United States Heading towards a Depression?

Well, if it's spent, where is this inflation?

If it's spent, where is the low unemployment? the booming housing market? the prosperous state economies? the low foreclosure rate?

Where is all this so-called spending going? It doesn't look like it's in the economy. You see other posters mention how the commercial real estate is suffering.

So, where is all this spending you keep mentioning???

You're shtick seems to be constantly talking about Obama spending. Nothing else about him interests you. Why be so critical of spending that, in real terms, has not occurred (or hasn't affected the economy)?

You keep mentioning the CBO, allocations, expenditures, but you never say who is getting all this supposed spending.

Why are you so critical of Obama spending but not Bush spending?

We all see the effects of Bush spending (booming economy, loose credit, low unemployment, high property values).

Now, if Obama is spending, why aren't we seeing the same thing? What is your gripe with Obama besides spending (which seems to fixate you)?

 

Are you a chronic crack smoker, or do you just like to call our dear leader one? Just today he was on TV talking about how there are positive economic signs that we have stepped back from the brink, taking credit for these signs based on the various spending packages that have been implemented. Are you trying to imply the president had Nothing to do with these signs? Per his own words, these things take a while to have an impact on the market, or did you expect panacea overnight? Republicans like you have NO clue how markets work, its amazing you can claim fiscal prowess or superiority. I cant continue repeated explaining to you the difference between Obama's spending and Bush spending. If you want to keep equating them, have at it. Like a preacher in a church of one.

 

Even now roubini is saying there could be a "double dip recession" otherwise known as a W recession.

http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSTRE54R1U120090528

This is the first time I've seen him say that. Looks like im prediction was pretty accurate.

 

Another strawman.

Spending by whom? And to where? Why can't you answer these simple questions when you keep asserting you know all about Obama's spending.

Back it up with more than your opinion.

Out of your own mouth, these things take time. So why do you keep presuming/assuming Obama has spent more than Bush?

You present just more opinion ignoring Bush spending and exaggerating Obama spending (or projected spending or possible spending or allocated spending or whatever your word of the day is).

Obama has not outspent Bush. That is why the economy is in a recession.

You keep saying Obama has spent but won't back it up with any facts, evidence, graphs, reports, statistics, or tables. You are projecting, predicting, expecting, presuming, assuming, without anything to support it.

I am saying Bush has spent and have 8 years of data to prove it.

Why you won't give Obama a chance is the real question. What is your problem with Obama?

Obama will prove who he is eventually, but your analysis makes little sense, based on your arguments.

 

The Roubini "double dip recession" would be in the place of a servere recession or depression that we should be having.

The US is printing money to spare the pain today. However, we will have worse pain in a few years time after inflation runs out of control.

Dick Morris is predicting that inflation will start in approx 18 months.

 

I hate to have to keep repeating myself, but lets simplify this to a simple question I asked in my last post. If the economy is coming around, why is it happening, and who is to be given credit? You constantly claim no spending has happened, so is the economy righting itself on its own with no credit to Obama?

You see, the answer to that question leaves only two possibilities.

a) Obama spent and saved our economy
b) Obama did nothing and the economy righted itself

Feel free to check off whichever answer you feel fits better.

 

C) Bush-bama have delayed the reckoning day by borrowing our way out of the first wave of mortgage defaults. This is now pushing up interest rates in time to exacerbate the second wave of higher value mortgage defaults. The added debt service expenses will dampen any future recoveries and our banks are months from being insolvent again.

 

I agree. Instead of a very deep recession/depression we should be having right now we will probably get out of it around the end of this year, have a brief and very weak recovery acconpmanied by massive inflation. Then we will have a 2nd crash soon after. So were going to feel miserable for many years instead of a couple.

 

Throughout Presidential politics, recessions occur when a new party or administration takes office (Bush in 2000, Clinton in 92, Reagan 1980, Carter 1976). Why?

It disrupts government spending.

Yet, you're saying Obama is so super-organized that he can spend like a veteran President in only 5 months?!?!! That defies all Presidential history and precedent.

