View Full Version : is it right?
Hooahguy
10-31-2008, 13:19
...to blame bush for the bad economy?
LittleGrizzly
10-31-2008, 13:27
From what i understand of economics we have boom and bust periods anyway, and it does seem that bush was unlucky enough to be in charge during a bust period, and of course im sure losing the twin towers had a little bit ofa negative effect on the economy also....
All that said Bush made the situation worse through bad policy choices, tax cuts and increased spending, these 3 things combined with a bust period anyway, is a combanation for disastier...
So, yes it is right to blame bush for the economy, just not completely...
Well, if you had a communist state and he controlled the whole economy, perhaps.
yesdachi
10-31-2008, 14:58
No 1 person is entirely at fault.
Hooahguy
10-31-2008, 15:12
ultimatly we must blame ourselves for getting loans we couldnt keep, starting this thnig.
i just think bush took the same route hoover did and thought this thing would blow over, and when it didnt, well..... we all know what happened.....
No 1 person is entirely at fault.
Damn straight, who do you suggest, I say Husar never really liked him.
...to blame bush for the bad economy?
Logically? No. Traditionally? Yes. The sitting president gets the credit for all the good stuff anf takes the blame for all the bad stuff that happens during his presidency.
Well, if you had a communist state and he controlled the whole economy, perhaps.
:candle:
:gossip: I heard rumors about US citizens having to pay taxes, so it must be a communist state :listen:
:tomato:
yesdachi
10-31-2008, 16:50
:candle:
:gossip: I heard rumors about US citizens having to pay taxes, so it must be a communist state :listen:
:tomato:
We don’t have to we get to. :laugh2:
Strike For The South
10-31-2008, 16:52
We don’t have to we get to. :laugh2:
Its our duty!
No one person even the president of the united states can be blamed for what is going on...
he didn´t help none...that´s for sure....but saying it´s his fault is going too far.
Gregoshi
10-31-2008, 17:13
Its our duty!
Cue the Star Spangled Banner! :unitedstates:
Seamus Fermanagh
10-31-2008, 17:21
Administrations do influence the economy, as do various tax/estate/regulatory laws etc. enacted by Congress. At best, government is only one player in a very complex game. The problem is that they think their role to be more central than it can be.
The important thing to remember, in assigning blame, is that there is almost always a multiple-year lag time between government change and economic impact.
E.G. Congress' efforts to promote minority home ownership were begun in the latter-1990s. They did not intend to create a sub-rime lending derivative market...but that is what happened as Wall Street pursued the high basis point return and accepted the risk that went with it. Obviously, 12-15 years later, there are some problems with this. Good on intentions, not so good on long-term unintended consequences.
On the bright side, there's plenty of blame to go around. Congress was controlled by the GOP at the time, so they signed off on it even though the Dems led. Then, with GB43, a GOP admin pushed to continue these programs with Congressional Dem support against those who sought to reign in FM & FM. Then, the "money is the greatest game" crowd packaged all the debts into seemingly lucrative bundles of joy -- and lots of folks bought into it.
...to blame bush for the bad economy?
Yes, partially, just as the Federal Reserve, the business cycle, banks, mortgage Companies, American investors, and congress are all to blame.
Louis VI the Fat
10-31-2008, 18:29
Yes Bush is to blame. For the policies of his administrations and for being at the top of the hierarchy of anglo-style freemarket fundamentalism - the real culprit.
Europe didn't have a credit crunch. Neither did East Asia. America had one. Then this spilled over to the global financial system and the cardhouse came crumbling down, dragging everybody along into the abyss.
Our banks are doing okay. Nor do we live on credit the way Americans do. Yet we are dragged down into crisis and the ensuing global recession. Or, America had the party, we, the neighbours, get to clean up the rubbish the following morning.
Beyond bearable too is that America borrowed the money when the dollar was weak, i.e., they got tremendous value. Since the crisis unfolded the dollar has shot up in value. So America gets to pay back its loans on favourable terms. In other words, not only are the neighbours cleaning up the mess, they find out that they are the ones who actually footed the bill for the party too.
