Login

Rappster · 02-11-2009, 09:56 AM

I'm sorry, too...

You're dumb.

Go fuck yourself.

QUOTE (HemisFear @ Feb 11 2009, 07:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Meh, that was a bit harsh of me to say, but the guy so far is an utter disappointment in my eyes. Sooner or later he's going to have to realize that he's won and it's time to start .. you know...leading.

Love the Liberal agenda pointing fingers at Bush using fear (which he did)

Then in his speech the other night the guy says "This is the worst crisis we've seen since the great depression!" .. really....asshole...because the early 1980's were much worse than things are currently so do me a favor, don't do the EXACT thing you were saying you didn't like about Bush and the Republicans (use of fear) to get your bill passed. Please, go look at unemployment in the 80's before you use such sweeping commentary and that wonderful speech giving (Baptist church pasture) forceful tone of yours to make us believe that we're in trouble. No shit shirlock!

Then the guy says that the policies of TAX CUTS is what got us into this in the first place?! Are you kidding me?! Are you absolutely kidding me?! Nevermind Greenspan and the Fed going to the banks and telling them to change their lending standards and ALLOWING legislation that allowed for 30:1 leverage!!!!!! Nevermind Cox taking away the uptick rule and being COMPLETELY asleep at the wheel...nevermind the consumer who had no business buying a home in the first place....

And last but certainly not least, let's NOT nevermind the TRUE dirty little secret of WHY we can't let the banks fail, the 600 TRILLION dollars in derivatives (yes, reread that number again please, then slowly let it sink in that there isn't that much money in the entire world today....then go home, put your head on your pillow and start to do some critical thinking about this whole situation) that will come a calling if these guys go under...no..DONT tell the truth or anything....just blame the guy behind you and speak in an eloquent form, scare the shit out of everyone who listens to you. GREAT fucking job, so far there Barack...GREAT..FUCKING...JOB! Oh, and you're golden boy, TurboTax Tim, WONDERFUL way to give a "highly detailed and thourough report on the banking situation" yesterday buddy....thumbs...fucking...up!

What really bothers me is, I want the guy to do well, I really and honestly do...but people have him made out to be this hero and so far all I'm seeing is great speech deliveries, naive ideologies, and a people that are already scared, being told, to be more scared! RAWR!!!

So like I said....fuck Obama. and his minion of social agenda, Nancy Pelosi!

Sore topic for me sorry [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif[/img]

ruby23 · 02-11-2009, 10:05 AM

QUOTE (HemisFear @ Feb 11 2009, 07:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Meh, that was a bit harsh of me to say, but the guy so far is an utter disappointment in my eyes. Sooner or later he's going to have to realize that he's won and it's time to start .. you know...leading.

Love the Liberal agenda pointing fingers at Bush using fear (which he did)

Then in his speech the other night the guy says "This is the worst crisis we've seen since the great depression!" .. really....asshole...because the early 1980's were much worse than things are currently so do me a favor, don't do the EXACT thing you were saying you didn't like about Bush and the Republicans (use of fear) to get your bill passed. Please, go look at unemployment in the 80's before you use such sweeping commentary and that wonderful speech giving (Baptist church pasture) forceful tone of yours to make us believe that we're in trouble. No shit shirlock!

Then the guy says that the policies of TAX CUTS is what got us into this in the first place?! Are you kidding me?! Are you absolutely kidding me?! Nevermind Greenspan and the Fed going to the banks and telling them to change their lending standards and ALLOWING legislation that allowed for 30:1 leverage!!!!!! Nevermind Cox taking away the uptick rule and being COMPLETELY asleep at the wheel...nevermind the consumer who had no business buying a home in the first place....

And last but certainly not least, let's NOT nevermind the TRUE dirty little secret of WHY we can't let the banks fail, the 600 TRILLION dollars in derivatives (yes, reread that number again please, then slowly let it sink in that there isn't that much money in the entire world today....then go home, put your head on your pillow and start to do some critical thinking about this whole situation) that will come a calling if these guys go under...no..DONT tell the truth or anything....just blame the guy behind you and speak in an eloquent form, scare the shit out of everyone who listens to you. GREAT fucking job, so far there Barack...GREAT..FUCKING...JOB! Oh, and you're golden boy, TurboTax Tim, WONDERFUL way to give a "highly detailed and thourough report on the banking situation" yesterday buddy....thumbs...fucking...up!

