RE: Clinton's advice

RE: Clinton's advice (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DomYngBlk -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 7:08:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: defiantbadgirl http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/bill-clinton-advocates-constitutional-option-debt-ceiling-132253374.html Clinton says he would raise the debt ceiling without approval. Do you think Obama should follow Clinton's advice? No way. Obama is holding the whole deck. Why would he try to fix a problem that is Congress;s

MrRodgers -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 8:17:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy Its a path with too much risk for Obama to take. He is supposedly a Constitutional scholar, and Clinton's interpretation of the 14th is unlikely to prevail a challenge in the SCOTUS. The validity of existing debt doesnt have fuck all to do with increasing the debt. Obama has so many chinks in his armor, failing on a Constitutional issue leaves him far too vulnerable. With the advent of the so-called 'signing statements' Obama could site war-time powers, order the treasury to pay and borrow as required, disperse as ordered and let the courts come in later. I am beginning to believe that the repubs would precipitate a default because they feel they'll come out fine and are much more interested in power...than country. Maybe the repubs in the house will impeach him where the senate will yawn and go back to raising campaign money.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 8:20:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: Its the refusal to cut spending that will lead to a ratings downgrade and economic disaster, and Obama will deserve full blame for not making them Bullshit-- Obama called for Congress to cut deficits by $4 trillion over 12 years and commit to automatic, across-the-board spending cuts and tax increases if an initial target is not met by 2014. There's also a bipartisan plan in the works. The problem is not cuts. The problem is the GOP opposition to ending Bush tax cuts for incomes over $250,000. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703385404576259903446373140.html The cuts for those under 250k were 3x as much. THEY are the problem. Discretionary spending has increased 40% under Obama. THEY are the problem. The Defense budget has increased blah blah blah blah. IT is the problem. Picking any one thing as being "the problem" is simply asinine.

mnottertail -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 8:53:43 AM)
The cuts for those under 250k were 3x as much. So, lets deal with your innumeracy a bit. man makes 10k a year, man makes 250k. the cut saved the 250K guy about 6700 dollars.....3X = 27000 dollars for a 10K a year worker. thanks for playing.

Musicmystery -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 2:37:00 PM)
quote: The cuts for those under 250k were 3x as much. THEY are the problem. Discretionary spending has increased 40% under Obama. THEY are the problem. The Defense budget has increased blah blah blah blah. IT is the problem. Picking any one thing as being "the problem" is simply asinine. Then stop doing it yourself. You're right--it's asinine. I've posted SEVERAL times that any solution MUST include defense, social security, medicaid/medicare, spending cuts, and raising taxes. And I'm all for eliminating ALL of the Bush tax cuts at all levels. Nobody even knows what they did with all that extra money. I opposed them ten years ago. I opposed extending them. I oppose them now. They were stupid stupid stupid. Adding two unfunded wars was just ridiculous. Ignoring fiscal policy changes while monetary policy picked up the slack for the first two Bush recessions was predictable, but disastrously short sighted. Obama's role is continuing the wars he got handed and making difficult calls on stimulus. But you started this with a single "poor Republicans" post that was flatly inaccurate. Spin, baby, spin. I would like to have REAL discussions/debates with you. But in the political arena, you just aren't interested.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 2:48:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: The cuts for those under 250k were 3x as much. THEY are the problem. Discretionary spending has increased 40% under Obama. THEY are the problem. The Defense budget has increased blah blah blah blah. IT is the problem. Picking any one thing as being "the problem" is simply asinine. Then stop doing it yourself. I never have. Ive given a whole litany of mistakes and problems. You're right--it's asinine. I've posted SEVERAL times that any solution MUST include defense, social security, medicaid/medicare, spending cuts, and raising taxes. Except for the raising taxes part, youre right on. And I'm all for eliminating ALL of the Bush tax cuts at all levels. Nobody even knows what they did with all that extra money. Of course we do. I have no clue what you mean by that. As to their effect, it was extremely beneficial and got us out of the Clinton recession and 9/11 problems without siginficantly decreasing revenues. I opposed them ten years ago. I opposed extending them. I oppose them now. They were stupid stupid stupid. Adding two unfunded wars was just ridiculous. Ignoring fiscal policy changes while monetary policy picked up the slack for the first two Bush recessions was predictable, but disastrously short sighted. Thats what you get when Dems control both houses. Obama's role is continuing the wars he got handed and making difficult calls on stimulus. You mean escalating an unwinnable war and entering another conflict, Im sure. Difficult call on stimulus? It wasnt the least bit difficult. It was a demonstrably stupid idea from the start. But you started this with a single "poor Republicans" post that was flatly inaccurate. I did no such thing. Spin, baby, spin. I would like to have REAL discussions/debates with you. But in the political arena, you just aren't interested. Im plenty interested, but when you continue to spout nonsense that sounds like it came from the KenDoll book of economics it's pointless.

flcouple2009 -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 2:53:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy Its a path with too much risk for Obama to take. He is supposedly a Constitutional scholar, and Clinton's interpretation of the 14th is unlikely to prevail a challenge in the SCOTUS. The validity of existing debt doesnt have fuck all to do with increasing the debt. Obama has so many chinks in his armor, failing on a Constitutional issue leaves him far too vulnerable. Would it fail? Are you saying this with the same certainty you predicted there would be no recall election would actually be held in AZ?

