Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Hedgehog on December 25, 2008, 01:06:02 PM
-
There's a poll on approval ratings of Obama, and he's getting more and more popular by the minute.
Seems like the only ones disliking him are the gays and Rush Limbaugh at the moment. 8)
The full article is here:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/24/obama.approval/index.html?iref=nextin
But instead of copy and pasteing the whole thing, here are the highlights:
Story Highlights
Poll: More than eight in 10 approve of how Barack Obama is handling transition
Obama has higher ratings than Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan did at same time
Poll: Fifty-six percent say Obama's Cabinet picks are outstanding or above average
-
hedge, if the left-wing lie machine can convince the entire state of hawaii to lie about obama's birth certificate, it can easily manipulate the results of one poll.
-
Whats funny is that if Bush was to start another 850 billion dollar stimulus package he would be crucified. Obama gets praised. Not that I'm defending Bush but the biased opinions are just ridiculous.
-
Whats funny is that if Bush was to start a 850 billion dollar stimulus package he would be crucified. Obama gets praised. Not that I'm defending Bush but the biased opinions are just ridiculous.
Fact.
-
There's a poll on approval ratings of Obama, and he's getting more and more popular by the minute.
Seems like the only ones disliking him are the gays and Rush Limbaugh at the moment. 8)
The full article is here:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/24/obama.approval/index.html?iref=nextin
But instead of copy and pasteing the whole thing, here are the highlights:
Story Highlights
Poll: More than eight in 10 approve of how Barack Obama is handling transition
Obama has higher ratings than Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan did at same time
Poll: Fifty-six percent say Obama's Cabinet picks are outstanding or above average
Okay here's a rule-- you need to actually HOLD the office before you have an approval rating. Otherwise it's "approve of what . . . the job you're doing for a job you haven't started yet?" It's like political premature ejaculation . . .
-
Okay here's a rule-- you need to actually HOLD the office before you have an approval rating. Otherwise it's "approve of what . . . the job you're doing for a job you haven't started yet?" It's like political premature ejaculation . . .
December 24, 2008
CNN Poll: Obama transition draws approval of 4 in 5 Americans
Posted: 09:05 AM ET
From CNN Deputy Political Director Paul Steinhauser
CNN) – Hawaii's always been a great spot for honeymoons — and Barack Obama, who's spending the holiday season there on the beach at Kailua, is unquestionably having one of the best in modern presidential history.
Eighty-two percent of those questioned in a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll released Wednesday morning approve of the way the Obama is handling his presidential transition. That's up 3 points from when we asked this question at the beginning of December. Fifteen percent of those surveyed disapprove of the way Obama's handling his transition, down 3 points from our last poll.
The 82 percent approval is higher than then President-elect George W. Bush 8 years ago, who had a 65 percent transition approval rating, and Bill Clinton, at 67 percent in 1992.
"Barack Obama is having a better honeymoon with the American public than any incoming president in the past three decades. He's putting up better numbers, usually by double digits, than Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, or either George Bush on every item traditionally measured in transition polls," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.
-
Okay here's a rule-- you need to actually HOLD the office before you have an approval rating. Otherwise it's "approve of what . . . the job you're doing for a job you haven't started yet?" It's like political premature ejaculation . . .
I don't think there is such a rule.
The article clearly state (if you read it) that it compares Obama's current ratings to those of other president-elects, polled at the same time prior to getting into the office.
But I do believe this love affair all Americans have with their new president is starting to get a little bit ridiculous.
Here's one example, a Gallup poll (I know those are the only polls Coach think are legit, so he should be gung ho this time 8)):
http://thepage.time.com/2008/12/26/poll-obama-is-man-americans-admire-most/
Apparantly the first time a president-elect is more admired than the sitting president.
Like I said, it's starting to get ridiculous.
Yes, he will probably make for a decent president and shit.
But he's not like some fcuking sport superstar.
Enough already with that shit.
-
Okay here's a rule-- you need to actually HOLD the office before you have an approval rating. Otherwise it's "approve of what . . . the job you're doing for a job you haven't started yet?" It's like political premature ejaculation . . .
They've been polling the popularity of incoming guys for decades - the article talks about Reagan and Bush 1 as well.
