We're screwed

[All-American]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

Everything is now Obama's fault. Blaming the Bush administration is what pussies do.

So if two planes crash into two skyscrapers in the month of July, that will be Obama's fault, right? Enough time has passed that it is no longer feasible to blame the Bush administration?

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by All-American

So if two planes crash into two skyscrapers in the month of July, that will be Obama's fault, right? Enough time has passed that it is no longer feasible to blame the Bush administration?

Obama is the President.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by All-American

So if two planes crash into two skyscrapers in the month of July, that will be Obama's fault, right? Enough time has passed that it is no longer feasible to blame the Bush administration?

If I follow your analogy, I'm not sure I've heard Obama make a lot of speeches touting how much safer he's made America.

But let's be fair here: presidents don't actually deserve as much credit or blame for economic gyrations as they get. Nonetheless, the political reality is that if you're in the Oval Office, you carry the burden. And Obama embraced this. No one forced Obama to propose a huge pork-spending bill, call it a stimulus plan, and sell it on the basis that it would reduce unemployment increases by as much as 2% over projections.

The truth is, if things improve he'll take credit for it, and if they worsen he'll blame Bush. S.O.P. for both parties. Considering how Bush was treated, especially in the wake of 9/11's economic impact, il Pad is completely within proper (political) bounds to say Obama should now "own" this economy.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by All-American

So if two planes crash into two skyscrapers in the month of July, that will be Obama's fault, right? Enough time has passed that it is no longer feasible to blame the Bush administration?

There is the reality that we don't understand the correlation to historical events, despite our willingness to make attribution, and the political reality, that once you're in power, you get the praise, probably unjustifiably so, for those things which prosper, and the blame for those things which fail.

Public perception is not based upon scholarly investigation of correlative factor and complex causative analysis.

[ChinoCoug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

I disagree on one point. Of course, this being economics, we won't "know" anything for certain, but with that caveat, or recognition in place, we should see if something so massive is having any corrective effect. What we can't "know" is what aspects of the current malaise are attributable to worldwide economic downturn, the collective failed policies of the past and or some misadventure by virtue of the failure of these policies.

If things continue to spiral downward, eventually the public will tire of his spin and there will be some liability heaped upon his administration. However, he appears to be a teflon man in that no blame sticks to him currently. Let's hope the teflon wears off.

Allow me to unscramble your gobbledeegook:

1. We'll don't know the effect of the stimulus.
2. If the economy tanks so will Obama.

While you're at it, would you mind interpreting this economic data for me?



I think it's something to do with lawyers and the economy.

Thanks in advance.

[il Padrino Ute]

Chino, just accept the fact that your political hero made a bad economy worse.

[ChinoCoug]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

Chino, just accept the fact that your political hero made a bad economy worse.

Actually, the hero born of women has crushed the serpent with his heel. He repaired credit markets so credit is flowing again. Soon, industrial will be back up and so will employment.

We'll be back in business pretty soon

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug

Allow me to unscramble your gobbledeegook:

1. We'll don't know the effect of the stimulus.
2. If the economy tanks so will Obama.

While you're at it, would you mind interpreting this economic data for me?



I think it's something to do with lawyers and the economy.

Thanks in advance.

And although such analyses are useful, if you want me or anybody else to believe they are conclusive in establishing causation, then blow it out your ass.

Liquidity has not been adequately restored to the credit markets, the toxic assets have been over-valued. If you believe otherwise, try getting a loan in Vegas.

So you studied economics at BYU where we're not exactly at the top of the food chain in that arena. And by most estimations, economics, though fascinating in explaining emotional human behavior, is far from a physical science. The explanations are interesting and studies can be fashioned based on one's biases to explain what the scholar "believes" is occurring based upon the techniques of the industry, which is overal skewed toward a Keynsian format.

You'll get no argument from me that a country will benefit more from a culture which encourages engineers and peoples building and manufacturing goods. My own children are geared for that very reason toward engineering and architecture. A developed nation which has no industrial and technological base has no future in my opinion. Ours is obviously dwindling.

[ChinoCoug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

And although such analyses are useful, if you want me or anybody else to believe they are conclusive in establishing causation, then blow it out your ass.

Liquidity has not been adequately restored to the credit markets, the toxic assets have been over-valued. If you believe otherwise, try getting a loan in Vegas.

So you studied economics at BYU where we're not exactly at the top of the food chain in that arena. And by most estimations, economics, though fascinating in explaining emotional human behavior, is far from a physical science. The explanations are interesting and studies can be fashioned based on one's biases to explain what the scholar "believes" is occurring based upon the techniques of the industry, which is overal skewed toward a Keynsian format.

You'll get no argument from me that a country will benefit more from a culture which encourages engineers and peoples building and manufacturing goods. My own children are geared for that very reason toward engineering and architecture. A developed nation which has no industrial and technological base has no future in my opinion. Ours is obviously dwindling.

So would you argue against that a country that expends its talent in lobbying the government, seeking special favors, and transferring wealth around without peoples building and manufacturing goods has no future?

[ChinoCoug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

And although such analyses are useful, if you want me or anybody else to believe they are conclusive in establishing causation, then blow it out your ass.

Liquidity has not been adequately restored to the credit markets, the toxic assets have been over-valued. If you believe otherwise, try getting a loan in Vegas.

So you studied economics at BYU where we're not exactly at the top of the food chain in that arena. And by most estimations, economics, though fascinating in explaining emotional human behavior, is far from a physical science. The explanations are interesting and studies can be fashioned based on one's biases to explain what the scholar "believes" is occurring based upon the techniques of the industry, which is overal skewed toward a Keynsian format.

You'll get no argument from me that a country will benefit more from a culture which encourages engineers and peoples building and manufacturing goods. My own children are geared for that very reason toward engineering and architecture. A developed nation which has no industrial and technological base has no future in my opinion. Ours is obviously dwindling.

by the way, try getting a loan outside of Las Vegas and Phoenix. Much easier. I got a home loan for 5.375%.