Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: tonymctones on August 24, 2010, 12:31:58 AM
-
Ive seen this time and time again liberals blaming bush for the economic down turn...
and ive asked time and time again mal, straw, 240 etc...what exactly bush did to contribute to the meltdown...
never with an answer....
so I decided to start this thread for you guys...what exactly did bush do to create this meltdown?
neurotoxin I know you feel justified so maybe you will grace us with your genius...
-
Little-known fact: Obama's failed stimulus program cost more than the Iraq war
By: Mark Tapscott
Editorial Page Editor
08/23/10 11:32 AM EDT
www.washingtonexaminer.c om
________________________ ________________________ ________________________
Expect to hear a lot about how much the Iraq war cost in the days ahead from Democrats worried about voter wrath against their unprecedented spending excesses.
The meme is simple: The economy is in a shambles because of Bush's economic policies and his war in Iraq. As American Thinker's Randall Hoven points out, that's the message being peddled by lefties as diverse as former Clinton political strategist James Carville, economist Joseph Stiglitz, and The Nation's Washington editor, Christopher Hayes.
The key point in the mantra is an alleged $3 trillion cost for the war. Well, it was expensive to be sure, in both blood and treasure, but, as Hoven notes, the CBO puts the total cost at $709 billion. To put that figure in the proper context of overall spending since the war began in 2003, Hoven provides this handy CBO chart showing the portion of the annual deficit attributable to the conflict:
But there is much more to be said of this data and Hoven does an admirable job of summarizing the highlights of such an analysis:
* Obama's stimulus, passed in his first month in office, will cost more than the entire Iraq War -- more than $100 billion (15%) more.
* Just the first two years of Obama's stimulus cost more than the entire cost of the Iraq War under President Bush, or six years of that war.
* Iraq War spending accounted for just 3.2% of all federal spending while it lasted.
* Iraq War spending was not even one quarter of what we spent on Medicare in the same time frame.
* Iraq War spending was not even 15% of the total deficit spending in that time frame. The cumulative deficit, 2003-2010, would have been four-point-something trillion dollars with or without the Iraq War.
* The Iraq War accounts for less than 8% of the federal debt held by the public at the end of 2010 ($9.031 trillion).
* During Bush's Iraq years, 2003-2008, the federal government spent more on education that it did on the Iraq War. (State and local governments spent about ten times more.)
Just some handy facts to recall during coming weeks as Obama and his congressional Democratic buddies get more desperate to put the blame for their spending policies on Bush and the war in Iraq. For more from Hoven, go here.
-
Ive seen this time and time again liberals blaming bush for the economic down turn...
and ive asked time and time again mal, straw, 240 etc...what exactly bush did to contribute to the meltdown...
never with an answer....
so I decided to start this thread for you guys...what exactly did bush do to create this meltdown?
neurotoxin I know you feel justified so maybe you will grace us with your genius...
bumpty bump bump bump
come on guys surely this is an easy answer for you...I mean obama must have sent you guys something in an email in regards to this right?
blacken, straw, mal, 240?
-
bumpty bump bump bump
come on guys surely this is an easy answer for you...I mean obama must have sent you guys something in an email in regards to this right?
blacken, straw, mal, 240?
Don't expect anything remotely coherent or compelling from this bunch.
-
Ive already said...Bush did absolutley ZERO for the Economy to take a dump. The Economy didnt take a dip until November 5th 2008...True story...
Bush's administration kept the surplus and everything was good.
-
Ive already said...Bush did absolutley ZERO for the Economy to take a dump. The Economy didnt take a dip until November 5th 2008...True story...
Bush's administration kept the surplus and everything was good.
Not quite.The economy tanked THE DAY Nancy Pelosi took office.Before that Bush had 52 consecutive months of job growth,which is 52 more then Imam Obama will have in his entire term.
-
Ive already said...Bush did absolutley ZERO for the Economy to take a dump. The Economy didnt take a dip until November 5th 2008...True story...
Bush's administration kept the surplus and everything was good.
Actually things started getting worse once Pelosi took over.
The swamp is going to get drained in November.
-
Ive already said...Bush did absolutley ZERO for the Economy to take a dump. The Economy didnt take a dip until November 5th 2008...True story...