We are to America what the US taxpayers are to investment bankers. No matter how prudent we are about our own finances, we are the ones ending up paying. And no matter what happens, before or after the party, we pay for their caviar.
Strike For The South
10-31-2008, 18:54
Yes Bush is to blame. For the policies of his administrations and for being at the top of the hierarchy of anglo-style freemarket fundamentalism - the real culprit.
Europe didn't have a credit crunch. Neither did East Asia. America had one. Then this spilled over to the global financial system and the cardhouse came crumbling down, dragging everybody along into the abyss.
Our banks are doing okay. Nor do we live on credit the way Americans do. Yet we are dragged down into crisis and the ensuing global recession. Or, America had the party, we, the neighbours, get to clean up the rubbish the following morning.
Beyond bearable too is that America borrowed the money when the dollar was weak, i.e., they got tremendous value. Since the crisis unfolded the dollar has shot up in value. So America gets to pay back its loans on favourable terms. In other words, not only are the neighbours cleaning up the mess, they find out that they are the ones who actually footed the bill for the party too.
We are to America what the US taxpayers are to investment bankers. No matter how prudent we are about our own finances, we are the ones ending up paying. And no matter what happens, before or after the party, we pay for their caviar.
ribbit
Hooahguy
10-31-2008, 19:14
Yes Bush is to blame. For the policies of his administrations and for being at the top of the hierarchy of anglo-style freemarket fundamentalism - the real culprit.
so no blame to the thousands of bad loans bankers gave? all of it is bushs fault?
wow.
:inquisitive:
yesdachi
10-31-2008, 19:36
so no blame to the thousands of bad loans bankers gave? all of it is bushs fault?
wow.
:inquisitive:
I am only a reflection of my management said the banker :wink:
Uesugi Kenshin
10-31-2008, 20:03
so no blame to the thousands of bad loans bankers gave? all of it is bushs fault?
wow.
:inquisitive:
I think you can blame the people who gave out or traded in bad loans, but I think you can place a lot of blame on the administration because they led the deregulation charge which helped make a lot of this possible, though they certainly aren't the only culprits.
Koga No Goshi
10-31-2008, 20:31
:candle:
:gossip: I heard rumors about US citizens having to pay taxes, so it must be a communist state :listen:
:tomato:
In Soviet Obamerica,
TAXES PAY YOU!
seireikhaan
10-31-2008, 20:37
Bush deserves blame. Clinon deserves blame. Bush I deserves blame. Reagan deserves blame. Carter deserves blame. Bankers deserve blame. Credit agencies deserve blame. Mortgage companies and housing builders deserve blame. Congress deserves blame. And, most of all, the American citizens deserve blame for becoming lazy and apathetic, not doing our utmost to root out our own corrupt officials and spending like there was no tomorrow.
Koga No Goshi
10-31-2008, 20:43
If the economy were going swell (which you are hard pressed to find it doing under a Republican in modern times) he would take personal credit. So yes, personal blame for when it falters is only applying the same standard he himself (or any President really) would have you apply if things were looking up. He got up and bragged everytime the overall trend of job loss was temporarily in reverse, so why not blame him when things are bad?
Louis VI the Fat
10-31-2008, 21:13
Yes Bush is to blame. For the policies of his administrations and for being at the top of the hierarchy of Anglo-style freemarket fundamentalism - the real culprit.so no blame to the thousands of bad loans bankers gave? all of it is bushs fault?
wow.
:inquisitive:Not all of it is Bush' fault. On the contrary. I named as the real culprit Anglo-style freemarket fundamentalism.
~;)
CountArach
10-31-2008, 22:27
Yes
...to blame bush for the bad economy?
Well, there's a difference between blaming the man and blaming the administration. I blame both. 8 years and we're in a recession, in two losing wars, etc.
Alexanderofmacedon
11-01-2008, 03:46
This land is my land. This land is your land?
I've been worried about this for a while!!!!!! this is a patriotic song!!:laugh4:
LittleGrizzly
11-01-2008, 12:57
This land is my land. This land is your land?
