Obama Is Destroying The Economy

[Shady]

Jim Cramer: “This is the greatest wealth destruction I’ve seen by a president”

Link

U.S. rescue efforts may risk double-dip recession

"The stuttering attempts to repair the banking and lending mechanisms so far by the new administration suggests that by late 2010, the specter of a second dip into recession will be looming large," said Merrill Lynch economist Sheryl King.

Reuters

As the Dow keeps dropping, the President is running out of people to blame

As 2009 opened, three weeks before Barack Obama took office, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at 9034 on January 2, its highest level since the autumn panic. Yesterday the Dow fell another 4.24% to 6763, for an overall decline of 25% in two months and to its lowest level since 1997. The dismaying message here is that President Obama's policies have become part of the economy's problem.

What is new is the unveiling of Mr. Obama's agenda and his approach to governance. Every new President has a finite stock of capital -- financial and political -- to deploy, and amid recession Mr. Obama has more than most. But one negative revelation has been the way he has chosen to spend his scarce resources on income transfers rather than growth promotion. Most of his "stimulus" spending was devoted to social programs, rather than public works, and nearly all of the tax cuts were devoted to income maintenance rather than to improving incentives to work or invest.

The market has notably plunged since Mr. Obama introduced his budget last week, and that should be no surprise. The document was a declaration of hostility toward capitalists across the economy. Health-care stocks have dived on fears of new government mandates and price controls. Private lenders to students have been told they're no longer wanted. Anyone who uses carbon energy has been warned to expect a huge tax increase from cap and trade. And every risk-taker and investor now knows that another tax increase will slam the economy in 2011.

WSJ

But he gives good speeches!

I just hope that I still have a job by the time the next Presidential election comes around. This Jimmy Carter/Lyndon Johnson wannabe needs to be as far from economic power as possible. And it must be obvious to all, that President Obama has absolutely no clue when it comes to how the economy works, and how private sector business thrives. And teaching constitutional law, and working as a "community organizer" isn't how one gets the needed knowledge and experience.

Edited March 3, 2009 by Shady

[eyeball]

I just hope that I still have a job by the time the next Presidential election comes around.

I'm quite certain after the Republicans surge back on a tidal wave of anti-Obama anti-librul sentiment there will be lots of job opportunities such as manning detention camps and preparing America's economy for war.

Edited March 3, 2009 by eyeball

[GostHacked]

What is funny is when Rumslfeld a day before 9/11 said the Pentagon can't account for 2.3 TRILLION dollars of the budget over a period of a couple years. That is less than what Bush and Obama TOGETHER have spend on bail out/stimulus packages.

Shady, the last 8 years was like nothing to you right?? I never seen you complain about the waste in Bush's bail out package or the billions wasted and unaccounted for in terms of the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions. But yet you are screaming from the rooftops about this.

You might just want to take a seat and ... stop posting.

Eyeball

I'm quite certain after the Republicans surge back on a tidal wave of anti-Obama anti-librul sentiment there will be lots of job opportunities such as manning detention camps and preparing America's economy for war.

I just hope Rush Limbaugh is still their leader !!!! lololol

[Shady]

What is funny is when Rumslfeld a day before 9/11 said the Pentagon can't account for 2.3 TRILLION dollars of the budget over a period of a couple years.

Hmm, considering Rumsfeld had been Defense Secretary for 6 months at that point, are you blaming him for missing money over the previous couple of years? Huh?

That being said, massive fiscal irresponsible doesn't condone even more and greater fiscal irresponsiblity, nor does it condone destructive economic policies like large income tax hikes, large capital gains tax hikes, the expansion of the welfare state, the removal of deducting interest on mortgages, and the removal of deducting charitable donations during a time of deep recession.

But yet you are screaming from the rooftops about this.

Yep, because Obama has taken the baton of irresponsible spending, and has ran with it, with even greater waste and irresponsiblity.

You might just want to take a seat and ... stop posting.

Yeah, you'd probably like that, fascist.

[Shady]

Cramer’s S.O.S.: Obama, Save Our Stocks

CNBC

[GostHacked]

Hmm, considering Rumsfeld had been Defense Secretary for 6 months at that point, are you blaming him for missing money over the previous couple of years? Huh?

Just like the way you are blaming Obama for screw ups from the past administration?? Come on Shady, I told you to take a seat.

That being said, massive fiscal irresponsible doesn't condone even more and greater fiscal irresponsiblity, nor does it condone destructive economic policies like large income tax hikes, large capital gains tax hikes, the expansion of the welfare state, the removal of deducting interest on mortgages, and the removal of deducting charitable donations during a time of deep recession.

You do recall a report from the Feds that says the US has been in a recession since about Dec 2007. So, go ahead and blame Obama for that fiasco as well.

Yeah, you'd probably like that, fascist.

Are you calling me a fascist?? I hope you can back that up. If I took anything you said seriously, I might take offense to that comment. At this point I am more leaning to total anarchy. Free for all.

