Thank-you, tom.
none, US companies have never had more money, they’ve never had a more productive worker, they never had lower tax rates yet they still don’t hire. So your answer is none.
Obama has been one of the best republican presidents we have had. I expect that his speech tonight will be a huge concession to conservative wishes (he’s going to talk about tax decreases or tax code changes), and then blame the republicans for being bitter partisans that won’t work with him even though he tries to reach out to them.
What would I LIKE to hear Obama say tonight???
I’d like to hear an AGRESSIVE stimulus plan where the government will buy mortgages from people who owe more on their homes than what they are worth, encouraging new home construction (the real key to economic success), huge tax incentives for Americans to buy green energy from power companies or to produce it themselves, and then to literally tell the Republicans that the American people will NOT accept no for an answer.
And I want a flying car.
Morally correct. Strategically dumb.
He hasn’t a chance in hell of getting an aggressive stimulus plan through Congress. All that would accomplish would be to open himself to charges of being some kind of radical. (He’s not. I am, so I know…)
He probably hasn’t much chance with much more modest plan, but he at least has the chance that some Pubbies will get cold feet, like to put some distance between themselves at the Tea Farters. Slim, but not zero.
But that chance, which will help some, against grandstanding, which will help zero? I hired a grownup. Hired because, comparatively speaking, I kinda trust him. If he tells me that’s the best he can do, I’m gonna give him the benefit of a doubt until convinced otherwise.
The program was in place ,but the government just returned 34 billion that was earmarked for it to help retire the debt. They were supposed to work on keeping people in their homes. When the program first started a lot of people got their homes saved.
[QUOTE=drewtwo99]
… then to literally tell the Republicans that the American people will NOT accept no for an answer.
[/QUOTE]
You want him to lie again?
There is no groundswell of support for another gigantic boondoggle of a stimulus package. Been there, done that, what was claimed would happen didn’t happen. The deficit is thru the freaking roof, unemployment is higher than they said it would be if we didn’t pass the stimulus, and the Dems lost control of one house of Congress largely because of the Tea Party, for whom the deficit is a major issue. Maybe Obama is dumb enough not to know that, but I doubt it.
Look, the reason for the recession was a real estate bubble - people thinking they were rich because of the equity in their homes. That bubble was unsustainable, and it popped. Now Obama and the Dems want to create another bubble, only one based on government borrowing money and spending it. That’s unsustainable too, and when it pops the results are going to be a fuck of a lot worse than a recession.
In a buyer’s market like this, with a shit load of houses for sale for less than the owner paid for them. you think the key to economic success is to flood the market with more housing? Who’s going to buy all those houses - the same people who aren’t buying the ones on the market already?
'Let’s spend money we haven’t got on stuff we don’t need." Oh yeah - that’ll grow the economy all right.
Regards,
Shodan
I’ll settle for one that gets 60 mpg on the ground.
Yes because bailing out even more people who can’t afford their homes is the answer. We already spent friggin 800 billion dollars. Simplifying the tax code is the way to go.
So. Nobody watched it? I was counting on you people to tell me all about it.
You don’t know what you are talking about. If they are kept in their homes, the neighborhood does not suffer like it would with lots of empty homes. If the rates are lowered, the bank still collects money for the property instead of spending money foreclosing .
Many people were lured into adjustable mortgages that went up in the future. They were assured by the bank ,that the increase in home value would keep ahead of the increase. The fact is when they moved in, they could afford to pay their mortgages and almost all did. But when the banker induced crash came, the mortgage cost soared. That is when they were unable to keep up. Nobody is suggesting that the home owner should be bailed out or live for free. They are suggesting that interest rates more like the ones the banks are paying, should be the norm.