As so much of our economic woes are directly tied to PERCEPTION of the current siuation (and resulting confidence or lack thereof), the attitude of Americans regarding the next leader is a highly important one. Part of the reason we're in this clusterfvck of an economy is that people have no confidence in our President currently. The fact is, they have more confidence in Obama, and their PERCEPTION of our competence of leadership will increase greatly on Jan 20th.
-
They've been polling the popularity of incoming guys for decades - the article talks about Reagan and Bush 1 as well.
As so much of our economic woes are directly tied to PERCEPTION of the current siuation (and resulting confidence or lack thereof), the attitude of Americans regarding the next leader is a highly important one. Part of the reason we're in this clusterfvck of an economy is that people have no confidence in our President currently. The fact is, they have more confidence in Obama, and their PERCEPTION of our competence of leadership will increase greatly on Jan 20th.
its easy to have confidence in a person who is a blank slate and you can project any of your hopes and ideals on. why dont you go respond to the blame game thread you made.
-
Fact.
Coach, I've got nothing against you & if you ever make your way to Michigan I'd love to train with you but you're like a shopping cart with a bad wheel that always goes to the right. ;)
-
Fact.
word.
Polls are biased.
News is biased.
Facts are biased.
Being and nothingness are biased.
Biased to the weak, ineffectual punching bags aka liberals....who are also bloodthirsty, power-hungry, Machiavellians.
The average american aka conservative is a victim of this bias. Always a helpless victim casting pearls of wisdom before swine. Or Rats in this case.
-
Whats funny is that if Bush was to start another 850 billion dollar stimulus package he would be crucified. Obama gets praised. Not that I'm defending Bush but the biased opinions are just ridiculous.
Obama could start world war 3, nuke half the globe, sacrifice a virgin on the desk of the oval office and these retards would still be swinging from his dick. I'll reserve my "approval" until he's actually in office.
But he has assembled a nice team, regardless. Doesn't mean shit right now, though.
-
After the disaster that GWB and Paulson have been, Pee Wee Herman would have better ratings.
-
Seems like the only ones disliking him are the gays and Rush Limbaugh at the moment.
Why should anyone dislike Obama. So far, he has handled himself as best as he can during this incredible financial and recession crisis. He has already retracted a lot of what he thought his fellow Democrats wanted him to say and do. Even his priest he is bringing creates irritation with the Democrats.
So far, Obama has done nothing. And rightfully so, he should vacation, and enjoy it with his daughters and family until he comes into office. At least he is starting to choose who he wants to work with early.
As for CHANGE, ha - that is really funny.
Most of his appointees were old timers from the Clinton era and more.
Some change.
-
word.
Polls are biased.
News is biased.
Facts are biased.
Being and nothingness are biased.
Biased to the weak, ineffectual punching bags aka liberals....who are also bloodthirsty, power-hungry, Machiavellians.
The average american aka conservative is a victim of this bias. Always a helpless victim casting pearls of wisdom before swine. Or Rats in this case.
I know this is tongue-in-cheek but you still make a compelling case for the right. Except for the part about facts being biased. That made me lmao though!!! We could use you as a spokesman if you ever decide to abandon your grade-school idealism and embrace reality. :)
-
Fact: George W Bush was an unmitigated disaster.
That's only the opinion of the majority of Americans, as well as people of the world.
I mean, yes... if you want to believe the majority of Earthlings, then yes...
-
They've been polling the popularity of incoming guys for decades - the article talks about Reagan and Bush 1 as well.
As so much of our economic woes are directly tied to PERCEPTION of the current siuation (and resulting confidence or lack thereof), the attitude of Americans regarding the next leader is a highly important one. Part of the reason we're in this clusterfvck of an economy is that people have no confidence in our President currently. The fact is, they have more confidence in Obama, and their PERCEPTION of our competence of leadership will increase greatly on Jan 20th.
Regardless of whether pollsters are idiotic enough to take the poll, the premise is foul- job approval before you hold the job. Barrack even has been sending press releases from the "Office of the President Elect." He actually invented a new office which does not exist. His egomania will ultimately be his undoing.
-
Regardless of whether pollsters are idiotic enough to take the poll, the premise is foul- job approval before you hold the job.
True, but they've done it for decades. It allows them to see if a guy improves his public perception or not backed upon actual job performance.
And since so much of our economy is based on confidence - the confidence we have in our leaders is VERY important.
I mean 50% more americans approve of Obama than they do of Bush. 82 to what, 30? 28? lol...