[Oleg Bach]

Obama is the last administration --- look at the face of Biden - this is an extremist and conditioned rightist - combine that with the Hillary Clinton phenomena ( a leftie that loves money and power) - I would say --- Obama is just an extension of the last administrators. I did mention a while ago that America was a facist state. It is..but people become offended when they hear the word facist...or nazi....but what else do you call a nation there there is no competing or countering party to speak of - no resistance to the status quo what so ever?

[punked]

Pretty sure when you look back on it Democrats have always created more jobs then republicans. So you got nothing to worry about.

[jdobbin]

That being said, massive fiscal irresponsible doesn't condone even more and greater fiscal irresponsiblity, nor does it condone destructive economic policies like large income tax hikes, large capital gains tax hikes, the expansion of the welfare state, the removal of deducting interest on mortgages, and the removal of deducting charitable donations during a time of deep recession.

When did you ever criticize spending in the last administration? Oh right. It was all the Democrats fault and only if they had a 60 seats in the Senate, they would have had balanced budgets.

[Shady]

Just like the way you are blaming Obama for screw ups from the past administration?? Come on Shady, I told you to take a seat.

I will do no such thing. What I'm blaming Obama for, is a massive increase of waste and fiscal irresponsibility, a continuation of Bush policy, but on steroids. And, destructive economic policy, that is an attack on the private sector, and an attack on business, large and small, and the exact opposte thing to do in a deep recession. He's more fixated on implementing a big government agenda than he is on fixing problems.

You do recall a report from the Feds that says the US has been in a recession since about Dec 2007. So, go ahead and blame Obama for that fiasco as well.

And Obama is making things worse.

Are you calling me a fascist?? I hope you can back that up.

You're trying to silence me. Classic fascism. Classic totalitarianism. Classic Stalinism.

I did mention a while ago that America was a facist state.

No, America is not a fascist state. Sorry, but that's hyperbole.

[jdobbin]

Cramer’s S.O.S.: Obama, Save Our Stocks

Sounds like Cramer is looking to create a new truth like he always brags about.

He really does have contempt for the media when he calls them bozos for running his false stories.

[punked]

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/01/09/...cord-on-record/

[Oleg Bach]

Go and find a book with all of history's great quotations in it ---- then alter them slightly to disguise them - then - string them to gether and practice your tone - AND YOU CAN BE AN OBAMA ALSO....

Y E S Y O U C A N !

[stevoh]

Go massively into debt for war... no problem.

Go massively into debt attempting to help fellow Americans... FREAK OUT.

Nice to see the republicans care more about IRAQI citizens than their own.

[Oleg Bach]

Go massively into debt for war... no problem.

Go massively into debt attempting to help fellow Americans... FREAK OUT.

Nice to see the republicans care more about IRAQI citizens than their own.

Go massively into debt sending off some bailout money that will never circulate and heal the system but will be horder some where else ---- Nice to see that governments care more about their own friends than they people the supposedly serve.

[GostHacked]

I will do no such thing.

No I beg you to take a seat. Please.

What I'm blaming Obama for, is a massive increase of waste and fiscal irresponsibility, a continuation of Bush policy, but on steroids. And, destructive economic policy, that is an attack on the private sector, and an attack on business, large and small, and the exact opposte thing to do in a deep recession. He's more fixated on implementing a big government agenda than he is on fixing problems.

But Shady ... you never, ever complained about Bush's spending. Since Obama's plan is just a continuation of Bush's policy on roids, if Bush had not thrown in those policies, we would not be in this mess in the first place.. but I am just speculating here. But you are not taking into account what has happened in the past, so you loose credibility in this thread.

War on Terror don't come cheap Shady. It costs more than a buck-o-five.

And Obama is making things worse.

He may not be helping things, but look what he has to work with. And since you are not willing to take that into account, you right now have lost your position on this topic.

You're trying to silence me. Classic fascism. Classic totalitarianism. Classic Stalinism.

Not trying to silence you .. but if you do continue to spew out crap, you should be silenced.

No, America is not a fascist state. Sorry, but that's hyperbole.

It will be a gradual slide into Fascism. So gradual you won't even notice. Remember, according to the great man that is Glen Beck (lolololol) Obama's socialism will lead the US into COMMUNISM !!!!!! Surprised you are not towing that line as well.

[scorpio]

And it must be obvious to all, that President Obama has absolutely no clue when it comes to how the economy works, and how private sector business thrives.

But you do of course. By the way, where did you get your economic degree?

Edited March 3, 2009 by scorpio

[Oleg Bach]

But you do of course. By the way, where did you get your economic degree?

Same place where Obama got his. And the same place where you got yours. Getting a degree from an institution that is instituted and frozen in a time passed by may not be useful in todays rapidly changing economic events...and a degree may not work to understand what is now a fleeting economy..

[JerrySeinfeld]

Obama.

$3.5 TRILLION dollars.

