Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: OzmO on June 03, 2011, 02:05:20 PM
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/03/mitt-romneys-economic-cla_n_870770.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/03/mitt-romneys-economic-cla_n_870770.html)
Mitt Romney's Economic Claims vs. The Facts
WASHINGTON — In rhetorical excesses marking his entry in the presidential campaign, Mitt Romney said the economy worsened under President Barack Obama, when it actually improved, and criticized the president for issuing apologies to the world that were never made.
A look at some of the statements by Romney on Thursday in announcing his bid for the Republican nomination and how they compare with the facts:
ROMNEY: "When he took office, the economy was in recession. He made it worse. And he made it last longer."
THE FACTS: The gross domestic product, the prime measure of economic strength, shrank by a severe 6.8 percent annual rate before Obama became president. The declines eased after he took office and economic growth, however modest, resumed. The recession officially ended six months into his presidency. Unemployment, however, has worsened under Obama, going from 7.8 percent in January 2009 to 9.1 percent last month. It hit 10.1 percent in October 2009.
A case can be made for and against the idea that Obama's policies made the economy worse than it needed to be and that the recession lasted longer than it might have under another president. Such arguments are at the core of political debate. But Obama did not, as Romney alleged, make the economy worse than it was when he took office.
___
ROMNEY: "A few months into office, he traveled around the globe to apologize for America."
THE FACTS: Obama has not apologized for America. What he has done, in travels early in his presidency and since, is to make clear his belief that the U.S. is not beyond reproach. He has told foreigners that the U.S. at times acted "contrary to our traditions and ideals" in its treatment of terrorist suspects, that "America has too often been selective in its promotion of democracy," that the U.S. "certainly shares blame" for international economic turmoil and has sometimes shown arrogance toward allies. Obama, whose criticisms of America's past were typically balanced by praise, was in most cases taking issue with policies or the record of the previous administration, not an unusual approach for a new president – or a presidential candidate. Romney's actual point seems to be that Obama has been too critical of his country.
But there has been no formal – or informal – apology. No saying "sorry" on behalf of America.
___
ROMNEY: "Three years later, foreclosures are still at record levels. Three years later the prices of homes continue to fall."
THE FACTS: Although foreclosures remain high, the number of U.S. homes that were repossessed by lenders fell in April, compared with March and a year ago, according to the foreclosure listing service RealtyTrac Inc. Romney's claim about home prices, though, is supported by the Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller 20-city monthly index. It found home prices in big metro areas have sunk to their lowest since 2002. Since the bubble burst in 2006, prices have fallen more than they did during the Great Depression.
___
ROMNEY: "Instead of encouraging entrepreneurs and employers, he raises their taxes, piles on record-breaking mounds of regulation and bureaucracy and gives more power to union bosses."
THE FACTS: Romney ignores ambitious tax-cutting pushed by Obama. The stimulus plan early in his presidency cut taxes broadly for the middle class and business. He more recently won a one-year tax cut for 2011 that reduced most workers' Social Security payroll taxes by nearly a third. He also campaigned in support of extending the Bush-era tax cuts for all except the wealthy, whose taxes he wanted to raise. In office, he accepted a deal from Republicans extending the tax cuts for all. As for tax increases, Obama won congressional approval to raise them on tobacco and tanning salons. The penalty for those who don't buy health insurance, once coverage is mandatory, is a form of taxation. Several large tax increases in the health care law have not yet taken effect.
___
ROMNEY: "The expectation was that we'd have to raise taxes but I refused. I ordered a review of all state spending, made tough choices and balanced the budget without raising taxes."
THE FACTS: Romney largely held the line on tax increases when he was Massachusetts governor but that's only part of the revenue story. The state raised business taxes by $140 million in one year with measures branded "loophole closings," the vast majority recommended by Romney. Moreover, the Republican governor and Democratic lawmakers raised hundreds of millions of dollars from higher fees and fines, taxation by another name. Romney himself proposed creating 33 new fees and increasing 57 others – enough to raise $59 million. Anti-tax groups were split on his performance. The Club for Growth called the fee increases and business taxes troubling. Citizens for Limited Taxation praised him for being steadfast in supporting an income tax rollback.
___
Associated Press writers Steve LeBlanc in Boston and Jim Drinkard in Washington contributed to this report.
-
Dear god is that moronic.