-
True, but they've done it for decades. It allows them to see if a guy improves his public perception or not backed upon actual job performance.
And since so much of our economy is based on confidence - the confidence we have in our leaders is VERY important.
I mean 50% more americans approve of Obama than they do of Bush. 82 to what, 30? 28? lol...
Wait until the economy is even worse two years from now, then check the numbers. To use a sports analogy, take Eric Mangini's approval ratings among Jet Fans versus coach X. Coach X is going to smoke Mangini. But wait until the Jets are even worse next year.
-
Wait until the economy is even worse two years from now, then check the numbers. To use a sports analogy, take Eric Mangini's approval ratings among Jet Fans versus coach X. Coach X is going to smoke Mangini. But wait until the Jets are even worse next year.
Well, we have the last 2 presidencies to look at...
Clinton started the DOW at 3000, and got it to 10,000 when he left office.
not too bad. 333% growth in 8 years.
Bush started the SOW at 10,000, and left it at 8,400.
Eh, 16% loss in 8 years.
Obama will start at about 8,400.
I guess we'll find out.
-
The approval rating is a direct correlation to the perception created by the media. Obama hasn't done anything yet but many are infatuated with him. I strongly agree with the above post:
"its easy to have confidence in a person who is a blank slate and you can project any of your hopes and ideals on"
I think Obama has done a decent job with cabinet picks...which is the only thing we have to go on so far. We start really judging him after Jan 20th.
-
Okay here's a rule-- you need to actually HOLD the office before you have an approval rating. Otherwise it's "approve of what . . . the job you're doing for a job you haven't started yet?" It's like political premature ejaculation . . .
lol. Ain't that the truth. It really means nothing.
-
True, but the point is that its a reflection of what the media has created.
-
Rob, it wasn't too long ago the DOW was holding at close to 15000.
People say what Obama has to face coming into office with the ecomomy the way it. That really nothing compared to what Bush faced during 9/11 and everything throughout the course of his administraition. But IMO, his biggest screw ups have been over the last couple of months with the bailouts that should have never happend.
But to blame Bush for the economy it utterly retarded.
-
Rob, it wasn't too long ago the DOW was holding at close to 15000.
People say what Obama has to face coming into office with the ecomomy the way it. That really nothing compared to what Bush faced during 9/11 and everything throughout the course of his administraition. But IMO, his biggest screw ups have been over the last couple of months with the bailouts that should have never happend.
But to blame Bush for the economy it utterly retarded.
Why is it utterly retarded to blame the man who has been the president the last 8 years for the current economic situation?
-
True, but the point is that its a reflection of what the media has created.
I agree.
-
Ask Barney Frank and the rest of his cronies.
-
Why is it utterly retarded to blame the man who has been the president the last 8 years for the current economic situation?
b/c this has been a long time coming as easy as it is to blame one person many ppl are to blame. The lenders, the ppl who bought a house with the intent to flip it, the ppl who bought a house they couldnt afford simply b/c they got approved, the car companies...it is ignorant and retarted to solely blame the president for this.
-
Ask Barney Frank and the rest of his cronies.
Barney Frank, to my knowledge has never made that claim.
It was you who made the claim that it was utterly retarded to blame Bush.
But to blame Bush for the economy it utterly retarded.
So I am asking you.
Why is it utterly retarded to blame the man who has been the president the last 8 years for the current economic situation?
Thanks.
-
b/c this has been a long time coming as easy as it is to blame one person many ppl are to blame. The lenders, the ppl who bought a house with the intent to flip it, the ppl who bought a house they couldnt afford simply b/c they got approved, the car companies...it is ignorant and retarted to solely blame the president for this.
here is your response hedge its a complicated situation do a little bit of research on there are too many ppl to spread the blame around to my friend.
-
here is your response hedge its a complicated situation do a little bit of research on there are too many ppl to spread the blame around to my friend.
Who's been in charge of USA the last 8 years?
Who should get credit when it goes well and get the blame when it goes bad?
It's just like a business corporation.
It is the executive.
In this case - the president.
He's got the ultimate responsibility for the state of the nation.
If he's not able to handle that pressure - then he's not fit to be president.
This ain't no fcuking kindergarten where we should cut the leader some slack if he sucks.
The presidency of the USA is the most important job in the world, and it takes a brilliant mind and courage to do it.
If there is poor results during your time in office, you should get heat for it.
Then there was failure under your watch.
That's how I look at it.
-
Who's been in charge of USA the last 8 years?
Who should get credit when it goes well and get the blame when it goes bad?
It's just like a business corporation.
It is the executive.
In this case - the president.
He's got the ultimate responsibility for the state of the nation.
If he's not able to handle that pressure - then he's not fit to be president.
LOL is the CEO responsible when ppl many many many levels below him do something wrong?
I can understand where your coming from but trying to compare running a company to running a country again is being ignorant. Im not saying he is innocent in this matter only that blaming him soley is ignorant and not looking at ANY of the facts.
-
LOL is the CEO responsible when ppl many many many levels below him do something wrong?
I can understand where your coming from but trying to compare running a company to running a country again is being ignorant. Im not saying he is innocent in this matter only that blaming him soley is ignorant and not looking at ANY of the facts.
I don't think anyone is blaming Bush solely?
At least I don't.
But I definitely think he's the one with the biggest responsibility.
Then there are others who are also to blame.
But GWB is the biggest culprit.
Not the only one, but the biggest one.
You see what I'm saying?
-
compared to what Bush faced during 9/11
What did he face? Guilt?
Q: Mr bush, what do you feel in your soul about 911?
A: "I'm a good man...." trails off.
hmmmmmm
-
I don't think anyone is blaming Bush solely?
At least I don't.
But I definitely think he's the one with the biggest responsibility.
Then there are others who are also to blame.
But GWB is the biggest culprit.
Not the only one, but the biggest one.
You see what I'm saying?
I can understand your thinking as it happend on his watch but by that logic lincoln is mainly responsible for the civil war as well. You have to look at the entire picture and take into account the situation and how it came to be if these events where set into place years before bush took office then some of the blame shifts off of him. If ppl where practicing shady business practices and cooking books then some of the blame shifts off of him. You see when you look more closely at the problems you begin to understand that this was a multi faceted fuck up and didnt necissarily begin from the head down like most ppl would have you think.
-
What did he face? Guilt?
Q: Mr bush, what do you feel in your soul about 911?
A: "I'm a good man...." trails off.
hmmmmmm
while i understand you not wanting to post links b/c you spin shit like rush limbaugh or olbeirman it would be nice to get a link when you post from a supposed interview.
-
while i understand you not wanting to post links b/c you spin shit like rush limbaugh or olbeirman it would be nice to get a link when you post from a supposed interview.
First, call bullshit on the quote, so it'll be worth my time to post it.
-
First, call bullshit on the quote, so it'll be worth my time to post it.
LOL im not calling bullshit i did however call bullshit on the other posts which you havent provided any proof for yet. I would like a link though or youtube clip, you know i would have no reason to doubt you if you didnt intentionally spin shit all damn day.
Serious question: Do you think that misrepresenting facts is the best way to have a civilized debate?
-
LOL im not calling bullshit i did however call bullshit on the other posts which you havent provided any proof for yet. I would like a link though or youtube clip, you know i would have no reason to doubt you if you didnt intentionally spin shit all damn day.
Serious question: Do you think that misrepresenting facts is the best way to have a civilized debate?
ya lost me.
-
ya lost me.
Ill refresh your memory
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=254704.75
you asserted that palin refused to answer questions during the debate and that she broke rules as governor but retreated when asked to provide proof and then tried to pass a supposed transcript of a PLAN for her to not answer questions and never addressed the governor breaking rules aspect.
At any rate please link this one Ill call bull shit if it will make you feel better and you could maybe actually win a debate for a change.
-
Ill refresh your memory
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=254704.75
you asserted that palin refused to answer questions during the debate and that she broke rules as governor but retreated when asked to provide proof and then tried to pass a supposed transcript of a PLAN for her to not answer questions and never addressed the governor breaking rules aspect.
At any rate please link this one Ill call bull shit if it will make you feel better and you could maybe actually win a debate for a change.
look
ya know
-
good response why dont you zing me again with a "your momma wears combat boots" or "im rubber your glue whatever you say bounces of me and sticks to you" ::)
Its pathetic what you have become 240 im embarressed for you bro, you have become the very thing you despise and bitch about on here...Cudos
-
Well, we have the last 2 presidencies to look at...
Clinton started the DOW at 3000, and got it to 10,000 when he left office.
not too bad. 333% growth in 8 years.
Ahhh.. I wore a red shirt last Friday and it rained. Therefore, the red shirt made it rain.
-
Ahhh.. I wore a red shirt last Friday and it rained. Therefore, the red shirt made it rain.
hahah i like it
-
Well, we have the last 2 presidencies to look at...
Clinton started the DOW at 3000, and got it to 10,000 when he left office.
not too bad. 333% growth in 8 years.
Bush started the SOW at 10,000, and left it at 8,400.
Eh, 16% loss in 8 years.
Obama will start at about 8,400.
I guess we'll find out.
Why do you keep posting this crap? You're like the guys who post the worst pics of Dorian/Ronnie and claim some kind of victory because of it.
Clinton was President during a time of little to no military spending and the birth of......as has been said a million times....the Internet. Unless you give Gore credit for inventing it, and then Clinton the credit for picking him as a VP, stop posting this stat.
Everyone here loves Ron Paul so.
Ron Paul's understanding of this is why he says he doesn't want to run the economy and then explains that by saying, "because the President isn't supposed to run the economy." The President should understand the economy, but his job is to uphold the Constitution
Link: http://www.nolanchart.com/article1559.html
-
Who's been in charge of USA the last 8 years?
Who should get credit when it goes well and get the blame when it goes bad?
It's just like a business corporation.
It is the executive.
In this case - the president.
He's got the ultimate responsibility for the state of the nation.
If he's not able to handle that pressure - then he's not fit to be president.
This ain't no fcuking kindergarten where we should cut the leader some slack if he sucks.
The presidency of the USA is the most important job in the world, and it takes a brilliant mind and courage to do it.
If there is poor results during your time in office, you should get heat for it.
Then there was failure under your watch.
That's how I look at it.
It's actually the president and Congress at the federal level.
-
First, call bullshit on the quote, so it'll be worth my time to post it.
Yes, post the link to the following quotes:
What did he face? Guilt?
Q: Mr bush, what do you feel in your soul about 911?
A: "I'm a good man...." trails off.
hmmmmmm
-
Why do you keep posting this crap? You're like the guys who post the worst pics of Dorian/Ronnie and claim some kind of victory because of it.
Clinton was President during a time of little to no military spending and the birth of......as has been said a million times....the Internet. Unless you give Gore credit for inventing it, and then Clinton the credit for picking him as a VP, stop posting this stat.
Everyone here loves Ron Paul so.
Link: http://www.nolanchart.com/article1559.html
I can't believe you guys are falling for this Ron Paul bullshit.
Look, I understand if Joe the Coach or Joe The Plumber don't understand how the constitution works.
But a congressman?
A presidential candidate?
WTF?
Quote from: Ron Paul
Ron Paul's understanding of this is why he says he doesn't want to run the economy and then explains that by saying, "because the President isn't supposed to run the economy." The President should understand the economy, but his job is to uphold the Constitution
No Ron Paul.
It's not the president's job to uphold the constitution.
Perhaps Ron Paul skipped class when they taught checks and balances?
The presidency holds the Executive power.
The congress holds the Legislative power.
The Supreme Court holds the Judicial power and guards the constitution.
-
I can't believe you guys are falling for this Ron Paul bullshit.
Look, I understand if Joe the Coach or Joe The Plumber don't understand how the constitution works.
But a congressman?
A presidential candidate?
WTF?
Quote from: Ron Paul
Ron Paul's understanding of this is why he says he doesn't want to run the economy and then explains that by saying, "because the President isn't supposed to run the economy." The President should understand the economy, but his job is to uphold the Constitution
No Ron Paul.
It's not the president's job to uphold the constitution.
Perhaps Ron Paul skipped class when they taught checks and balances?
The presidency holds the Executive power.
The congress holds the Legislative power.
The Supreme Court holds the Judicial power and guards the constitution.
Hedge I don't think it's that cut and dried. The executive does enforce the law, including the Constitution, through agencies like the AG's office, FBI, Treasury, INS, etc. Yes we have checks and balances, and they work, but the prez has an obligation to "uphold" the Constitution. He takes an oath to do so when he takes office:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
-
Hedge I don't think it's that cut and dried. The executive does enforce the law, including the Constitution, through agencies like the AG's office, FBI, Treasury, INS, etc. Yes we have checks and balances, and they work, but the prez has an obligation to "uphold" the Constitution. He takes an oath to do so when he takes office:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
You're correct sir.