That's 3 times more than the Iraq war....over 6 YEARS!

And he's only been on the job 5 weeks.

I think I speak for every free-born active participant of the free world's economy when I say:

Oh

My

God.

The entrepreneurial wealth creating bastion US just became Trudeaupian Canada overnight.

The last great one has fallen to the condescension of the nanny state.

I'm sad.

[punked]

Obama.

$3.5 TRILLION dollars.

That's 3 times more than the Iraq war....over 6 YEARS!

And he's only been on the job 5 weeks.

I think I speak for every free-born active participant of the free world's economy when I say:

Oh

My

God.

The entrepreneurial wealth creating bastion US just became Trudeaupian Canada overnight.

The last great one has fallen to the condescension of the nanny state.

I'm sad.

Or you can think as the half the amount wall street has lost in 3 MONTHS!!!

[Oleg Bach]

When America goes Nanny State - it may not be like our dear old nanny - with her apron, smiling liberal face and smell of cherry pie on her breath. The new up and coming American nanny may look like Nurse Ratchet out of the coo coo ward. She may be wearing hob nailed boots and riot gear....who knows what is coming? The saving grace is that there are more informed people than ever before - that can counter dictitorial governments...we should be okay.

[Shady]

$3.5 TRILLION dollars.

Oh

My

God.

Looks like you're not the only one thinking OMG. Former Governor and Senator of Indiana, and possible Obama VP pick Evan Bayh also agrees.

A Democratic senator says no to a huge federal spending bill. <--- his title, not mine

The Senate should reject this bill. If we do not, President Barack Obama should veto it.

The omnibus increases discretionary spending by 8% over last fiscal year's levels, dwarfing the rate of inflation across a broad swath of issues including agriculture, financial services, foreign relations, energy and water programs, and legislative branch operations. Such increases might be appropriate for a nation flush with cash or unconcerned with fiscal prudence, but America is neither.

The solution going forward is to stop wasteful spending before it starts. Families and businesses are tightening their belts to make ends meet -- and Washington should too.

Spending should be held in check before taxes are raised, even on the wealthy. Most people are willing to do their duty by paying taxes, but they want to know that their money is going toward important priorities and won't be wasted.

But the bloated omnibus requires sacrifice from no one, least of all the government. It only exacerbates the problem and hastens the day of reckoning. Voters rightly demanded change in November's election, but this approach to spending represents business as usual in Washington, not the voters' mandate.

WSJ

I couldn't agree with him more. A spending bill that increases by 8% over last year, with 8000+ earkmarks is not change we can believe in, it's business as usual. And if Democrats pass this legislation, they're gonna have a tough time explaining the importance of spending millions of dollars on pig odor research in these economic times, 2 and 4 years from now.

[GostHacked]

The solution going forward is to stop wasteful spending before it starts.

Correct, this should have been caught and rectified during Bush's administration. Much waste happened there as well. Lives were wasted, which to me is more important and valuable than money.

[August1991]

Just like the way you are blaming Obama for screw ups from the past administration?? Come on Shady, I told you to take a seat.

Gost, if you read the WSJ editorial, it is clear that they blame Obama for what he has done since winning the election.

God knows that there is enough blame to go around.

Victory has many mothers. Defeat is an orphan.

When did you ever criticize spending in the last administration? Oh right. It was all the Democrats fault and only if they had a 60 seats in the Senate, they would have had balanced budgets.

Bush Jnr never submitted a budget where half of spending was borrowed money.

It is impossible to understand "one trillion" except in personal terms. At the moment, the US federal government receives tax revenue of one trillion annually. IOW, to pay for Obama's projected spending, an American's federal taxes would have to triple.

Dobbin, how would you react if I told you that your federal taxes were to increase by 3.5X?

With that said, the US government can still go far into debt. At present, US federal government debt is about 68% of GDP. In Japan, the ratio is about 190%. Obama can apparently borrow alot more money, and I'm sure that his advisors are now explaining this.

We are entering into uncharted territory.

Edited March 5, 2009 by August1991

[punked]

Gost, if you read the WSJ editorial, it is clear that they blame Obama for what he has done since winning the election.

God knows that there is enough blame to go around.

Victory has many mothers. Defeat is an orphan.

Bush Jnr never submitted a budget where half of spending was borrowed money.

It is impossible to understand "one trillion" except in personal terms. At the moment, the US federal government receives tax revenue of one trillion annually. IOW, to pay for Obama's projected spending, an American's federal taxes would have to triple.

Dobbin, how would you react if I told you that your federal taxes were to increase by 3.5X?

With that said, the US government can still go far into debt. At present, US federal government debt is about 68% of GDP. In Japan, the ratio is about 190%. Obama can apparently borrow alot more money, and I'm sure that his advisors are now explaining this.

We are entering into uncharted territory.

No because he hid war spending. Regardless Obama doesn't have time for this he is busy trying to save the American economy by doing something and not sitting on his hands.