You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Go to Page...
Thank you for crosschecking our sponsors!
About This Page: This is a discussion on Politics within the LetsGoKings.com forums, at Los Angeles Kings Hockey Fan Forum. Bush says Congress blocking progress - CNN.com
It's all Congress' fault! Let's start drilling in ANWR, there is no environmental impact at all!
Asked if he was premature in saying the economy is not in a recession, Bush said "the average person doesn't really care what we call it."
no responsibility whatsoever... what a f***ing cock sucker
Bush bears some responsibility due to the cost of the Iraq War, but the housing bubble and the shape the economy is in today was inevitable given all the cheap money than Greenspan was spreading around when he was Fed chief.
Now Bernanke is in a box. He can fight inflation by raising rates and causing many more people to go into default on their loans, or he can keep the money cheap and inflation will continue. It's a lose, lose situation right now.
__________________ Hockey's original bad boy. The "Cowboy" Howie Young
The Dems took over Congress in 2006. Everything has only gotten worse at even faster rates. Can't blame everything on Bush (but the Dems will). Where are these "changes" the Dems promisedif they won the House and Senate? Yet more cheap talk to get elected. Just wait until "Change" Obama is elected. His change will be the worst of all.
__________________ "The day the masses figure out that they can vote to give themselves money is the day Democracy dies"
Golly! I thought Bush had wartime executive powers?
All he has to do, by the logic of his own administration's reading of his powers as commander in chief, is order that anything he wants to be done in the name of national security and the "war on terror," be done. Signing statements, executive orders, set up special tribunals to rubber stamp his decisions, have at it Mr. Dictator!
Where's the consistency? Come on dickwad! Command the wartime economy!
__________________
"For if once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." Thomas DeQuincey, 1700's
Last edited by Leonidas; April 29th, 2008 at 10:00 AM.
in all fairness, Bush is just a mere puppet. He doesn't make a single decision, he just does what he's told.
In fairness to whom? Bush? First, you're wrong. Second, if you were right why would being fair to Bush be of any importance?
I know you don't really care about being "fair" to Bush though, and please don't recycle any conspiracy theories. Let's just give him the title of "Execuctive Secretary of the Central Committee of the Ruling Class" and be done with it, OK?
Bush bears some responsibility due to the cost of the Iraq War, but the housing bubble and the shape the economy is in today was inevitable given all the cheap money than Greenspan was spreading around when he was Fed chief.
Now Bernanke is in a box. He can fight inflation by raising rates and causing many more people to go into default on their loans, or he can keep the money cheap and inflation will continue. It's a lose, lose situation right now.
This is the best post on this thread, thus far.
It would not be unfair to say that Bush's spending policies are reminisent of drunken sailors, but this is a monitary issue.
In the early Bush administration, there was an economic correction. Greenspan tried to fix it by lowering the interest rates to some of the lowest levels that I have heard of in a long, long time. By doing that, in the short term he helped the economy, while in the same time he encouraged foolish loans from the banks, and the average American. At the same time, he weakened our dollar. As I am sure we all know, Presidents do not dictate monitary policy.
Now, we have Bernanke tring to fix the problem by keeping the interest rates low, and hoping people don't forclose. (It wont work, it will just stall out the problem longer then nessissary) In the meantime, he is encouraging inflation. I know this hasn't been said much, but we are in seriouos risk of stagflation.
The best way to deal with this is monitarly. The gas tax cuts will help a little bit, but we need something else. As cold as tit may sound, Bernanke needs to let the home loan crisis run itself through, go through a very bumpy year or two, and then clean up the mess after. Droping the rates won't help, all it will do is create more inflation while all these problems go on.
This is a monitary issue, not a fiscal one.
__________________ ~ No man has ever gone through life without having a scared heart.
Reich's blog comment is basically right. Strengthen the dollar. But a "windfall profits tax" is pretty vague.