-
Ahhh.. I wore a red shirt last Friday and it rained. Therefore, the red shirt made it rain.
So, you're argument is that there is no connection between the actions of the President and the state of the country, economic or otherwise. Whatever happens happens and the actions of the person in office are irrelevant?
-
So, you're argument is that there is no connection between the actions of the President and the state of the country, economic or otherwise. Whatever happens happens and the actions of the person in office are irrelevant?
his are the ramblings of a child.
-
So, you're argument is that there is no connection between the actions of the President and the state of the country, economic or otherwise. Whatever happens happens and the actions of the person in office are irrelevant?
Nothing of the sort, the argument is that you cannot presume a cause and effect in a blanket statement without further analysis or evidence. Example, Jimmy Carter becomes president and within three years the Iranians take hostages. Does that mean Carter created the crisis? Maybe, but not necessarily. There are certainly worldwide economic forces which are beyond the powers of our elected officials to prevent. Some leaders happen to be in the right place, or the wrong place, at the right time.
-
his are the ramblings of a child.
Don't you think you're being a little hard on Al?
-
He's talking about you.
Further more it is not a blanket statement to affix credit or blame to the president for the state of the economy. There is plenty of evidence to support the claim that this administration is responsible in large part, if not in totality, for the state of the economy.
-
Nothing of the sort, the argument is that you cannot presume a cause and effect in a blanket statement without further analysis or evidence. Example, Jimmy Carter becomes president and within three years the Iranians take hostages. Does that mean Carter created the crisis? Maybe, but not necessarily. There are certainly worldwide economic forces which are beyond the powers of our elected officials to prevent. Some leaders happen to be in the right place, or the wrong place, at the right time.
When you look at the last 8 years, none of those have had a balanced budget.
A few years ago, 2003-2004, when the economy was going well, Bush could've opted to raise taxes and slash government subsidies in order to cool off the economy and make household's save more.
But instead he lowered the taxes, and introduced even more government programs.
Not to mention Bush decided that he needed to spend money on wars in different places.
So yes, I think it's quite easy to see that George W Bush, while not the only culprit, is the biggest culprit of this economic crisis.
He just didn't have a clue when he was in office IMO.
I remember back in a debate during the presidential race in 2000 how Bush was asked what he would do if there was an economic crisis.
His answer was that he would call Alan Greenspan and ask him what to do. ::)
Unbelievable.
-
Moron - the crisis we have is a credit crisis.
Too many people, including banks, government, financial institutions, and individuals, borrowed far too much and cant pay it back.
In fact, we had an asset bubble based solely on the availability of cheap credit. Without access to credit, the car companies would not exist since people dont pay cash for cars, they get loans.
The same with the stupid prices for homes. Without the access to cheap mortgage money that was thrown at anything with a heartbeat, the home prices would not have jumped the way they did.
Its no different with "higher education." The only thing sustaining insane college costs is the access to cheap school loans.
However, its over. Its time to pay the bills and people cant borrow anymore because the banks are sitting with too many bad loans and bad debt.
Blaming it on GWB is just stupid. He helped the mess along no doubt, but this problem was building for a long long time.
-
He helped the mess along no doubt,
QFT.
-
Moron - the crisis we have is a credit crisis.
Too many people, including banks, government, financial institutions, and individuals, borrowed far too much and cant pay it back.
In fact, we had an asset bubble based solely on the availability of cheap credit. Without access to credit, the car companies would not exist since people dont pay cash for cars, they get loans.
The same with the stupid prices for homes. Without the access to cheap mortgage money that was thrown at anything with a heartbeat, the home prices would not have jumped the way they did.
Its no different with "higher education." The only thing sustaining insane college costs is the access to cheap school loans.
However, its over. Its time to pay the bills and people cant borrow anymore because the banks are sitting with too many bad loans and bad debt.
Blaming it on GWB is just stupid. He helped the mess along no doubt, but this problem was building for a long long time.
So you believe there were absolutely no political measures George W Bush could've taken to make the households save more money and loan less money?
-
So you believe there were absolutely no political measures George W Bush could've taken to make the households save more money and loan less money?