What really bothers me is, I want the guy to do well, I really and honestly do...but people have him made out to be this hero and so far all I'm seeing is great speech deliveries, naive ideologies, and a people that are already scared, being told, to be more scared! RAWR!!!

So like I said....fuck Obama. and his minion of social agenda, Nancy Pelosi!

Sore topic for me sorry [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif[/img]
You're a fucking imbecile.

BT · 02-11-2009, 10:19 AM

Guys, let him have his say. I don't agree with pretty much anything he is saying (and dude, you are almost completely wrong with a couple of your points), but I would rather argue the points than just call him names.

hPOD · 02-11-2009, 10:23 AM

QUOTE (BT @ Feb 11 2009, 08:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Guys, let him have his say. I don't agree with pretty much anything he is saying (and dude, you are almost completely wrong with a couple of your points), but I would rather argue the points than just call him names.

Agreed. Politics is a very touchy subject, so I tend to steer away from such things on public forums. In this case, I'm curious as to why you/others disagree, and in specific, with what? Hemi's post seems quite angry, and perhaps for good reason, which probably sparked anger on the side of others who replied by calling him names rather than bothering to refute him.

Coldneck · 02-11-2009, 10:46 AM

I am middle of the road when it comes to politics. I registered Republican, but have voted democrat the last 2 elections. I encourage hearing both sides of the argument. This board is about 95% young liberal leaning. With the exception of Lance, the conservative side of things is rarely ever argued here. Hemis is entitled to his opinion, which a large number of people in the country share. Those that are just calling him names without forming an argument against his opinions are the idiots here. Politics are polarizing, but just calling someone an imbecile based on his or her political beliefs is juvenile. Believe it or not there are incredibly smart people on both sides of the political argument.

BT · 02-11-2009, 10:47 AM

QUOTE (hPOD @ Feb 11 2009, 08:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Feb 11 2009, 08:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Guys, let him have his say. I don't agree with pretty much anything he is saying (and dude, you are almost completely wrong with a couple of your points), but I would rather argue the points than just call him names.

Agreed. Politics is a very touchy subject, so I tend to steer away from such things on public forums. In this case, I'm curious as to why you/others disagree, and in specific, with what? Hemi's post seems quite angry, and perhaps for good reason, which probably sparked anger on the side of others who replied by calling him names rather than bothering to refute him.
</div>

I have LOTS of problems with what he said. To wit:

QUOTE Love the Liberal agenda pointing fingers at Bush using fear (which he did)

After living through 8 years of Bush explaining that if we don't elect him/invade Iraq/let him listen to our phone conversations/lock people up indefinitely/lock people up without trial/torture people/ etc etc/ then we are ALL GOING TO DIE, I find it hard to believe that someone is going to accuse the evil Liberals of having a fear based agenda.

QUOTE "This is the worst crisis we've seen since the great depression!" .. really....asshole...because the early 1980's were much worse than things are currently

The fact is we haven't come close to reaching the bottom yet, so if we haven't reached the level of the 1980's recession, it's only a matter of time. The idea that things were MUCH worse in the 80's is laughable. I suppose it's possible we could pull out of this before things get as bad as the 80's, but I've yet to hear ONE sensible economist who believes that.

QUOTE Then the guy says that the policies of TAX CUTS is what got us into this in the first place?

NO, that's not what he said. In fact, it's nowhere close to what he said. He said "tax cuts alone can't solve all of our economic problems". That's a reasonable statement. And it's pretty much supported by most economists.

The rest of his statement mostly consists of him swearing at Obama, and calling him a fear monger. To that, let me just make some points I find glaringly obvious.

1. He has been in power less than a month, and in that month he has done far more than just talk pretty.
2. It IS a very FUCKING SCARY time. Obama has every right to be trying to scare us.
3. If the stimulus isn't passed, and passed soon, things will get much worse. THAT is why he is scaring us. Waiting does us no good.
4. The Republicans don't know their heads from their asses on this particular subject. If we listen to John McCain, he will make the stimulus smaller, which by definition, would provide less stimulus, and he would make it with more tax cuts, which any economist will tell you is about the most inefficient way possible to stimulate the economy. Listening to them is a spectacularly bad idea.

Coldneck · 02-11-2009, 10:52 AM

QUOTE (BT @ Feb 11 2009, 09:47 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (hPOD @ Feb 11 2009, 08:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Feb 11 2009, 08:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Guys, let him have his say. I don't agree with pretty much anything he is saying (and dude, you are almost completely wrong with a couple of your points), but I would rather argue the points than just call him names.

