Damn Stock Market!
- Thread starter Walter Brennaneer
- Start date
@f*ckyouliberals
Through the careful planning and steady leadership of Obama the stock market climbed from below 8000 to above 19500 and continues its upward trajectory ... thanks Obama
Do you think it is prudent to say such craziness realizing the optical damage that can be done to so many rolling eyes?
No, I don't smoke pot ... I do advocate for its legalization, although I don't partake myself
Not a fan of its legalization. It just seems like a huge step backward. I really hope that opinion doesn't strike up multiple pages either.
Could you imagine how well the stock market could have done with a pro business president for 8 years? One that didn't pass the worst law in the history of our republic?
The point is I cannot find a liberal to cite a specific Obama policy that created the stock market turn around. The stimulus as we all know did not stimulate even according to liberal economists. TARP was a Bush program not an Obama program. The Fed, led the way with QE and with zero interest rates. But in doing so they have created bubbles that unfortunately are going to burst sometime.
A pro business President got us in the mess we were in; greatest recession in history.
Nice talking point, bit completely untrue. You can keep repeating it over and over and over again but it doesn't make it any more true. And anyone that knows anything about the 2008 crisis knows there are many, many parties responsible.
You are completely wrong. We have in bigger messes than that one. the 70's had two, price controls, gas fillups on odd and even days. Carter gave us 19% loans and 13% unemployment. FDR twiddled his thumbs with WPA and cCC work programs by govt that never work. The housing mess was started by both parties. If Obama had foreclosed quickly, the recession would have ended quicker. You never do a patient good by slowly cutting a leg off, you do it by quickly cutting it off.
The WPA is a main part of what pulled us out of the Great Depression.
Two Republicans put is in the Great Depression and the greatest recession in history and two Democrats pulled us out of both.
You don't read much history. Many, many economists believe that World War II got us out of the depression not any of the government programs sponsored by FDR. The war resulted in about 12 million American men entering the military and another 12 million Americans being employed to support the military. In 1939, our unemployment rate was still in the high double digits but slightly under 20%. The depression did not end until after we entered World War II.
Actually, I had a very conservative history professor at WVU who disagrees. He talked about all the jokes made about Hoover....Hoovervilles, Hoover clothes, people just wanted a pot (when Hoover promised a chicken in every pot). He was very clear and so was the text book, FDR's New Deal Programs pulled us out of the Depression.
If so, then why was the unemployment rate still just under 20% in 1939? The programs did not work. What worked was World War II and the 24 million people involved in that effort.
A good article by Forbes:
https://www.google.com/amp/www.forb...war-ii-not-the-start-of-it/amp/?client=safari
The Great Depression started in 1929. The UE rate didn't even peak until 1933 at 24.9 per cent. Recoveries are not instantaneous or even quick, they take time. But by 1939 the UE rate had dropped to 17.2 per cent. That is a gain of 7.7 per cent, pretty impressive. The war certainly helped.
The highest the unemployment rate has been since the Great Depression was in 1983, again under another Republican President.
And that same president forced to raise interest rates to slay the incredible inflation left by Carter (13.5% inflation and 7.2% unemployment). This resulted in a recession and unemployment in excess of 10%. Reagan's policies, however, created the greatest economic engine this country has seen. After the recession ended in 1982, during the remainder of Reagan's years, our GDP averaged an incredible 4.9% growth. The enormous benefits of free market capitalism. Too bad the feeble Obama and his 1.6% GDP growth never learned that lesson.
The Obama Years Have Been Very Good to America's Weapons Makers
The United States has approved $200 billion in international arms deals since 2009.
MARCH/APRIL 2016 ISSUE
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/05/obama-international-arms-weapons-deals
The Obama years have been a boom time for America's weapons makers. Since 2009, the United States has approved arms deals worth some $200 billion—more than under any other presidency. The deals include sending Apache helicopters to Qatar, "bunker buster" bombs and cluster munitions to Saudi Arabia, and Hellfire missiles all over the place. Predicting an increase in weapons sales fueled by the war against ISIS, an unnamed American weapons manufacturing executive told Reuters last year: "Everyone in the region is talking about building up supplies for 5 to 10 years. This is going to be a long fight. It's a huge growth area for us."