What is this "Nanny Government?" My parents saved their money because you're supposed to save money. Now, George W is supposed to be our Daddy, saying "Junior don't empty your piggy bank and spend it on candy because you want to buy a bike next summer." Without intending, you have identified (or at least illustrated) the problem, if we don't have a society where people want to do the right thing, or have the right values, no government program will help.
-
What is this "Nanny Government?" My parents saved their money because you're supposed to save money. Now, George W is supposed to be our Daddy, saying now Junior don't empty your piggy banks and spend it on candy because you want to buy a bike next summer. Now, you have identified the problem, if we don't have a society where people want to do the right thing, no government program will help.
It's not "Nanny Government".
It's been very much a laissez-faire government over the last eight years instead.
If the Fed rate is low, and taxes are cut during an economic boom, it will lead the housing market to expand like a gigantic bubble.
Because mortgages are affordable, and saving money in the bank is not a good deal, since the rate is so low.
I guess you can be all smart about it and write stuff about "Nanny government" and piggy banks, et al.
Trying to be funny.
But the fact is that we're in an economic situation.
I don't know if that is all that funny TBH.
-
QFT.
Brilliant political analysis Al. Thanks for your contribution.
-
It's not "Nanny Government".
It's been very much a laissez-faire government over the last eight years instead.
If the Fed rate is low, and taxes are cut during an economic boom, it will lead the housing market to expand like a gigantic bubble.
Because mortgages are affordable, and saving money in the bank is not a good deal, since the rate is so low.
I guess you can be all smart about it and write stuff about "Nanny government" and piggy banks, et al.
Trying to be funny.
But the fact is that we're in an economic situation.
I don't know if that is all that funny TBH.
Hedge, I don't find the situation "funny" at all (although I appreciate your "smart" comment). I just don't understand why it's the government's role to tell us not to borrow too much and live within our means, which seems to be one of your chief problems with the Pres. It used to be called common sense, now the government tells us not to let our kids drink too much soda at school, we are headed down the wrong path.
-
So you believe there were absolutely no political measures George W Bush could've taken to make the households save more money and loan less money?
You have no clue what the heck you are talking about. GWB is not a dictator, despite your delusional fantasies.
People have freedom to spend their own money as they wish, unless you want a dictator not to allow them. BTW - people pay 15% in ss taxes for "retirement" which was supposed to act as a forced retirement savings plan.
Banks made too many bad loans and should be allowed to fail. The easy credit drove re prices too high for most people, which made it so that saving money was almost impossible when taxes, re costs, and living expenses are taken into account.
-
The govt was anything but laizee faire in this situation. The government, both federal and states, actively promoted the banks giving out these loans because they reaped huge taxes off of this mess.
The local governments loved this chaos because they were able to raise property taxes on everyone based upon higher appraisals. They increased spending exponentially thinking this ponzi scheme would go on forever.
The government created this mess as much as the banks and reckless borrowers, flippers, speculators, appraisers, mortgage brokers, all did.
-
The govt was anything but laizee faire in this situation. The government, both federal and states, actively promoted the banks giving out these loans because they reaped huge taxes off of this mess.
The local governments loved this chaos because they were able to raise property taxes on everyone based upon higher appraisals. They increased spending exponentially thinking this ponzi scheme would go on forever.
The government created this mess as much as the banks and reckless borrowers, flippers, speculators, appraisers, mortgage brokers, all did.
Excellent point, the libs profitted politically from a situation they helped create-- everyone must own a home regardless of credit-worthiness (OR FOR THAT MATTER, CITIZENSHIP). Then, when it blows up, they scream "lack of regulation" ergo it's the fault of the conservatives.
-
There's a poll on approval ratings of Obama, and he's getting more and more popular by the minute.
Seems like the only ones disliking him are the gays and Rush Limbaugh at the moment. 8)
The full article is here:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/24/obama.approval/index.html?iref=nextin
But instead of copy and pasteing the whole thing, here are the highlights:
Story Highlights
Poll: More than eight in 10 approve of how Barack Obama is handling transition
Obama has higher ratings than Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan did at same time
Poll: Fifty-six percent say Obama's Cabinet picks are outstanding or above average
He's a beast for sure.
-
Moron - the crisis we have is a credit crisis.
Blaming it on GWB is just stupid.
Damn right. Bush is an exceptional Leader/President!