Bush's administration kept the surplus and everything was good.
There was never a surplus. That is a myth created by Clinton's cabinet. This has been proven time and time again on this board.
Are you really studying to be a doctor?
-
There was never a surplus. That is a myth created by Clinton's cabinet. This has been proven time and time again on this board.
Are you really studying to be a doctor?
I always thought it was proven time and time again that there was a surplus. Maybe i didn't read further enough?
-
I always thought it was proven time and time again that there was a surplus. Maybe i didn't read further enough?
Maybe you didn't read. Period.
Just copied and pasted nonsense.
-
LOL weak attempt
the surplus has nothing to do with the economic down turn...
from what alot of lefties many on this board have said bush policies lead this country of a cliff...
so what bush policies exactly contributed to the country being driven of the cliff?
-
Maybe you didn't read. Period.
Just copied and pasted nonsense.
No need to get snippy jack ass. It's a simple question. If you can't show it, fine.
-
so what bush policies exactly contributed to the country being driven of the cliff?
Good luck with getting an answer. Neurotoxin, whatever his name is, started his 401k thread blaming Bush for the economy. I asked him the same question and he told me not to politicize the thread. Still waiting for him to explain how Bush destroyed the economy and why he is solely to blame.
-
No need to get snippy jack ass. It's a simple question. If you can't show it, fine.
Kazan has posted about this endlessly. There never was a surplus. It was an accounting gimmick for one year in the heirght of the Dot Com bubble that never materialized.
-
There was never a surplus. That is a myth created by Clinton's cabinet. This has been proven time and time again on this board.
Are you really studying to be a doctor?
What do my studies have to do with this?
-
What do my studies have to do with this?
LOL mal what does a surplus have to do with the economy melting down and what bush did to cause it?
-
What do my studies have to do with this?
Someone with such a level of education as you have should know better by now than to support some of the crap coming from this Admn that you do.
-
No need to get snippy jack ass. It's a simple question. If you can't show it, fine.
Are you related to Al Gore. Same comment he used for Bush when he would not admit defeat. How original.
I and other posters showed on other threads findings from INDEPENDENT sources, even people from that time who worked with that budget that clearly showed there was no surplus. Not only that but the operating budget for the government is one thing, the national economy is something else.
You go back and look for it.
-
LOL mal what does a surplus have to do with the economy melting down and what bush did to cause it?
As far as the economy..i didnt say it was all bushs fault..Actually im fucking with 333 when im sarcastic..Because he blames everything wrong on the "Obama Admin" like when he posted the shit that suicides were up because of obama. Shit like that.
I think the laxed oversight of Wallstreet had a part to play. As well as dems saying every moe dick and larry should get a home loan.
But i dont think that obama created the fucked up ecomony either.
-
Someone with such a level of education as you have should know better by now than to support some of the crap coming from this Admn that you do.
So because I dont agree with your political beliefs my level of education has to be questioned?
-
Are you related to Al Gore. Same comment he used for Bush when he would not admit defeat. How original.
I and other posters showed on other threads findings from INDEPENDENT sources, even people from that time who worked with that budget that clearly showed there was no surplus. Not only that but the operating budget for the government is one thing, the national economy is something else.
You go back and look for it.
I'll take that as a "no, I won't."
-
As far as the economy..i didnt say it was all bushs fault..Actually im fucking with 333 when im sarcastic..Because he blames everything wrong on the "Obama Admin" like when he posted the shit that suicides were up because of obama. Shit like that.
I think the laxed oversight of Wallstreet had a part to play. As well as dems saying every moe dick and larry should get a home loan.
But i dont think that obama created the fucked up ecomony either.
I blame obama for turning a bad situation FAR worse based on ideology alone.
-
My biggest beef with BUSH was the Iraq war. As for the economy, both parties rode the housing wave and did nothing.
-
I blame obama for turning a bad situation FAR worse based on ideology alone.
im sure
-
Ask Clinton who gave Wall St. the opportunity to act like unchecked assholes? :D
-
So because I dont agree with your political beliefs my level of education has to be questioned?
No, but we now have objective facts showing this admn a failure in everything it has done. An educated person usually realizes failure and seeks to do something different.