The government should set up a Manhattan Project sort of enterprise that is funded by taxes on the Oil and Coal companies that rise to the level of being confiscatory.
Private investors should be able to invest in the "Manhattan Energy Project" as well and should get shares for doing so.
The targets of research and development should be solar power, wind, and tidal driven turbines. One goal should be to make as much power as possible be produced and distributed at the neighborhood level, and less and less at the point of huge centralized and capital intensive power plants.
"But if we tax the companies at that level they'll just pass on the taxes so it's just like taxing Joe Sixpack! Let the market take care of it!" Horse****.
Move the IRS right into their corporate business and accounting offices and have them inspect the books at every step of the way. Set a reasonable level for profits, promise them some (smallish) stake in the resulting technologies, and then take everything else in the name of national security.
Reich makes some decent points here, especially regarding the fall of the dollar and rising oil prices. The two are directly related.
When the dollar loses value investors take flight to commodities. Oil is now like gold was in the early '80s. Every time Bernanke cuts interest rates you can count on paying more at the pump.
At some point people that received and the banks that made the ridiculous sub-prime loans are going to have to take their medicine. I'm not sure that any Fed chief is going to be able to engineer a soft landing or just a mild recession this time. Buffet was on CNBC this week and he is predicting that this recession is going to last longer and be deeper than people are expecting. I hope he is wrong, but who can argue with his track record?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonidas
The government should set up a Manhattan Project sort of enterprise that is funded by taxes on the Oil and Coal companies that rise to the level of being confiscatory.
Bad idea. If you want less of something tax it more. We aren't getting off oil anytime soon, so raising taxes to confiscatory levels on oil companies is not a good idea. You think they are going to fund this alternative energy research just because? No, they will simply take their ball and go home and won't do any exploration for more oil.
I am in favor of removing any tax breaks that the oil companies are getting though, just as I am in favor of losing the subsidies for ethanol and farmers that have vacant fields.
__________________ Hockey's original bad boy. The "Cowboy" Howie Young
Last edited by KINGS17; April 29th, 2008 at 02:27 PM.
It would not be unfair to say that Bush's spending policies are reminisent of drunken sailors, but this is a monitary issue.
In the early Bush administration, there was an economic correction. Greenspan tried to fix it by lowering the interest rates to some of the lowest levels that I have heard of in a long, long time. By doing that, in the short term he helped the economy, while in the same time he encouraged foolish loans from the banks, and the average American. At the same time, he weakened our dollar. As I am sure we all know, Presidents do not dictate monitary policy.
This is a monitary issue, not a fiscal one.
I agree with most of this.
2 things I want to add
1- War is inflationary
2- Excessive government spending is further weakening the dollar
More spending(especially debt)= a weaker dollar = more inflation. The more money that is printed= the weaker the dollar. In this day and age on a credit system money doesn't need to be printed to "be in circulation"
At some point people that received and the banks that made the ridiculous sub-prime loans are going to have to take their medicine.
It's amazing how dumb people can get when there is money to be made. From the Gold rush to the Dotcom busts. The sub prime loans are the 21st century version of this phenomenon
Watch out if countries start selling their oil in euros, amazing that one of the first things that Bush did in Iraq was return the sale of oil from euros to dollars.
1- War is inflationary
2- Excessive government spending is further weakening the dollar
More spending(especially debt)= a weaker dollar = more inflation. The more money that is printed= the weaker the dollar. In this day and age on a credit system money doesn't need to be printed to "be in circulation"
I would be willing to accept that amendment. I hoped it was implied in the comment about Bush's spending.
Though I agree that war inflates, I will say that sometimes that is a risk that may need to be taken. But, to argue that moves us onto a different topic.
__________________ ~ No man has ever gone through life without having a scared heart.
Rick got it mostly right except he forgot about the Bush ownership society thing. Bush admin is to blame by pressuring the Fed and the regulators to look the other way on these toxic loans.