Agreed. Politics is a very touchy subject, so I tend to steer away from such things on public forums. In this case, I'm curious as to why you/others disagree, and in specific, with what? Hemi's post seems quite angry, and perhaps for good reason, which probably sparked anger on the side of others who replied by calling him names rather than bothering to refute him.
</div>

I have LOTS of problems with what he said. To wit:

QUOTE Love the Liberal agenda pointing fingers at Bush using fear (which he did)

After living through 8 years of Bush explaining that if we don't elect him/invade Iraq/let him listen to our phone conversations/lock people up indefinitely/lock people up without trial/torture people/ etc etc/ then we are ALL GOING TO DIE, I find it hard to believe that someone is going to accuse the evil Liberals of having a fear based agenda.

QUOTE "This is the worst crisis we've seen since the great depression!" .. really....asshole...because the early 1980's were much worse than things are currently

The fact is we haven't come close to reaching the bottom yet, so if we haven't reached the level of the 1980's recession, it's only a matter of time. The idea that things were MUCH worse in the 80's is laughable. I suppose it's possible we could pull out of this before things get as bad as the 80's, but I've yet to hear ONE sensible economist who believes that.

QUOTE Then the guy says that the policies of TAX CUTS is what got us into this in the first place?

NO, that's not what he said. In fact, it's nowhere close to what he said. He said "tax cuts alone can't solve all of our economic problems". That's a reasonable statement. And it's pretty much supported by most economists.

The rest of his statement mostly consists of him swearing at Obama, and calling him a fear monger. To that, let me just make some points I find glaringly obvious.

1. He has been in power less than a month, and in that month he has done far more than just talk pretty.
2. It IS a very FUCKING SCARY time. Obama has every right to be trying to scare us.
3. If the stimulus isn't passed, and passed soon, things will get much worse. THAT is why he is scaring us. Waiting does us no good.
4. The Republicans don't know their heads from their asses on this particular subject. If we listen to John McCain, he will make the stimulus smaller, which by definition, would provide less stimulus, and he would make it with more tax cuts, which any economist will tell you is about the most inefficient way possible to stimulate the economy. Listening to them is a spectacularly bad idea.
</div>

BT, I agree with pretty everything you just said. Well done sir.

Kid · 02-11-2009, 11:03 AM

Mmontalto ... king of Fucktardia.

hPOD · 02-11-2009, 11:07 AM

QUOTE After living through 8 years of Bush explaining that if we don't elect him/invade Iraq/let him listen to our phone conversations/lock people up indefinitely/lock people up without trial/torture people/ etc etc/ then we are ALL GOING TO DIE, I find it hard to believe that someone is going to accuse the evil Liberals of having a fear based agenda.

I think his point was along the lines that Obama resorted to fear tactics to get his stimulus passed, which is a fair thing for him to say. Things went from, "we must pass this bill to help free up lending in our economy" to "OH MY GOD THE SKY IS FALLING EVERYONE'S GONNA BE BROKE AND THINGS ARE GOING TO BE WORSE THAN THEY WERE IN THE DEPRESSION IF WE DON'T PASS THIS BILL RIGHT NOW!$#!$#@!", and this happened almost overnight when members of congress, including some Democrats, balked at his original bill, which wasn't even his, it was Pelosi's.

QUOTE The fact is we haven't come close to reaching the bottom yet, so if we haven't reached the level of the 1980's recession, it's only a matter of time. The idea that things were MUCH worse in the 80's is laughable. I suppose it's possible we could pull out of this before things get as bad as the 80's, but I've yet to hear ONE sensible economist who believes that.

Fair enough, and I agree with this, however, I don't agree with listening to economists who just a year ago were telling us to buy homes and that the housing market was stable. Most of them, anyway. Some were spot on, but in either case, both sides were merely guessing.

QUOTE NO, that's not what he said. In fact, it's nowhere close to what he said. He said "tax cuts alone can't solve all of our economic problems". That's a reasonable statement. And it's pretty much supported by most economists.

I agree.

QUOTE 2. It IS a very FUCKING SCARY time. Obama has every right to be trying to scare us.

I think people are scared enough without our leaders scaring them even more. Citizens tend to get disorderly and afraid of the unknown, leaders are the ones who calm them. Obama doesn't need to be tossing gas cans on that fire right now.