1. The Stim Bill failed by the admns' own definition.
2. Homebuyer tax credit caused a major disaster in housing as evidenced by this months' numbers.
3. ObamaCare causing premiuims to skyrocket.
and on and on and on.
-
No, but we now have objective facts showing this admn a failure in everything it has done. An educated person usually realizes failure and seeks to do something different.
1. The Stim Bill failed by the admns' own definition.
2. Homebuyer tax credit caused a major disaster in housing as evidenced by this months' numbers.
3. ObamaCare causing premiuims to skyrocket.
and on and on and on.
Reliable soureces?...not politically slanted please
-
Ask Clinton who gave Wall St. the opportunity to act like unchecked assholes? :D
Ask Bush who allowed it to continue and continued to wet his beak?
-
Reliable soureces?...not politically slanted please
This is what i'm talking about. If you spent more time reading RCP, Bloomberg, WSJ, etc, and less time comedians and jokers, you would know this.
1. Obama claimed that his stim bill would keep UE less than 8%
2. The Homebuyers' tax credit brought forward artificial demand not based on market forces, but a tax gimmick and now people are not buying period and prices and sales still crashing.
3. Most businesses, mine included, have just gotten 25% premium increases based on ObamaCare mandates. This has been widely reported in many sources.
-
Ask Bush who allowed it to continue and continued to wet his beak?
Yes and no. Bushes' appointing Cox to head the SEC was a disaster. However, the fannie freddy thing is mostly on the dems.
-
Little-known fact: Obama's failed stimulus program cost more than the Iraq war
By: Mark Tapscott
Editorial Page Editor
08/23/10 11:32 AM EDT
www.washingtonexaminer.c om
________________________ ________________________ ________________________
Expect to hear a lot about how much the Iraq war cost in the days ahead from Democrats worried about voter wrath against their unprecedented spending excesses.
The meme is simple: The economy is in a shambles because of Bush's economic policies and his war in Iraq. As American Thinker's Randall Hoven points out, that's the message being peddled by lefties as diverse as former Clinton political strategist James Carville, economist Joseph Stiglitz, and The Nation's Washington editor, Christopher Hayes.
The key point in the mantra is an alleged $3 trillion cost for the war. Well, it was expensive to be sure, in both blood and treasure, but, as Hoven notes, the CBO puts the total cost at $709 billion. To put that figure in the proper context of overall spending since the war began in 2003, Hoven provides this handy CBO chart showing the portion of the annual deficit attributable to the conflict:
But there is much more to be said of this data and Hoven does an admirable job of summarizing the highlights of such an analysis:
* Obama's stimulus, passed in his first month in office, will cost more than the entire Iraq War -- more than $100 billion (15%) more.
* Just the first two years of Obama's stimulus cost more than the entire cost of the Iraq War under President Bush, or six years of that war.
* Iraq War spending accounted for just 3.2% of all federal spending while it lasted.
* Iraq War spending was not even one quarter of what we spent on Medicare in the same time frame.
* Iraq War spending was not even 15% of the total deficit spending in that time frame. The cumulative deficit, 2003-2010, would have been four-point-something trillion dollars with or without the Iraq War.
* The Iraq War accounts for less than 8% of the federal debt held by the public at the end of 2010 ($9.031 trillion).
* During Bush's Iraq years, 2003-2008, the federal government spent more on education that it did on the Iraq War. (State and local governments spent about ten times more.)
Just some handy facts to recall during coming weeks as Obama and his congressional Democratic buddies get more desperate to put the blame for their spending policies on Bush and the war in Iraq. For more from Hoven, go here.
Wow. Talk about putting things in perspective.
-
This is what i'm talking about. If you spent more time reading RCP, Bloomberg, WSJ, etc, and less time comedians and jokers, you would know this.
1. Obama claimed that his stim bill would keep UE less than 8%
2. The Homebuyers' tax credit brought forward artificial demand not based on market forces, but a tax gimmick and now people are not buying period and prices and sales still crashing.
3. Most businesses, mine included, have just gotten 25% premium increases based on ObamaCare mandates. This has been widely reported in many sources.
Alls i wanted was a non bias link...
-
Alls i wanted was a non bias link...