-
Pretty trivial, but a good "running cover" story to shield Obama.
Especially this gem:
ROMNEY: "When he took office, the economy was in recession. He made it worse. And he made it last longer."
THE FACTS: The gross domestic product, the prime measure of economic strength, shrank by a severe 6.8 percent annual rate before Obama became president. The declines eased after he took office and economic growth, however modest, resumed. The recession officially ended six months into his presidency. Unemployment, however, has worsened under Obama, going from 7.8 percent in January 2009 to 9.1 percent last month. It hit 10.1 percent in October 2009.
A case can be made for and against the idea that Obama's policies made the economy worse than it needed to be and that the recession lasted longer than it might have under another president. Such arguments are at the core of political debate. But Obama did not, as Romney alleged, make the economy worse than it was when he took office.
There is no growth, zero, none, zilch. If there was and it was sustainable than the Fed would end QE. GDP is propped up by massive Fed stimulus, massive govt. programs and massive amounts of increased govt. spending. Think of the deficit of 1.5 trillion or so as stimulus as well. All of that for absolutely nothing. Talk about not being able to take an objective look.
It's from Huffington Post so I guess they kinda have to roll out this drivel.
-
romney's new strategy is to parrot tea party catch phrases that bachmann was saying years before him.
-
why do they lie don't they realize that everone can look up everything now.the only one they are going to fool are the far right nuts, aka 333386
-
why do they lie don't they realize that everone can look up everything now.the only one they are going to fool are the far right nuts, aka 333386
The economy is worse and the GDP number also is a pricy of govt spending.
-
Facts have a strong liberal bias
-
Yeah, booming economy straw. Lmfao.
-
Facts have a strong liberal bias
A scant 58,000 jobs added last month says that liberals like you wouldn't know facts if they punched you right in your Bay-Area elitist face. :)
The sinking of the SS Obama went into overdrive today. Good thing he's been focusing on jobs "like a laser", though. I could only imagine where we'd be if we wasn't devoting all his time to fixing the economy and doing something dumb like giving billions to Muslims or hitting fundraiser after fundraiser.
-
A scant 58,000 jobs added last month says that liberals like you wouldn't know facts if they punched you right in your Bay-Area elitist face. :)
ADD much?
what does the anemic job report today have to do with Romney and the topic of this thread?
-
Half of which were from mcdonalds.
Remember pelosi screaming about that a few years ago?
-
ADD much?
what does the anemic job report today have to do with Romney and the topic of this thread?
I'm just making sure that you're aware of the horrifically atrocious jobs report that was released today. That sound you heard when it hit the internet this morning was the last bit of air being let out of the liberal agenda. :)
Half of which were from mcdonalds.
Remember pelosi screaming about that a few years ago?
Piglosi is the biggest piece of shit in politics. A pathetic opportunist just like the rest of them.
-
I'm just making sure that you're aware of the horrifically atrocious jobs report that was released today. That sound you heard when it hit the internet this morning was the last bit of air being let out of the liberal agenda. :)
Piglosi is the biggest piece of shit in politics. A pathetic opportunist just like the rest of them.
liberal agenda = trying to fix the disaster of the past 8 years of Republican policy
-
Ha ha ha ha - aint working out too well now huh?
-
liberal agenda = trying to fix the disaster of the past 8 years of Republican policy spending this country into the abyss.
Fixed. Give it a rest already.
-
Ha ha ha ha - aint working out too well now huh?
nope and part of the reason is the banking legislation
I agree with Bernake that credit it too tight and I think that's a big cause of these very weak recovery
-
nope and part of the reason is the banking legislation
I agree with Bernake that credit it too tight and I think that's a big cause of these very weak recovery
You mean the Dodd-Frank legislation that pathetic liberals like Chucky Schumer voted for and who has now spent the last 10 months since voting in favor of it criticizing every facet of it? Hahahaha!
-
Fixed. Give it a rest already.
so you think spending by Obama is causing the problem
feel free to elaborate (assuming you're capable of doing so)
let's hear some specific details
-
You mean the Dodd-Frank legislation that pathetic liberals like Chucky Schumer voted for and who has now spent the last 10 months since voting in favor of it criticizing every facet of it? Hahahaha!
do you remember me ever being in favor of it?
