifth straight month of temp increases and is a precursor of better times. It makes sense that employers stung by the type of recession we just had will first lay people off. They will then try to get by with staff they have even when business improves and work them harder (lucky to have the job!) Then when they can't handle that, bring in temps to get the work done without adding the costs of full time employees. That will come next unless we double dip.

    Of course it is. It's way, way too high.
     
  2. Steamer

    Steamer New Member

    Jan 30, 2006
    This is par for the course. I have not stated anything untrue, yet your response is "Steamer's stupid."
    You're like a 3rd grader, who can't think of good comeback. "Oh yeah. You're stupid!"
    Nice.
     
  3. Metrogo

    Metrogo Member

    Apr 6, 1999
    Washington Hghts NY
    How do you know that he's not tricking you? You're not qualified to know since you, like barack obama, have never created jobs. I mean, since OBama is not equipped to get good advice about the economy because he never created jobs, why do you think you're qualified to understand the economy when it's explained to you?
     
  4. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    That's about as ironic as eating apples and telling people not to eat poison.
     
  5. Steamer

    Steamer New Member

    Jan 30, 2006
    "The important thing is where we have come. We lost 650,000 jobs in December 2008. One year later, the ultra-liberal Heritage Foundation notes that we lost 80,000 jobs in December 2009. On its face, the losses have slowed considerably. What they don't point out is that in December the economy also added 47,000 temp jobs.

    While that is not ideal, that is the fifth straight month of temp increases and is a precursor of better times. It makes sense that employers stung by the type of recession we just had will first lay people off. They will then try to get by with staff they have even when business improves and work them harder (lucky to have the job!) Then when they can't handle that, bring in temps to get the work done without adding the costs of full time employees. That will come next unless we double dip."

    I can see how the ski analogy, as an Obama supporter, might be your best defense...or most hopeful belief.
    Your second analogy is probably pretty accurate. I know of a lot of people who are at companies that are operating at bare-boned levels. This will not change for quite some time. Keep in mind, my criticism of Obama is not an endorsement of Bush, although his economy was pretty solid, until 06'.
     
  6. Steamer

    Steamer New Member

    Jan 30, 2006
    Apparently, Obama is not getting ood advice. I wonder how many of his economic advisers have created jobs in the private sector.

    And I may not have created jobs, but I sure have "saved" a lot. ;)
     
  7. Metrogo

    Metrogo Member

    Apr 6, 1999
    Washington Hghts NY
    Well you see, you're changing your tune. Isn't a community organizer capable of getting and executing good advice about creating jobs?
     
  8. stanger

    stanger BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 29, 2008
    Columbus
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Not in the private sector.
     
  9. Metrogo

    Metrogo Member

    Apr 6, 1999
    Washington Hghts NY
    We're talking about the public sector. And p.s., though I was not a community organizer, I did start out my working life as a political activist, and I think I know something about job creation since I've done it.
     
  10. Chris M.

    Chris M. Member+

    Jan 18, 2002
    Chicago
    Really?

    We went from a healthy surplus to deficits to 521 billion in deficit spending by 2004 and that's solid? I thought we were supposed to be concerned with deficits.

    Ah, but that is less than Obama's! Never mind that 2009 would have been at least 1.3 trillion without Obama doing a thing.

    Let's also take a closer look at Bush's miniscule 521 billion in 2004 and even the 260 billion by 2006 (look a reduction!). Can we agree that those numbers are too high?

    If yes, can we also agree that they are not accurate by today's count and are artificially low? You see, Bush was spending 10 billion a month in Iraq and that was off budget. Abracadabra.

    Second, these deficit numbers were kept artificially low by higher than appropriate revenue numbers driven by the real estate bubble.

    Allow me to head you off at the pass . . . "But Clinton surpluses occurred during the tech bubble!" Yes they did. and those were artificial as well because of that. The 2009 deficit is not Obama's fault. We will all agree that he added about 300 billion in 09 on stimulus spending and we will disagree as to the necessity of that.

    But the debt was locked in and reflects a serious drop in revenues due to the bubble pops.
     
  11. Chris M.

    Chris M. Member+

    Jan 18, 2002
    Chicago
    Why don't you entertain us with the long list of presidents with significant experience creating jobs in the private sector. I'll get the popcorn.
     
  12. stanger

    stanger BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 29, 2008
    Columbus
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You are not the only one that posts in here that has created jobs. Other people are as qualified to talk about it as you are.
     
  13. Metrogo

    Metrogo Member

    Apr 6, 1999
    Washington Hghts NY
    No they're not, not according to steamer. You see, steamer doesn't think obama is qualified to handle economic policy because he was a community organizer who never created a job. So only us job creators are qualified to talk about it, none of you mere non-job-creators.
     
  14. stanger

    stanger BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 29, 2008
    Columbus
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    This is an interesting list.

    President's Occupations Pre and Post Election

    Seems as none of them did.:D

    Perhaps that's the problem? We need a president that knows how to run a successful business. Bill Gates?
     
  15. stanger

    stanger BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 29, 2008
    Columbus
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    How many jobs does a lawyer create?
     
  16. Chris M.

    Chris M. Member+

    Jan 18, 2002
    Chicago
    Ross Perot? :D

    Don't blame me. I voted for that crazy Texan with the big ears in 2002.
     