Musicmystery -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 3:12:53 PM)
quote: Thats what you get when Dems control both houses. The first two Bush recessions were with Republicans controlling both Houses. Nothing was done fiscally to change direction. Quite the contrary.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 3:31:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: Thats what you get when Dems control both houses. The first two Bush recessions were with Republicans controlling both Houses. There was only 1 Bush recession and he didnt control the House at the time.

Musicmystery -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 3:33:53 PM)
There were three--look it up. We bought our way out with monetary policy, leaving interest rates near zero for the third one, making monetary policy a difficult and less effective method. The third was the 2008 one that spilled over into the Obama administration.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 3:37:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery There were three--look it up. We bought our way out with monetary policy, leaving interest rates near zero for the third one, making monetary policy a difficult and less effective method. The third was the 2008 one that spilled over into the Obama administration. There were two during his Presidency, the Clinton recession and the one that spilled over into the Obama administration. Look it up.

Musicmystery -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 3:38:50 PM)
I did. You should too.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 3:39:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery I did. You should too. I dont need to.

mnottertail -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 3:46:29 PM)
But your total wrongness on the issue leaves you out of the loop on so much of the world. Especially when you drone on and on and on throwing facts to the wind about things that are easily verifiable. I think because you have so many people on block because they call you on your misinformation, that you think people cant see you posting this pure horseshit.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 3:47:32 PM)
NBER (you know, the guys that officially determine whether there is a recession or not?): Last Four Recessions and their Durations 12/07 - 6/09 18 months 3/01 - 11/01 8 months 7/90 - 3/91 8 months 7/81 - 11/82 16 months

Lucylastic -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 4:02:10 PM)
what about the one that ended in 2003?

mnottertail -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 4:11:00 PM)
The NBER does not define a recession in terms of two consecutive quarters of decline in real GDP. Rather, a recession is a significant decline in economic activity spread across the economy, lasting more than a few months, normally visible in real GDP, real income, employment, industrial production, and wholesale-retail sales. For more information, see the latest announcement from the NBER's Business Cycle Dating Committee, dated 9/20/10. So, according to NBER Obama is doing a bang up job, digging us out of recession in only six months. And you say that he is doing WHAT? You need to consolidate your positions, you talk out of one side of your mouth, then another.....wherever you can get stats to back up your partisan illogic. Thats how you see The Master Republican in Ohio doing a bang up job, when all indications are that it is Obamas leadership, since his unemployment is at US average in Ohio, so HE aint doing shit, in the same breath, as recall elections are being held in Wisconsin, and the fractious teabaggers are standing like deer in the headlights with HALF the doing ok numbers that democrats have and you see some wide republican sweep in the government coming....... You gotta get off rassmussen and limbaugh and Faux Nuze and see the real world. PEOPLE are calling this a recession. PEOPLE vote, not corporate america. Their wads of cash and bullshit chicken little shit aint gonna be bought in those numbers.

Lucylastic -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 4:11:52 PM)
A move in the recession date in a 2004 report by the Council of Economic Advisors to several months before the one given by the NBER was seen as politically motivated.[5] BCDC members suggested they would be open to revisiting the dates of the recession as newer and more definitive data became available.[6] In early 2004, NBER President Martin Feldstein said: "It is clear that the revised data have made our original March date for the start of the recession much too late. We are still waiting for additional monthly data before making a final judgment. Until we have the additional data, we cannot make a decision."[6] Thus, the date was revised in late 2008. From 2000 to 2001, the Federal Reserve in a move to quell the stock market, made successive interest rate increases, credited in part for "plunging the country into a recession."[7] Using the stock market as an unofficial benchmark, a recession would have begun in March 2000 when the NASDAQ crashed following the collapse of the Dot-com bubble. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was relatively unscathed by the NASDAQ's crash until the September 11, 2001 attacks, after which the DJIA suffered its worst one-day point loss and biggest one-week losses in history up to that point. The market rebounded, only to crash once more in the final two quarters of 2002. In the final three quarters of 2003, the market finally rebounded permanently, agreeing with the unemployment statistics that a recession defined in this way would have lasted from 2001 through 2003. SO its a matter of definition I take it..

mnottertail -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 4:13:44 PM)
'real republican' is a matter of definition, once they been caught, why not this?

Lucylastic -> RE: Clinton's advice (7/20/2011 4:17:34 PM)
a twue and weal wepubwican?

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625