The United States currently controls more than half of the global arms market. Its top five customers are Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Australia, Iraq, and Israel. By comparison, Russia, the next biggest global weapons supplier, controls just 14 percent of the market.
Some of the factors driving the surge in American exports include a shift toward arming allies instead of putting American boots on the ground, regional threats from ISIS and Al Qaeda, and Obama's 2013 decision to relax arms export rules, a move supported with an estimated $170 million in lobbying by the defense industry. In the past week, the Obama administration announced it was considering expanding weapons sales to Vietnam and easing an arms embargo on Libya.
Here's a look at the recent explosion of international arms deals:
The United States has approved $200 billion in international arms deals since 2009.
MARCH/APRIL 2016 ISSUE
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/05/obama-international-arms-weapons-deals
The Obama years have been a boom time for America's weapons makers. Since 2009, the United States has approved arms deals worth some $200 billion—more than under any other presidency. The deals include sending Apache helicopters to Qatar, "bunker buster" bombs and cluster munitions to Saudi Arabia, and Hellfire missiles all over the place. Predicting an increase in weapons sales fueled by the war against ISIS, an unnamed American weapons manufacturing executive told Reuters last year: "Everyone in the region is talking about building up supplies for 5 to 10 years. This is going to be a long fight. It's a huge growth area for us."
The United States currently controls more than half of the global arms market. Its top five customers are Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Australia, Iraq, and Israel. By comparison, Russia, the next biggest global weapons supplier, controls just 14 percent of the market.
Some of the factors driving the surge in American exports include a shift toward arming allies instead of putting American boots on the ground, regional threats from ISIS and Al Qaeda, and Obama's 2013 decision to relax arms export rules, a move supported with an estimated $170 million in lobbying by the defense industry. In the past week, the Obama administration announced it was considering expanding weapons sales to Vietnam and easing an arms embargo on Libya.
Here's a look at the recent explosion of international arms deals:
Considering the Republican leadership that got us into that mess ... we'd be lucky if any of us had homes
As usual, ignore the facts. FDR was a total disaster when it came to the economy, the only thing that got us out of the depression was wW2. After 3 terms we were still wallowing around in fake govt jobs. The reason we got to that unemployment rate under Reagan was because of Carter, the only person who can compete with Obama for worst President. You don't mention that Reagan had the greatest economic growth of any President after his policies had a chance to take effect. Nice try.
Just goes to show you that what I preach should be taken to heart. No govt subsidies for anybody. Not everybody should own a home. Congress should be in session twice a year for 2 months and then to clean up in the fall, 1 more month. Members should have jobs outside of Congress. It's a basic conflict of interest to make a living off the taxpayer and to vote yourself more power to take more and more from the American people. Harry reid went to Congress poor and came out rich.
Practically all members of Congress come out rich, geez! They need more restrictions and limits on the money they can receive. They are almost all bought off, D, R and I.
I disagree with having other jobs, it only leads to conflicts of interest. Look at our current President and his administration, having commercials on tv for Ivanka. Look at our current governor (WV) and his appointees. All tied to the coal industry.
It's a bigger conflict of interest when they come to Congress full time. You don't see the hypocrisy where someone can get rich off insider trading? Done all the time in congress, both sides. Make them have jobs, make payroll, pay taxes on payroll.
Laughable. WW2 pulled FDR *** out of the depression. Govt make beleive jobs and high taxes do absolutely nothing. FDR had almost three terms before the war, nothing got better. Liberals want you to believe it. It's not factually true.
His comment was so stupid about the 2008 crisis that my head is actually beginning to hurt. Barney Frank admitted he made huge mistakes but this poster blames it all on Bush.