  17. Metrogo

    Metrogo Member

    Apr 6, 1999
    Washington Hghts NY
    In my case, 4, with 2 more on the way. I've started another business where we created 7 jobs as well, that was in the 90s.
     
  18. stanger

    stanger BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 29, 2008
    Columbus
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Wow. With the 4 that work for me we really are the little engine that drives the economy. :p
     
  19. Metrogo

    Metrogo Member

    Apr 6, 1999
    Washington Hghts NY
    We're titans of industry.
     
  20. roadkit

    roadkit Greetings from the Fringe of Obscurity

    Jul 2, 2003
    Fornax Cluster
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think a lot of people get enamored of the idea that being able to run a huge business is going to mean you can deal with the politics of being President.

    I disagree. While Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld were not the President, they both successfully ran major corporations. Fat lot of good it did for the USA.
     
  21. ratdog

    ratdog Member+

    Mar 22, 2004
    In the doghouse
    Club:
    Chicago Red Stars
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I have no great love for Slick Willie and I think he only looks good because he's flanked by such dumbasses, but if he had been a Reep, he'd have borrowed against the bubble "growth" and gone on a drunken spending binge on $800 toilet seats for the Pentagon. Instead, Clinton actually tried to be prudent even in the face of a wildly favorable economic situation.

    --------------------

    That said, let's hear about the economy from libertarians' favorite heroes, America's small business owners. Each month, the National Fedration of Independent Business ("The Voice of Small Business", mind you) asks its members what is their most important obstacle. Presumably, if this problem were solved, they would thrive and would go on hiring sprees, right? So, according to these Great Americans (note the capital letters!), what is the numero uno impediment to better business conditions and increased jobs in our economy? Taxes? Surprisingly for this bunch, nope. Increased regulation? Sorry, libertarians, not even close. Banks not lending? We're getting closer...

    By a freaking landslide, our small business champions report that their biggest problem today is... wait for it... "POOR SALES"! I know steamer is surprised but the rest of us have probably figured out that after a collapse in agregate demand during the worst recession since WW2, small businesses need more demand for their products/services before they can start hiring.

    Some economists, believe it or not, actually figured this out many many moons ago. Both Keynes and Hayek said that when the financial market is unable to create credit because of capital constraints and when private aggregate demand collapses, there is a role for increased government spending and central bank financing of that spending. In other words, the government should spend to make up for the failure of the markets until the markets can get back on their feet and provide a safety net for all the people temporarily thrown out of work through no fault of their own other than having the nerve to be born to parents who did not provide them with a huge trust fund with which to ride out the storm.

    Neither Keynes nor Hayek recommended such policies in "normal" times, whatever that means. Neither Hayek nor Keynes, though, believed that any good could be served by the deflation and unemployment that would accompany a depression. Most economists today believe we were on the brink of depression in 2008.

    Getting back to our small businesses, aggregate demand is boosted when the government spends or transfer money to people who will spend and that spending is financed by credit created by the Fed. Increased aggregate demand for goods and services directly and indirectly increase sales for businesses of all sizes.

    This is why despite the damage done to our economic health by decades of GOP irresponsibility, Obama and the Dems enacted ARRA (aka, "the stimulus") which wingnuts are now busy trying trying to say failed or will cause us ruin (where were these people during the Reagan, Bush I and Bush II presidencies??).

    As of 1/25/2010, only about 30% of the $580 billion allocated spending in "the stimulus" has actually been spent.

    http://www.propublica.org/ion/stimulus

    So there is approximately 70% of spending stimulus and approximately 56% of tax-cut stimulus still coming down the pipeline. That's good news for our small businesses as it means sales will get better and they'll be able to create jobs. The wingnuts, of course, are trying to sell us that "Obama failed" barely a third of the way into the stimulus and despite signs that the financial system is stabilizing and the economy is slowly following suit. Part of the blame for this idiocy being parroted in so many places is that Obama and Dem congrssional leaders have done a piss poor job of setting expectations with the American people who, because nobody has taught them anything about economics (the last thing our business and political elites want is an informed populace!), think that a crisis decades in the making will somehow magically be solved in a year.

    On the other hand, some people are saying we need MORE stimulus. How they can know that when we still have 2/3 of the existing stimulus spending to go is a mystery. Maybe they called Sister Cleo. Both extremes need to switch to decaf and go read an economics textbook. And steamer, both Hayek and Keynes say you suck at economics.

    --------

    As a side note, both generals and businesspeople seem to make lousy Presidents -and politicians in general- partly because they're used to living in authoritarian top-down command structures and the Presidency is anything but that.
     
  22. taosjohn

    taosjohn Member+

    Dec 23, 2004
    taos,nm
    [​IMG]
     
  23. MattR

    MattR Member+

    Jun 14, 2003
    Reston
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I agree with Steamer, and demand that President Obama conjure, out of thin air, jobs for everyone. But he can't add any jobs to the government payroll, because that would encroach on private enterprise. He also can't spend any government money, because that would enlarge the deficit. He also cannot propose any regulations, because that would hinder the economy. Finally, he cannot lower any taxes, because that would decrease revenue.

    Can't you see it? Obama just isn't the miracle worker you libs expect!!!1!1!
     
    1 person likes this.
  24. Transparent_Human

    Oct 15, 2006
    Pale blue dot
    Club:
    Celtic FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Mauritius

Share This Page