-
so you think spending by Obama is causing the problem
feel free to elaborate (assuming you're capable of doing so)
let's hear some specific details
What's there to elaborate?
Over 14 trillion in debt and rapidly climbing.
58,000 jobs added and a U6 of 16% even after watching Dems spend in a way that put Bush to shame.
US debt on the verge of being downgraded by Moody's.
Obama doing everything in the world but actually addressing the economy.
You should tell everyone how you think the stimulus wasn't big enough. It's always funny when people with no economics background advocate Keynesian economics. Ask Japan how well that worked out for them. ::)
How badly does it hurt you watching the SS Obama sink like it is?
-
do you remember me ever being in favor of it?
Maybe you liberals should have thought it through. Or did you think that US banks were the only financial institutions on the planet?
You're basically saying that the dems are pretty fucking stupid and can't even see nor grasp the most simplest of potential outcomes to legislation they propose.
-
What's there to elaborate?
Over 14 trillion in debt and rapidly climbing.
58,000 jobs added and a U6 of 16% even after watching Dems spend in a way that put Bush to shame.
US debt on the verge of being downgraded by Moody's.
Obama doing everything in the world but actually addressing the economy.
You should tell everyone how you think the stimulus wasn't big enough. It's always funny when people with no economics background advocate Keynesian economics. Ask Japan how well that worked out for them. ::)
How badly does it hurt you watching the SS Obama sink like it is?
you said suggested that spending is causing the problem
give us an example or two
should be easy for you
-
Maybe you liberals should have thought it through. Or did you think that US banks were the only financial institutions on the planet?
You're basically saying that the dems are pretty fucking stupid and can't even see nor grasp the most simplest of potential outcomes to legislation they propose.
I criticized it from the beginning so go bitch and moan to someone else
-
you said suggested that spending is causing the problem
give us an example or two
should be easy for you
Sure.
The nearly $1 trillion stimulus bill that did NOTHING but push unemployment over 10%. :)
Oh wait, you think Obama didn't spend enough on that. LOL, my bad. ::)
I criticized it from the beginning so go bitch and moan to someone else
Yet you still blindly worship the people who hammered it through.
Got to laugh at that. Yet ANOTHER catastrophic fuck-up by the Dem party. Seems to be all they're good for.
-
Sure.
The nearly $1 trillion stimulus bill that did NOTHING but push unemployment over 10%. :)
Oh wait, you think Obama didn't spend enough on that. LOL, my bad. ::)
great
show us exactly how the stimulus pushed UE over 10%
-
great
show us exactly how the stimulus pushed UE over 10%
Hahaha, you think I'm going to waste my Friday night digging up facts to support my claim? Nope. I'm out of here in 10 minutes.
But all I need to really do to prove my point is ask you to show me where all those the shovel-ready jobs are. Because you and I both know you can't answer that as those "jobs" are long gone. The stimulus was billed by Obama as essential to keeping unemployment under 8%. UE went to 10% and over in the months after. UE6 still at 16%. Thanks for playing.
Why don't you prove that the reckless liberal spending is actually fixing the economy? After all, you're the guy who thinks Obama isn't spending enough and you clearly know better than Moody's, the IMF and every other economic expert on the planet not named Paul Krugman.
-
Hahaha, you think I'm going to waste my Friday night digging up facts to support my claim? Nope. All I need to do is ask you where the shovel-ready jobs are? Because you and I both know you can't answer that as those "jobs" are long gone.
Why don't you prove that the reckless liberal spending is actually fixing the economy? After all, you're the guy who thinks Obama isn't spending enough and you clearly know better than Moody's, the IMF and every other economic expert on the planet not named Paul Krugman.
of course not
I expect you to throw out Republican talking points that you have no clue how to support and then run away when challenged for some details
just like you always do
-
CONGRATULATIONS LIBERALS!! This is another example of what 4.5 years of Progressive Legislation looks like.
Obama 2009: "The stimulus will create thousands of shovel-ready jobs"
Obama 2010: "There is no such thing as a shovel-ready job" (NY Times interview).
RECORD Unemployment
RECORD Foreclosures
RECORD Poverty Rates
RECORD Food Stamps
RECORD Business Failures
RECORD Gas Prices
RECORD Personal Bankruptcies
RECORD Low Average Salaries
RECORD Inflation (food prices rising rapidly)
RECORD Car Repossessions
RECORD Welfare
RECORD Stale Housing Market
RECORD Low Dollar Value
RECORD Low U.S. Credit Rating
RECORD Debt
RECORD Deficit
of course not
I expect you to throw out Republican talking points that you have no clue how to support and then run away when challenged for some details
just like you always do
I can't think of a single instance of you ever actually supporting a point of yours with facts. :)
Sadly, you're a typical pussy who avoids threads asking you to do just that.
-
now show us how exactly how the stimulus pushed UE over 10%
that was your claim right?
The nearly $1 trillion stimulus bill that did NOTHING but push unemployment over 10%. :)
let's see some proof of your claim
-
1. Bush crashes economy
2. Obama makes it ten times worse
3. Romney claims he will bring change and fiscal responsibility to get elected then he will continue the same policies of the previous two
They all work for the same people
-
1. Bush crashes economy
2. Obama makes it ten times worse
3. Romney claims he will bring change and fiscal responsibility to get elected then he will continue the same policies of the previous two
They all work for the same people
Getbig is stuck in the left-right dichotomy....
-
no the economy took massive shit under obama
bailouts 0.5 T before obama 5.0 after
thanks dems!!
20% unemployment
bigger more expensive governmetn everywhere
government fails at everything
we now have gov spending more than ever in hsitory
thank obama u fuckup!!
onyl good thing he ever said was isael back to 1967 border adn palestine state
Bush got the ball rolling for his buddy Obama. You can't deny that. An establishment republican is the same thing as an establishment democrat. The overall policy hasn't changed in 70 years.
-
Getbig is stuck in the left-right dichotomy....
Yep. Amazing that people think that by electing Romney things will change. We need an honest independent or a true constitutional conservative
-
This isn't about romney but the authors' bogus claim that obama did not make matters worse. I know the msm is in the tank for obama - but come on - this article is beyond ludicrous.
By almost every single objective measure things aee drastically worse.
To claim otherwise is pure nonsense.
-
::)
How can anyone consider this garbage news?
Romney's claims versus a team of neutered liberal pundits opinions would be more of an accurate title.
-
They try to point out that job losses did peak and start to decline shortly after he became president. But this is just a function of the economy falling far enough to correct itself. It has nothing to do with Obama. For the final 3 months of Bush's presidency, the market was realitively calm. There was no more bad news coming out of the financial sector. It didnt start crashing again until Obama became president, his innagural address, and the day he signed that disasterious stimulus bill. I would argue that Obama was dealt the perfect deck of cards. He inherited the economy at a point in which it had already corrected itself. It is absolutly unacceptable to be stuck at 10% unemployment for 2 years. The very fact that the unemployemnt rate hasnt risen above 10% means the economy corrected itself. Therefore, it should be growing atleast at somewhat of a pace. But its not. ITs stuck. Interest rates are at all time lows, Therefore, there is no excuse for the lack of job growth.
-
Obamacare, dodd frank, playing games on the taxes, card check, crazy sc picks, rampant inflation, epa madness, etc have all injected a huge amount of uncertainty into the economy to where businesses refuse to hire anyone.
This is squarely on obama. To claim he did not make matters worse is so laughable and absurd its beyond words.
-
liberal agenda = trying to fix the disaster of the past 8 years of Republican policy
You are nitwit. Obama inherited an economy at 7% UE. Three years into his presidency it is at over 9%. You liberals judge a President by comparing the present with the past. I.E. Economy under Bush to what he inherited from Clinton. When the same is done with Obama, then he should be found responsible for making the economy worst. There is nothing Bush did to still affect the economy 3 years after he left office. There is no such residual effect from any of his legislations. The only legislation that was still in effect when Obama took office had to do with taxes and Obama and Dems had a choice whether to renew it or not. Basically, you are pretty stupid to still blame Bush for anything. Especially when Dems had control of Congress the last 2 years of Bush's presidency in which he was a lame duck president and even with all that, he left the economy at a much lower UE than it is now.
Educate yourself:
Editorial: Jobs Slump — It's The Policy, Stupid
Posted 06/03/2011 07:00 PM ET
Recession: Two years into a "recovery," the unemployment rate leaps to 9.1% and just 54,000 new jobs are created. Is this just "bumps on the road to recovery," as the White House insists, or something more dangerous?