What makes Obama so much better at organizing the government and motivating spending than all these other Presidents? It's a ridiculous assertion.

The economy is suffering because Bush spending has been interrupted.

You say the economy is doing well and Obama is spending. Wrong on both counts.

Bush was spending. Obama is not by all history and logic.

Now, why would you say these obvious lies and attribute them to Obama? Why do you hate the President so much?

 

Let me follow your logic.
1) Government spending creates recessions (for lack thereof) between presidencies
2) We are in one of the deepest recessions since the great depression and this is because Bush spent so little?
3) The recession is righting itself but this is not because Obama is spending.

I'm not sure there is anything that can be said to that . You win.

 

Let me fix that for you.

I hope you can understand that.

 

1) You made a double negative (notice the use of the word lack twice in your modified flavor)
2) Bush stopped spending in July, 6 months before the end of his presidency..... Hey, I'm ok with that what a friggin moron.
3) If the recession is not coming to an end, why is Obama telling us we have stepped away from the brink? Is he just trying to claim political victory after doing nothing?

I'd say get a grip on reality, but I think you need to stop contradicting yourself first, then we can talk about reality.

 

July??? WTF??? WHo do you think gave the bank bailouts, car bailouts, etc in the fall?

 

Sorry Domainer, I was reiterating what Pioneer was implying. Things really started getting ugly in July, so if Pioneer's statement that lack of spending between presidencies caused the recession, Bush must have stopped spending in July. Obviously that is not the case.

 

Another strawman. You must live in the land of hay.

That is the word "YOU" used. If you don't like it, don't use it.

Where in my post does it mention a month? There you go assuming and jumping to conclusions and creating another strawman.

Politicians do this all the time. It's what they do. You can't possibly tell me you believe everything a politicians says, can you?

Are you that naive? Then again, it may explain some of your hatred of Obama.

You keep changing your position and then creating a strawman to represent mine.

Do you know how to use logic rather than fallacies to defend yourself?

 

Ok ........

 

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/battle-kicks-off-over-huge-energy-bill-in-house




Oil chief warns US green policy will kill economy

By Carola Hoyos

Published: April 14 2009 03:00 | Last updated: April 14 2009 03:00

Washington's energy and environment policy risks plunging the US into an economic tailspin that could turn it into "the world's cleanest third world country", one of the US oil industry's most successful chief executives has warned.

James Hackett, chairman and chief executive of Anadarko, one of the US's largest independent oil and gas companies, said in an interview: "The histrionic and maniacal focus on carbon dioxide is intellectually repugnant to me."



**********************************************




Lets also not forget what obama just did to us when he signed that new car bill that will require more mpg in cars. Now cars will either be smaller and less safe or more costly to build! Obama is putting us into a prolonged depression with no end in sight!

 

thank him for his unbiased opinion.

we would have already had electric cars if it wasn't for stupid people not being manipulated by oil and car companies. as the cars become lighter the effect of an accident would be a lot less. go study physics a little. the weight of the object hitting you has a direct effect of force that you have to absorb.

 

I have studied physics. Last I checked physics 101 doesn't cover how safe you will be inside a vehicle during a crash. The larger cars are safer, period. You need to get your head out of your book and use your common sense. And if you did your research you would know that fatalities have increased since the 1970's due to PREVIOUS mandated government increases in MPG.

And your electric car talk is ridiculous. First off do you have the money to afford one? Of course not. Even if they could somehow be as cheap as a normal car by now after many years of use, which i'd say chances of zero, the cost of electricity to charge them up would probably be as expensive, if not more expensive than using gasoline right now. And of course, they would be a heck of a lot less safe too. If your life doesn't mean much to you for you to get in a death trap, just end it now, so I can save time from replying to you further.

 

the force of impact is the direct result of speed and the weight of the two objects involved. if the cars are smaller and lighter the force of the impact would be less and need for heavier metal would decrease.
watch the movie. this is just a preview.
who killed the electric car