I have posted on thes endlessly.
Here is agraph on Obama's promises of the Stim Bill vs reality alone.
As for the last pic, I will send you my copy of this book if you are interested in learning about economics and how things actually work in reality.
-
Yes and no. Bushes' appointing Cox to head the SEC was a disaster. However, the fannie freddy thing is mostly on the dems.
Bush had no power in his entire time in office to stop this?
-
Bush had no power in his entire time in office to stop this?
He wrote 15 times to Barney Frank and dodd to reign them in and it got locked up in committee by Frank. mcCain also tried to reign them in and was blocked by the dems.
Look, I loathe Bush for many reasons, but I know he tried to get the congress to act on this to no avail.
-
He wrote 15 times to Barney Frank and dodd to reign them in and it got locked up in committee by Frank. mcCain also tried to reign them in and was blocked by the dems.
Look, I loathe Bush for many reasons, but I know he tried to get the congress to act on this to no avail.
he wrote in crayon..they couldnt read it
-
he wrote in crayon..they couldnt read it
All jokes aside, the facts are what they are - Barney Frank blocked all called to reign in Fanny and Freddy in committee.
-
bump for a response from NT or straw or any other person who says bush is responsible for the economy going to shit...
-
Tony - dupes like Straw have no answer to this.
________________________ ________________________ ____________
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Flashback: When Obama Filibustered Fannie Mae Financial Reform
R.S. McCain has a reminder about Barack Obama's past:
n July 2005 . . . the Senate Banking Committee, then controlled by the Republicans, adopted tough regulatory legislation for the GSEs [government-sponsored entities, i.e., Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac] on a party-line vote — all Republicans in favor, all Democrats opposed. . . .
If legislation along the lines of the Senate committee’s bill had been enacted in that year, many if not all the losses that Fannie and Freddie have suffered, and will suffer in the future, might have been avoided.
Why was there no action in the full Senate? As most Americans know today, it takes 60 votes to cut off debate in the Senate, and the Republicans had only 55. To close debate and proceed to the enactment of the committee-passed bill, the Republicans needed five Democrats to vote with them. But in a 45 member Democratic caucus that included Barack Obama and the current Senate Banking Chairman Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.), these votes could not be found.[/color]No wonder why Obama wants greater regulation of the internet: it makes an historical blackout easier. Who could forget this video?
-
Hey Straw - what about this? I don't expect a coherent response from you.
-
Bush Called For Reform of FannieMae/FreddieMac 17 Times in 2008 Alone
Gateway Pundit: Bush Called For Reform of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac 17 Times in 2008 Alone… Dems Ignored Warnings
For many years the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of financial turmoil at a housing government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties. President Bush publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted. Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President’s repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.
2001
April: The Administration’s FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is “a potential problem,” because “financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity.”
2002
May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)
2003
January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years.
February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that “although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations,” “the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them.” As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. (“Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO,” OFHEO Report, 2/4/03)
September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO’s review found earnings manipulations.
September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact “legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises” and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.
October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.
November: Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any “legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk.” To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have “broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards” and “receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)
2004
February: The President’s FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: “The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator.” (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)
February: CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to “not take [the financial market's] strength for granted.” Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by “ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, “Keeping Fannie And Freddie’s House In Order,” Financial Times, 2/24/04)
June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying “We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System.” (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)
2005
April: Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying “Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system.” (Secretary John W. Snow, “Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee,” 4/13/05)
2007
July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse.
August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying “first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options.” (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07)
September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August – up 115 percent from the year before.
September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the previous month – the lowest level in nine years. Median sale price of existing homes fell six percent from the year before.
December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying “These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I’ve called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon.” (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07)
2008
January: Bank of America announces it will buy Countrywide.
January: Citigroup announces mortgage portfolio lost $18.1 billion in value.
February: Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, says “A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully.” (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)
March: Bear Stearns announces it will sell itself to JPMorgan Chase.
March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and “move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages.” (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)
April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and “modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes.” (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)
May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.
◦“Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans.” (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)
◦“[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator.” (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)
◦“Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans.” (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)
June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying “we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)
July: Congress heeds the President’s call for action and passes reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.
-
:D