Quoted For The Truth
dontcha know, americans have an inalienable right to live in a house, it’s like, in the constitution
and the government is constitutionally mandated to artificially keep the price of real estate high so that people who made the biggest purchase of their lives like they were buying a shirt at Macy’s can keep the “dream”
This is arguable. Yes, the debt is very big. Yes, in an ideal world, we wouldn’t grow it relative to GDP. There are two big problems when the government spends too much. First, it soaks up productive capacity that can be better used in the private sector. Second, the interest payments start to grow out of control.
The first problem just isn’t an issue right now. There’s tons of excess capacity (the very large number of unemployed people, for example).
The second is only a problem in the long term. Right now, it’s not a problem at all. This summary of the 2010 budget on Wikipedia shows interest payments on the debt at $164B. That’s a big number, but it’s only about 5% of the budget, and only, what, about 1 or 2% interest rate? For a household, that would still be a pretty reasonable carrying cost of debt (we spend about 8% of our gross income to service our mortgage, which is our only debt). Interest rates on 10 year Treasuries are running just under 2% last I checked. And those things are sold on the free-market, so that must be some judgement of the current risk, right?
We need to deal with entitlements in the long-term. Medicare is the worst. Social Security is not nearly as bad. The Affordable Care Act (not Obamacare–it’s largely Republican ideas) has a bunch of stuff in it that may help. But in the short term, borrowing just isn’t that big a deal.
It was a pretty good speech, BTW.
-Rick
I DVR’ed it. I tried to watch it. I really did. But he came across as pissed off and irritated when he should have been inspirational. I only made it thru about 5 minutes. I’ll read the summary in the paper tomorrow.
I found a transcript at Politico. I never watch politicians on tv. It’s bad for my health.
Thanks for the transcript. I watched some of it, but only on the TV at the gym.
A few thoughts (all quotes from here) -
He used that ‘hurry up and pass the bill before anyone gets a chance to discuss it’ a couple of times. He must be getting desperate.
Anyway, it doesn’t make sense that $450B will provide a jolt that $787B didn’t, and I said earlier, consumers will not have confidence in a deficit spending bubble like Obama wants.
More of the same. He thought there were all kinds of “shovel-ready” construction projects the last time he tried this out, and it didn’t work out that way. He doesn’t seem to have learned very much, which is a pity.
“No more earmarks”? Again? Come on, Barry - fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, I must be an Obama supporter.
You couldn’t keep them out last time, you won’t keep them out this time either.
And here he falls apart altogether. How are we going to pay for this? “Pass the bill right away - and shift the responsibility for paying for it off me”.
So he is going to lower tax rates by eliminating loopholes and deductions. What difference will that make? This is just double talk.
:shrugs: SOP for BHO. More speeches, more spending, more deficit, more attempts to evade responsibility.
Move along, nothing to see here.
Regards,
Shodan
If you’d listened to the whole speech, you’d have heard that wasn’t the only measure planned.
And yes, I would expect more effect from his current proposal than the undersized stimulus previously passed. We aren’t headed down the incline we were then.
Some people want simple answers to complex problems. We don’t live in simple times anymore, as much as some would like to return to them.
I find it amusing that “business oriented” folks pretend that businesses never deficit spend to modernize, streamline, or otherwise retool the business when things are slow.
Yes, Obama supporters are very gullible, aren’t they?
Regards,
Shodan
I disagree. He has tried inspirational for two years, and Congress has proved immune to inspiration. It is time to to get pissed off and shame those bastards into doing the right thing. If he ever gives another “inspirational” speech again, it will be too soon for me. I like ass-kicking Obama better than hand-holding Obama.
The suggestion I like is for Obama to go into every swing district where Republicans are vulnerable, and point out the bridge that will be rebuilt, the school that will be modernized and the sewer plant that will be expanded under the jobs bill. Let these representatives explain to their voters why they voted against creating jobs in their own district that would improve the local economy and restore infrastructure at the same time.
Could you pretty please stop trying to shut down reasonable discourse by accusing everyone who doesn’t agree with you of being a monster? Pretty, pretty please.