This has been the most miserable recovery in modern history. Not only are there not enough jobs being created, but also the economy itself looks to be stalling.
Gross domestic product grew a paltry 1.8% during the first quarter, and most economists expect something similar for the second quarter. Double dip? It's possible.
As we noted earlier last week before the new jobs data came out, the U.S. is already in a growth recession — defined as an economy that's growing too slowly to keep unemployment from rising.
Yet the Obama administration is crowing about its accomplishments as if slowing growth and rising joblessness have nothing to do with its bad policies.
"The initiatives put in place by this administration — such as the payroll tax cut and business incentives for investment — have contributed to solid employment growth overall this year, but this report is a reminder of the challenges that remain," said Austan Goolsbee, Obama's top economic adviser.
"Solid employment growth"? Since the end of last year, job growth has averaged 130,500 a month — about the number of people who enter the workforce each month. That's not "solid" enough.
By the way, the unemployment rate has been below 9% for just five months since Obama took office — and three of those months were in the first 12 weeks of his presidency, before his policies took effect.
Even so, President Obama on Friday visited Chrysler workers, lauding the government's bailout for the re-emergence of the auto industry, which has added 113,000 jobs over the last two years.
What he didn't say was that GM, the bailout's poster boy, lost taxpayers $14 billion, and the total cost of his stimulus and bailout plan has now risen to $830 billion.
Obama was unflappable. "This economy took a big hit — it's taking a while to mend," he told Chrysler workers, reciting high gas prices, Japan's earthquake and the Mideast as the "head winds" facing the economy.
How about the head wind of bad government policies that, based on Congressional Budget Office data, have cost the economy over $760 billion in lost economic output in the past two years — and millions of jobs?
This lost output is the Obamanomics growth tax. Too much tinkering, too much debt, too much spending.
"By failing to alleviate the uncertainty businesses are feeling, Washington continues to stifle hiring," said Chamber of Commerce economist Martin Regalia.
This "uncertainty," by the way, is why businesses, with their $2 trillion in cash, stay on the sidelines. At this point in a recovery, they should be adding hundreds of thousands of workers each month.
That they aren't is a damning indictment of Obama's big-spending, high-debt, Keynesian strategy that has emerged as one of the great failures of economic policy-making in modern times.
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/574400/201106031900/US-Jobs-Hole-Just-Got-Deeper.htm
-
When a president and his advisers stand in front of that nation and claim that their stimulus bill is needed to keep UE at 8% or lower and the opposite occurs, guess what? That legislation is the problem. That is why Obama is directly at fault for the current failing economy. They introduced the Stim Bill and ever since the economy has been terrible. That is the direct link. How can anyone continue to stupidly deny it?
-
When a president and his advisers stand in front of that nation and claim that their stimulus bill is needed to keep UE at 8% or lower and the opposite occurs, guess what? That legislation is the problem. That is why Obama is directly at fault for the current failing economy. They introduced the Stim Bill and ever since the economy has been terrible. That is the direct link. How can anyone continue to stupidly deny it?
Because it's a choice. Straw, blackass, mal, Andre Benny et al will never admit their brilliant Harvard lawyer genius messiah is a failure.
-
3333, these liberals are so stupid.
If it is still Bush's fault, then I guess once the economy picks up, Bush should get credit for it. I mean, when exactly does Bush's influence ends? Why would it end once the economy recovers? If Bush's legislations were so far reaching, maybe those legislations needed 4 or 5 years after he left office to have positive results.
Yesterday, I heard Obama's press secretary brag about having 14 months of positive job growth. All of the sudden that is good enough. How come it wasn't good enough when there were 52 straight months of job growth under Bush? Liberals have to be the dumbest people in the world.
-
3333, these liberals are so stupid.
If it still Bush's fault, then I guess once the economy picks up Bush should get credit for it. I mean, when exactly does Bush's influence ends? Why would it end once the economy recovers? If Bush's legislations were so far reaching, maybe those legislations needed 4 or 5 years after he left office to have positive results.
Yesterday, I heard Obama's press secretary brag about having 14 months of positive job growth. All of the sudden that is good enough. How come it wasn't good enough when there were 52 straight months of job growth under Bush? Liberals have to be the dumbest people in the world.
Remember when ue was five percent and the libs were screaming about all the jobs being fast food jobs? Ha ha ha.