QUOTE 3. If the stimulus isn't passed, and passed soon, things will get much worse. THAT is why he is scaring us. Waiting does us no good.

I fell for that once, too. As the saying goes, fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. Bush used that same argument on the first stimulus and I still don't feel very...stimulated. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img] The fact is, nobody knows what will happen with or without this stimulus.

QUOTE 4. The Republicans don't know their heads from their asses on this particular subject. If we listen to John McCain, he will make the stimulus smaller, which by definition, would provide less stimulus, and he would make it with more tax cuts, which any economist will tell you is about the most inefficient way possible to stimulate the economy. Listening to them is a spectacularly bad idea.

I don't think either party knows their heads from their asses on this particular subject. I get the feeling they're running around a baseball diamond on a stormy day while holding a coke bottle in the air...you know, to catch lightning in it. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif[/img]

You do make some good points, though!

ruby23 · 02-11-2009, 11:16 AM

If it walks like an imbecile, talks like an imbecile, it's an imbecile. I'm glad BT went through and highlighted some of the gross inaccuracies in the ridiculous, unprovoked, uneducated rant . . . but I wasn't gonna waste my time doing it. I'm not gonna debate something with someone unable to comprehend what they're even talking about. BTW, I'm not a Democrat.

BT · 02-11-2009, 11:33 AM

QUOTE I think his point was along the lines that Obama resorted to fear tactics to get his stimulus passed, which is a fair thing for him to say. Things went from, "we must pass this bill to help free up lending in our economy" to "OH MY GOD THE SKY IS FALLING EVERYONE'S GONNA BE BROKE AND THINGS ARE GOING TO BE WORSE THAN THEY WERE IN THE DEPRESSION IF WE DON'T PASS THIS BILL RIGHT NOW!$#!$#@!", and this happened almost overnight when members of congress, including some Democrats, balked at his original bill, which wasn't even his, it was Pelosi's.

QUOTE I fell for that once, too. As the saying goes, fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. Bush used that same argument on the first stimulus and I still don't feel very...stimulated. smile.gif The fact is, nobody knows what will happen with or without this stimulus.

I quoted both of these, because I think they speak to the same issue. You have to understand one thing when we talk of this. Bush DID use the same argument, and essentially he was wrong, but the push to get TARP passed and the argument that Obama is making right now are two (almost) entirely different arguments. Bush and Paulson were worried about a credit crunch when the original TARP negotiations began. They thought we were in the midst of a liquidity crisis, and that priming the lending pump would get things going again. They (obviously) were wrong (and you are correct that they also pushed it through too fast). The stimulus is an entirely different matter. We are HEMORRHAGING jobs right now. RIGHT NOW. It's happening. It's not theoretical. And every job we lose is one more person that can't spend money in an economy that desperately needs spending. As spending decreases, more jobs are lost. As more jobs are lost, spending decreases. It is an ugly fucking spiral. And it's happening as we speak. The stimulus needs to have happened 6 months ago. It's that critical.

Furthermore, Obama really isn't trying to scare the people so much as to light a fire under the asses of the Republicans. For some godforsaken reason the Republicans are treating the stimulus as if it is a budget that needs to be balanced. It's a SPENDING BILL. We need to spend money. In normal times, that's fiscally irresponsible. Right now it's a necessity. I heard a great line the other night concerning McCain's approach to this. Cutting back on the spending in a spending bill is like taking a shortcut while you are jogging. You can do it, but why in God's name would you?

QUOTE Fair enough, and I agree with this, however, I don't agree with listening to economists who just a year ago were telling us to buy homes and that the housing market was stable. Most of them, anyway. Some were spot on, but in either case, both sides were merely guessing.

Yes, many got things wrong, that's true, but many got it right (Roubini, Krugman, etc). But seriously, can you find me ONE decent economist who doesn't think that things are going to get worse, probably much worse, before they get better?

***rok*** · 02-11-2009, 11:36 AM

Put me in the camp that doesn't believe the stimulus will do much to avert crisis. We're headed for rougher times, and I'm not advocating doing nothing, but the record of Keynsian tactics or even Supply Side remedies being used as quick fixes for sick economies is spotty at best. People don't want to admit that it took almost 20 years to get out of the Great Depression, so believe me when I say that I wish the President well, but I have my doubts.

