joether
Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
|
Let's go over the basic concept:
Mr. Boehner is a medical doctor by trade, Mr. Romney is a businessman by trade. Which person would have a better handle on the economic growth for the next few years? President Obama! 
All kidding aside, Mr. Romney has in the past and even now pointed out that the steps needed to deal with the issues in 2008 were akin to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. That money had to be spent in such a manner as to create an artifical demand. We had plenty of supply, but demand for products/services was rapidly decreasing due to the circumstances that led up to the 2007 economic crash and sinking towards a depression. If President Obama had followed the 'advice' of Republicans, this nation would have well been in a depression like that experienced in this country shortly after 1929 (with Republicans suddenly effected by ultra-selective Amneisa that they suggested such a thing). Fortunately for us Americans, he was wise enough to tell them "Thank you for your 'advice' but we will be going with my plan'. The facts of the ARRA speak for itself: Most industries that were rapidly failing bottom out; some of them were making inroads to profititable status at the tail end of the bill's duration (which ran for two years). Employment losses were slowly lowered and soon saw positive growth in many sectors of industry.
Mr. Romney is at odds with most other Republicans on how to deal with the budget deficit: Budget cuts and tax increases. It is not enough to simply cut billions from the budget, but to also increase the taxes to aquire more funding. This concept comes straight out of Business Theory 101: If your expenses are more than your gross profits, you lean on your sales guys/gals to make more! In the USA, we have a mechanism called 'taxes'. The problem with cutting the budget (Romney, economists, and Democrats knew this), is that it would have had a negative effect on jobs. How much does a $100 Billion dollars in federal spending buy or maintain in US Jobs? The number, according to the CBO and some Democrats is 750,000-950,000 depending on the industries effected. That didnt made sense when companies were already shedding jobs in 2007-2010.
I do get a bit annoyed and even sadden that there are numerous conservatives that really have a poor education when it comes to macro-economics (as it effects the nation). Most of them accused the President of taking over GM with $60 Billion dollars (he ordered the DOT to invest the money in preferred stock, NOT, common stock). Even more so, these folks did not sit down and read the ARRA, Affordable Care Act (ACA), or even the rules put in place to protect investors from the sort of greedy and unethical business practices that were allowed when Republicans in previous sessions of Congress removed them (there was in fact some REAL reasons for those regulations). They are making bad decisions based on bad information and bad educational knowledge on financial issues in their present and future lives. Of course, they have been trained (brainwashed is a better term) to distrust Liberalis Media infavor of 'state-run' television programming that spews out false, misleding, and just plain wrong information on an hourly basis with very little to no ethics in doing so.
|
The Heretic... - 
Profile
RE: The Heretic... - .gif){kind=avatar}
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread