2016 Presidential Horse Race

[Polish Leppy 22]

Only because they ignored the point of the post you responded to -- which was that every president since Dutch has had to operate in his economic and political creation. Someone posted a great article several days ago about it is all unraveling for them politically AND today Whiskey Peter an article about how they have run out of ideas economically. You should really check them out.

You immediately go to Obama policy without even acknowledging that my point includes Obama. But, it is bigger than any one administration. Hell its been this way your entire life. You don't think it can be better than it is right now? In my lifetime, most people I come in contact with had good comfortable wages, pensions, health care, and could send their kids to college and go to the beach for a week or two each year with their families. Today, most people are not that fortunate, even though companies they work for are making record profits as they take away or water down benefits. That did not begin in the Obama administration. It began with the Gipper, my friend. Time for a change.

Sounds like 2008 all over again. Hope and change, round three! Whhhheeeeeeeee

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Amazing, isn't it? When we're talking about race, he thinks it's 1952. When we're talking economic policy he pretends it's 2008 and we need to flip our economic system upside down.

And you forget that 2008-2009 ever happened. The economy was losing 800,000 jobs a month when Obama took office. The turn around has been remarkable.

 

[connor_in]

And you forget that 2008-2009 ever happened. The economy was losing 800,000 jobs a month when Obama took office. The turn around has been remarkable.

I don't forget it happened. Because I know that if we hadn't elected PBO, that that number would have increased exponentially every month until every single US citizen became unemployed. Ya know, cause no such thing as cyclical economics and stuff.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

And you forget that 2008-2009 ever happened. The economy was losing 800,000 jobs a month when Obama took office. The turn around has been remarkable.

Yep. We'll never forget the stimulus (and then unemployment rising), Biden and "shovel ready jobs", record numbers of Americans on assistance, record low numbers in the workforce, black unemployment higher than ever, and a stagnant economy.

Reagan inherited a Carter mess, implemented pro growth policies, and the 80s were really good for America. Obama did the opposite.

 

[connor_in]

Happy Halloween!
Donald Trump Photoshopped into Horror Movies is Internet Gold - iHorror

I dislike Trump, but gotta ask, if you use HRC's face, would it be sexist? If Obama, racist? Carson?

 

[IrishJayhawk]

I don't forget it happened. Because I know that if we hadn't elected PBO, that that number would have increased exponentially every month until every single US citizen became unemployed. Ya know, cause no such thing as cyclical economics and stuff.

Cyclical economics explains something like 68 straight months of job growth (since February, 2008)? Then why hasn't it ever happened before?

Leppy also loves to talk about the workforce participation. We've known for decades that the number would be dropping like crazy right now because of the baby boomers retiring. The number has been trending down since about 2000.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Yep. We'll never forget the stimulus (and then unemployment rising), Biden and "shovel ready jobs", record numbers of Americans on assistance, record low numbers in the workforce, black unemployment higher than ever, and a stagnant economy.

Reagan inherited a Carter mess, implemented pro growth policies, and the 80s were really good for America. Obama did the opposite.

The recession at the end of the Carter administration was adorable compared to the financial crisis at the end of the Bush administration. No one disputes that.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Declining Labor Participation Rates

Consider a report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics issued in November 2006, more than two years before Obama took office and before the start of the Great Recession. It pegged the start of the decline in participation rates at around 2000, and projected the decline would continue for the next four decades.

Bureau of Labor Statistics, November 2006: Every year after 2000, the rate declined gradually, from 66.8 percent in 2001 to 66.0 percent in 2004 and 2005. According to the BLS projections, the overall participation rate will continue its gradual decrease each decade and reach 60.4 percent in 2050.

So Obama was killing participation rates before he even took office.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

The recession at the end of the Carter administration was adorable compared to the financial crisis at the end of the Bush administration. No one disputes that.

No doubt. The difference is the reaction/ response, and the numbers don't lie between what Reagan did and what Obama did. Not close.

 

[Cackalacky]

I dislike Trump, but gotta ask, if you use HRC's face, would it be sexist? If Obama, racist? Carson?

Are you seriously asking that? Why? Because I would love to see Ben Carson Candy Man and HRC Freddy Kreuger. Obama as Pennywise....lol

Check out this one and don't be so serious...

Polticans in the comfort of their own homes

 

[GoIrish41]

Wow! Our entire current economic history began in January 1981 with absolutely no influences from before that month. Who knew?

No just the part where a catastrophic shift occurred in which the norm became ever shrinking tax rates -- especially for the rich, (less revenue) deregulation that allowed the banks to write their own rules, unprecedented and ever expanding military spending (more spending). It the short term the influx in spending did wonders, but those policies screwed us in the long run. The rich became richer and more powerful while the middle class shrunk -- no matter the promises that prosperity would trickle down. There were influences before and after, but Reaganomics has been the way of the world since then, largely because the influence of big business has grown and been used to rig the game in their favor. But thanks Obama, right?

 

[connor_in]

Are you seriously asking that? Why? Because I would love to see Ben Carson Candy Man and HRC Freddy Kreuger. Obama as Pennywise....lol

Check out this one and don't be so serious...

Polticans in the comfort of their own homes

Just trying to get a read on the room as compared with past elections...I prefer to mock all politicians...those I like AND those I do not.


I am the one that posts the political cartoons

 

[Cackalacky]

No just the part where a catastrophic shift occurred in which the norm became ever shrinking tax rates -- especially for the rich, (less revenue) deregulation that allowed the banks to write their own rules, unprecedented and ever expanding military spending (more spending). It the short term the influx in spending did wonders, but those policies screwed us in the long run. The rich became richer and more powerful while the middle class shrunk -- no matter the promises that prosperity would trickle down. There were influences before and after, but Reaganomics has been the way of the world since then, largely because the influence of big business has grown and been used to rig the game in their favor. But thanks Obama, right?

Right. 1978-1981...it's very evident that there was a massive economic paradigm shift/event at this time. Most data that is indicative of middle class decline, accumulation of wealth in the top 1%, stagnating wages, increased production, etc... begins at that time.

 

[Cackalacky]

Just trying to get a read on the room as compared with past elections...I prefer to mock all politicians...those I like AND those I do not.


I am the one that posts the political cartoons

I know and agree... that question caught me as odd from you. That website only had Trump though.

 

[connor_in]

No just the part where a catastrophic shift occurred in which the norm became ever shrinking tax rates -- especially for the rich, (less revenue) deregulation that allowed the banks to write their own rules, unprecedented and ever expanding military spending (more spending). It the short term the influx in spending did wonders, but those policies screwed us in the long run. The rich became richer and more powerful while the middle class shrunk -- no matter the promises that prosperity would trickle down. There were influences before and after, but Reaganomics has been the way of the world since then, largely because the influence of big business has grown and been used to rig the game in their favor. But thanks Obama, right?

 

[kmoose]

Right. 1978-1981...it's very evident that there was a massive economic paradigm shift/event at this time. Most data that is indicative of middle class decline, accumulation of wealth in the top 1%, stagnating wages, increased production, etc... begins at that time.

So Carter set it in motion?

 

[GoIrish41]

Right. 1978-1981...it's very evident that there was a massive economic paradigm shift/event at this time. Most data that is indicative of middle class decline, accumulation of wealth in the top 1%, stagnating wages, increased production, etc... begins at that time.

78-79 - gas shortages, energy crisis and recession that doomed any chance Carter might have of re-election (not that there was a big chance anyway). In comes Reagan touting his new prescriptions for conservative policy changes that would transform the economy. Trickle down economics (or voodoo economics as his Vice President once said). It brought massive spending increases, deregulation and dramatic tax cuts. This infused the economy with cash just as oil prices stabilized. He promised prosperity had been delivered as was the GOP game plan for the next four decades. In the short term it is hard to argue that it didn't work. But in the long run there have been dramatic consequences for the average citizen -- shrinking middle class, lost jobs to cheap labor nations, sustained tax reductions and weak regulation, diminished worker benefits and stagnant wages. The flashpoint was Reagan's ascendancy to the White House.

 

[mef811]

All the republicans are wondering.... WHERE the scoobyness is REAGAN when we need him.. Old times are old and it's time to change. Trump? thats hilarious.

I don't know bc this read is boring. But It's great to have republicans forced to debate through social media causes. They refused other than 1 time for Bush jr. and in the last 8 years its been an I give up and won't lose to a debate referendum.

 

[pkt77242]

Ben Carson had extensive relationship to Mannatech - CNNPolitics.com

 

[Cackalacky]

So Carter set it in motion?

No. But those years saw republican led legislation passed prior to when Reaganomics were turned loose. Interesting enough, about the same time....England went through a similar phase under Thatcher with similar results.

 

[connor_in]

You guys are right. I so wish we could go back to the economic and foreign policy world of the late 1970's.

 

[connor_in]

 

[kmoose]

No. But those years saw republican led legislation passed prior to when Reaganomics were turned loose.

Like what?

 

[Bluto]

No doubt. The difference is the reaction/ response, and the numbers don't lie between what Reagan did and what Obama did. Not close.

Sometimes I feel like they stopped teaching basic civics around 1982 (thanks Reagan). What the Reagan administration did do was work with Tip O'Neil to actually pass legislation that addressed various issues that the county was dealing with. Now, O'Neil could have been a complete putz like the present day Republican caucus and nothing would have been accomplished during the entire Reagan administration.

 

[Bluto]

Like what?

The change in monetary policy and accompanying lack of regulatory oversight lead to the Savings and Loan melt down that occurred in 80's.

It's crazy how many similarities there are between the Great Depression, the Savings and Loan melt downs in the 80's and the financial crisis of 2008

 

[kmoose]

The change in monetary policy and accompanying lack of regulatory oversight lead to the Savings and Loan melt down that occurred in 80's.

It's crazy how many similarities there are between the Great Depression, the Savings and Loan melt downs in the 80's and the financial crisis of 2008

Um, I was looking for specific "Republican led legislation"...................

 

[wizards8507]

It's crazy how many similarities there are between the Great Depression, the Savings and Loan melt downs in the 80's and the financial crisis of 2008

You have no idea, do you? The financial crisis of 2008 was caused by the Community Reinvestment Act. Introduced in the House by Henry Reuss (D-WI), passed by a Democrat House and Senate, and signed into law by Jimmy Carter. It was then reformed in the 1990s at the insistence of William Jefferson "BJ" Clinton (and a complicit Republican congress). Subprime lending (i.e. giving mortgages to people who couldn't afford it) occurred because of regulation, not in spite of it.

 

[wizards8507]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EO7KO14LCzY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[GoIrish41]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EO7KO14LCzY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

So, I guess he's not on the debate reform committee?

 

[wizards8507]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/V_yxGsWHx9o" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>