BT · 02-11-2009, 11:51 AM

QUOTE (rok @ Feb 11 2009, 09:36 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Put me in the camp that doesn't believe the stimulus will do much to avert crisis. We're headed for rougher times, and I'm not advocating doing nothing, but the record of Keynsian tactics or even Supply Side remedies being used as quick fixes for sick economies is spotty at best. People don't want to admit that it took almost 20 years to get out of the Great Depression, so believe me when I say that I wish the President well, but I have my doubts.

The thing is Rok, I think most economists agree with you. Things are far too gone for a quick fix. The stimulus won't "fix" anything, but it might help avert a depression. I think even Obama would agree with that.

HemisFear · 02-11-2009, 11:52 AM

Finally, a well thought out, articulate point...however .. please.. allow me to retort!

QUOTE The fact is we haven't come close to reaching the bottom yet, so if we haven't reached the level of the 1980's recession, it's only a matter of time. The idea that things were MUCH worse in the 80's is laughable. I suppose it's possible we could pull out of this before things get as bad as the 80's, but I've yet to hear ONE sensible economist who believes that.

Really? And you know this how? Please, tell me exactly where we are going in the stock market, and unemployment, please also tell me when we'll see recovery. <b>This is part of the problem, the bottom line is WE DONT KNOW....NO ONE KNOWS...AND OBAMA PRETENDING LIKE HE DOES KNOW ISN'T LEADERSHIP!</b> What crystal ball do you have that we don't have? What FACTUAL evidence rather than conjecture do you have to support such a claim? Other than someone telling you that we're in the worst situation we could be in (and yes I agree with you that it's bad out there). The bottom line remains sir, that things were WORSE in the early 1980's than they are RIGHT now.

Here are some facts rather than stated opinions:

TODAY's Unemployement Rate: 7.6%
Early 1980's unemployement Rate: High Marker 10.8% (80's were worse)
SOURCE: [http]http://www.miseryindex.us/URbymonth.asp[/http]

GDP: [http]http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2008/1/30/gdpannualized1_2.png[/http]

As you'll see the 80's were worse than things are currently.....once again...Gross Domestic Product losses were worse then, than they currently are so the statement that it's "since the great depression" are false. Could it get there? Sure, probably, maybe, but we just dont know. What we do know are the facts and the facts are, he's lying......or simply isn't doing his homework.

Couple that with current home ownership rates, average income, personal wealth, and you pretty much realize that not only are we in a much better situation currently than we were then but oh yah, what was that thing we were going through at the time....um...oh that's right The Cold War.

Bottom line, the only way to say this correctly is that we THINK this COULD get as bad as the Great Depression if something isn't done. Unfortunately he didn't say that, he said it IS ... much different statement and only supports my claim that he's using fear to quickly get his bill passed. Congratulations Obama, you now have your near 1 trillion dollars.

QUOTE After living through 8 years of Bush explaining that if we don't elect him/invade Iraq/let him listen to our phone conversations/lock people up indefinitely/lock people up without trial/torture people/ etc etc/ then we are ALL GOING TO DIE, I find it hard to believe that someone is going to accuse the evil Liberals of having a fear based agenda.

The statement I made sir, was that the Liberals were pointing fingers at Bush for using fear, and now they are doing the same thing....please don't misquote me and frame your statements in a manner in which you feel is appropriate for you....that being said.

Yes, I've heard this arguement over and over. While <b>I agree with you that Bush had MANY problems</b>, as ALL presidents do, I was never a fan of the Patriot act but I do have one simple question for you...just one.

After Bush was in office on 9/11, 9 months into his presidency and we were attacked by foriegn invaders for only the second time in modern history........<b>How many times were we attacked after 9/11?</b>

Hate the guys policies, hate the way he was smug and treated the media, hate how he was VASTLY too lax on regulation.....but as with all things...taking a step back....seems to me that he defended our way of life pretty god damn well..which is any presidents #1 priority.

QUOTE NO, that's not what he said. In fact, it's nowhere close to what he said. He said "tax cuts alone can't solve all of our economic problems". That's a reasonable statement. And it's pretty much supported by most economists.

<b>You're right, I should have qualified my interperitation of the statement better. I concede your point.</b>

QUOTE The rest of his statement mostly consists of him swearing at Obama, and calling him a fear monger. To that, let me just make some points I find glaringly obvious.

1. He has been in power less than a month, and in that month he has done far more than just talk pretty.
2. It IS a very FUCKING SCARY time. Obama has every right to be trying to scare us.
3. If the stimulus isn't passed, and passed soon, things will get much worse. THAT is why he is scaring us. Waiting does us no good.
4. The Republicans don't know their heads from their asses on this particular subject. If we listen to John McCain, he will make the stimulus smaller, which by definition, would provide less stimulus, and he would make it with more tax cuts, which any economist will tell you is about the most inefficient way possible to stimulate the economy. Listening to them is a spectacularly bad idea.

Actually I'm not calling him a fear monger, again, don't frame your statements. I was simply making the point that he campaigned on Bush's use of fear to drive policy...and he's doing the same thing.

1. <b>I'll concede that he hasn't been in office long enough yet to see any sort of recovery.</b> That however doesn't mean that I have to like the way that he is handling the situation. To your point however, I agree, it'll take far more time than this. But you must be willing to concede that he's only going to be able to blame someone else for this for about a year. He's pinning everything on this stimulous working, and if it does...he'll get reelected..and if it doesn't..he won't.

2. Yes, absolutely, it's a very scary time....but please tell me where in the constitution his job is to scare the American people? Justification of his actions after he specifically campaigned against it makes him a hypocrit....or just a standard politician. That's what worries me most about this guy. People actually believe that he's not a typical politicain, when he is. Please don't hide behind the term "right" because what you mean is it's his job to do what he's doing.

Funny, I always thought the job of a leader was to A. Formulate plans and a way to execute them B. Avoid disaster C. Instill CONFIDENCE and many other attributes that come along with such a vast position of power and responsibility. <b>The point remains however that he critisized the Bush administration for using fear as a political tactic to get his agenda through and he's doing the SAME exact thing (by your own admission!)</b>

3. The stimulous was passed yesterday.....I think both sides can agree on one thing..that something must be done. What we don't agree on is HOW it's done. I do find it a bit curious though that you're speaking on an item in that was already passed as if it hasn't been.

4. McCain proposed a smaller incremental approach to stimulous. You're framing your statement where McCain was clear that what he wanted was to start out smaller, and come back as the need arises. <b>What the true comparision is, is direct spending : tax cuts. Democrats want 2:1 in favor of direct spending, Republians want 2:1 in favor of tax cuts. </b> Now we can go round and round on this subject but the bottom line is that none of us know and I will concede that it's just as much opinion and conjecture as anything else. To think that any political party is anymore or less informed than their counter-party constituants sir is blatantly absurd. I do not think you are less informed or more informed than me because you may or may not be Jewish, and I certainly don't think that you are or are not as informed as me because I'm a Republican. Statements like that only lend credo to biggotry.

To address my rant relative to Geithner, TurboTax Tim is obviously a bright guy but a man preaching transparency and showing up to a press conference (which I think we can agree are mostly left leaning) with such a small amount of detail was foolish and short sighteted. That's why the media lit into him yesterday.

Keep in mind, this is the same guy that presided over the Lehman Brothers debacle....

***rok*** · 02-11-2009, 12:02 PM

QUOTE (BT @ Feb 11 2009, 09:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rok @ Feb 11 2009, 09:36 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Put me in the camp that doesn't believe the stimulus will do much to avert crisis. We're headed for rougher times, and I'm not advocating doing nothing, but the record of Keynsian tactics or even Supply Side remedies being used as quick fixes for sick economies is spotty at best. People don't want to admit that it took almost 20 years to get out of the Great Depression, so believe me when I say that I wish the President well, but I have my doubts.

The thing is Rok, I think most economists agree with you. Things are far too gone for a quick fix. The stimulus won't "fix" anything, but it might help avert a depression. I think even Obama would agree with that.
</div>
And I agree with you that some sort of spending/tax bill is going to be helpful in the short-term. What I'm still concerned about is that this was a capital/credit markets induced crisis, and I haven't seen much proposed in terms of new regulatory structures that would prevent this from happening again in another 10 years. What we're doing right now is trying to spend, cut taxes and interest rates and hope for the best. Those things won't hurt, you have to admit they also played a big part in creating the mess that we're currently in. I'm not saying not to do these things right now, because any type of cash infusion into the economy will have an effect (we are of course talking around 1-1.3 trillion including interest or 10% of the GDP), but I just would like to see more regulatory reforms and new safeguards put in place that would lead me to believe that this doesn't happen again. TARP 2.0 doesn't really address the core of the problems either, but I guess it's a start.

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me