I HOPE HE FAILS

CANADIEN · January 23, 2009

I wonder how many people were wishing 8 years ago for 9/11, the Patriot Act, Guantanamo Bay, the Iraqi desastor, the economic meltdown.

It is one thing to say that Obama will fail, that he will not be up to the task. It his quite a different thing to wish for it to happen.

bush_cheney2004 · January 23, 2009

....It is one thing to say that Obama will fail, that he will not be up to the task. It his quite a different thing to wish for it to happen.

I think a Canadian said it best....."damn Americans....I hate those bastards."

Shady · January 23, 2009

If the country is heading into a depression, that means an Obama failure makes the situation worse than what George Bush already left it in.

Wrong. If Obama fails, and income taxes aren't raised, and corporate taxes aren't raised, and capital gains taxes aren't raised, and trillions of dollars that the country doesn't have isn't borrowed and spent, then the economy will recover, as it always has after every single recession. And in a way, by Obama failing, he succeeds.

bush_cheney2004 · January 23, 2009

Wrong. If Obama fails, and income taxes aren't raised, and corporate taxes aren't raised, and capital gains taxes aren't raised, and trillions of dollars that the country doesn't have isn't borrowed and spent, then the economy will recover, as it always has after every single recession. And in a way, by Obama failing, he succeeds.

Correct...even if Obama did absolutely nothing...the economy would still recover just as it always has.

trooper · January 23, 2009

Wrong. If Obama fails, and income taxes aren't raised, and corporate taxes aren't raised, and capital gains taxes aren't raised, and trillions of dollars that the country doesn't have isn't borrowed and spent, then the economy will recover, as it always has after every single recession. And in a way, by Obama failing, he succeeds.

It's funny you don't put the same benchmark on Bush who's arguably the most socialist president ever after the bailout and Medicare Part D or Harper who after giving 80B to the banks AND bailing out the auto sector AND going to do more socialist acts soon doesn't get this sort of hatred when Obama hasn't even done anything yet.

Oh he represents the democratic party but yet the republicans and Harper's gov't has been spending money like there's no tomorrow but get a free ride. LOL I can't fail but laugh at this hypocrisy.

WIP · January 23, 2009

Correct...even if Obama did absolutely nothing...the economy would still recover just as it always has.

You're as delusional as Herbert Hoover was in 1929, who after stockmarket and bank failures, stayed true to his dogma of non-interference in business and economics, and allowed the Depression to deepen and grind the economy to a halt.

I know, you are still wedded to this dogma that markets are self-correcting, and everything will work out fine if the government stays out of business. But markets are not self-correcting, regardless of how much you want to believe it, because economic theory doesn't factor in irrational factors. Sometimes people panic, get jealous, selfish, whatever, and act against their own best interests. Right now, all of the leading economists are scratching their heads, trying to figure out why this recession has just kept snowballing and getting worse, week by week. Money is being taken out of circulation by banks and private investors, as panic sets in and people try to secure the money they already have. But this means slow death for a market economy. And all of the forecasts about the recession aren't worth a hill of beans, because public mood and investor confidence are going to determine how deep the recession goes and when it will end; and these are not rational, predictable factors that can be forcasted by some technical analyst.

So far, Henry Paulsen's TARP strategy has been a total failure, because improving a bank's balance sheet doesn't necessarily mean that they are going to rush right out and offer new credit to people. And tax cuts are not going to stimulate spending if most consumers are afraid to part with their money. Businesses go bankrupt because consumers are afraid to spend, and even when they do find buyers, they can't get the credit for new loans. Therefore, you can quote Reagan all day long, but right now GOVERNMENT is the only agency that can force the economy to keep moving. They can't do it for very long; but hopefully an effective stimulus strategy will get the economy moving enough to restore confidence of investors and consumers. The alternative.....well, whatever it is, the alternative would be very bad.

WIP · January 23, 2009

Wrong. If Obama fails, and income taxes aren't raised, and corporate taxes aren't raised, and capital gains taxes aren't raised, and trillions of dollars that the country doesn't have isn't borrowed and spent, then the economy will recover, as it always has after every single recession. And in a way, by Obama failing, he succeeds.

Well, I already expressed why I don't believe the dogma that markets are self-correcting. I would add that evidence during this last year that shows the harm caused by deregulated banks and insurance and investment brokers is all the proof I need to be convinced that government has to have a hand on the wheel, and when they step back and deregulate, they are guilty of negligence.

Also, right now Obama has a strong mandate to govern. He has majorities in both the HOuse and the Senate, so the bipartisanship he is offering so far is more than is necessary. Agreeing to keep the Bush tax cuts temporarily, is already a first mistake, because the people in the top 5% of income earners have been the only social demographic to flourish during the Bush and Clinton years. They already have too many tax loopholes and deferment strategies to hide their money from the IRS. These are the people that Obama promised to close the loopholes and make pay a fair share of the overall tax burden since they have benefited so greatly during recent years.

Letting them keep their riches is not going to stimulate the economy since these are the people who waste money unproductively by driving up the prices of art & collectibles, and precious gems. What Donald Trump spends his extra income on will likely be more plumage to show off his wealth and prestige, not buying actual products and services like lower income people have to do when they come upon found money. So, if Obama does nothing, or is prevented from carrying out economic reforms, America loses also, and there is no way out of the recession!

WIP · January 23, 2009

It's funny you don't put the same benchmark on Bush who's arguably the most socialist president ever after the bailout and Medicare Part D or Harper who after giving 80B to the banks AND bailing out the auto sector AND going to do more socialist acts soon doesn't get this sort of hatred when Obama hasn't even done anything yet.

I wonder the same thing when I see the hypocrisy of conservatives who don't criticize government spending if it's for them! Besides this expensive, complicate prescription drug boondoggle that Bush has saddled on to future generations of Americans, why are the annual multi-billion dollar farm bills never criticized as wasteful spending? What about military spending! Since a good portion of U.S. foreign policy is designed around the interests of the major oil companies, let them pay the bill when they want "regime change" and a government installed in oil-rich third world countries. The railings against socialism are usually a smokescreen to hide the policy of crony capitalism.