So... its everyone's land ? sounds communist...
*Adds AoM to the unpatriotic haters of america, freedom and life..*
Gregoshi
11-01-2008, 20:12
This land is my land. This land is your land?
I've been worried about this for a while!!!!!! this is a patriotic song!!:laugh4:
New last line: This land was paid by you and me.
Not all of it is Bush' fault. On the contrary. I named as the real culprit Anglo-style freemarket fundamentalism.
~;)
I would say the vast majority was not Bush's fault.
Hooahguy
11-02-2008, 02:22
Well, there's a difference between blaming the man and blaming the administration. I blame both. 8 years and we're in a recession, in two losing wars, etc.
hm, i think were winning in iraq, but think what you want.
hm, i think were winning in iraq, but think what you want.
Why do you think that? Didn't Iraq just ask for 400 billion from us to get on it's feet after 5 years?
Veho Nex
11-02-2008, 04:20
...to blame bush for the bad economy?
I blame Clinton. Because of the allowing of out sourcing on such a large scale, in turn lowering the amount of jobs for the american populace. Thus increasing un employment, thus making it so our consumer prices would go down but less people could afford to buy things, then giving us a false idea that we were actually making a better economy when all we were doing was filling up a balloon which in the end popped. Then as it popped Bush decided to goto war for too long. Thus turning us into a declining economy.
Now if you disagree that one country can cause a total global recession look at it this way
America buys the resources -> Ships to cheap labor countries or gets labor from other countries(such as central valley california) -> reships it back and sells it -> american economy shows signs of increase in profits -> other countries purchase stock in american based economies -> American based economy crashes -> PRICES GO UP!!^^^^^ -> People can't afford as much as they normally would -> other countries lost money on certain American based companies -> watch as the world bleeds to death
DOCTOR DOCTOR QUICK THE ONLY WAY TO FIX THE PROBLEM IS TO POOR MORE AND MORE BLOOD INTO THE GAPING WOUND!!!
:help: (I DONT KNOW WHAT IM SAYING!!)
Seamus Fermanagh
11-02-2008, 06:05
Why do you think that? Didn't Iraq just ask for 400 billion from us to get on it's feet after 5 years?
The victory we are crafting may be somewhat pyrhhic.
Hooahguy
11-02-2008, 17:32
Why do you think that? Didn't Iraq just ask for 400 billion from us to get on it's feet after 5 years?
it has a relativley stable government, and in a year or so and we can leave....
In CommieAmerica, BUSH BLAMES YOU.
CountArach
11-03-2008, 02:17
In CommieAmerica, BUSH BLAMES YOU.
:laugh4:
HoreTore
11-03-2008, 07:26
Yes, it's right.
He had the powers to prevent it, and as such he can't hide from the responsibility. He is responsibe simply because he was president at the time of the crisis. He didn't see it coming, and is to blame.
AlexanderSextus
11-03-2008, 09:38
Its our duty!
/patriotism
:unitedstates: :unitedstates: :unitedstates: :unitedstates: :unitedstates::unitedstates:
Income Tax is unconstitutional
/end patriotism
AlexanderSextus
11-03-2008, 09:41
The victory we are crafting may be somewhat pyrhhic.
"Another victory against Iraq and we will be ruined"
/end pyrrhus copying
Koga No Goshi
11-03-2008, 21:50
it has a relativley stable government, and in a year or so and we can leave....
We've spent nearly as much money as on WWII, and taking a longer period of time. For maybe, in the future, possible similar stability. For one country.
SUCCESS!
Hooahguy
11-03-2008, 22:03
well, considering things didnt cost nearly as much then as it does now.....
who knows? if everything was the same price, maybe WWII would have cost us many billions more than the iraq war.
yesdachi
11-03-2008, 22:56
it has a relativley stable government, and in a year or so and we can leave....
I like your optimism. It is refreshing to see a glass half full.
Hooahguy
11-03-2008, 23:12
but i think the key is to not annouce our planned withdrawl until it already happened. then the terroist cant just sit tight until we pull out then go in full force.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.