Now do the Dems own the economy?

[daveman]

Debbie Wasserman Schultz said they did. Obama and Reid have full control of the economy. So the answer to "do the Dems own the economy?" is obvious.

No! They don't. They never will.

Their policies have given us the worst economy since the FDR Depression but it's Bush and Boehners fault, maybe Reagan's fault too.

Dems are against private ownership of anything even their own failed ideas

LOL. Silly ass, you are as stupid as ever. The whole time the Teabaggers were throwing their imitation of a two year old legislative tantrum the market was going down. As soon as they caved, the market immediatly made big gains. Now that is the kind of economy that I like owning.

We kick these dingdong malcontents out of office in Novemeber of 14, and have two years to get this nation back on track with investments in infrastructure, science, and the education of our citizens, you are going to see a renewed nation. One that once again is competing in all aspects for being number one, rather than being the competition for first place in political lunacy.

So when's it going to start?

Any minute now. Any minute now...

Oh, yeah, I forgot...next important item on Obama's agenda is Democrat Voter Registration Cards for Illegals, aka "immigration reform".

Because, you know, what's best for the country is his highest priority.

 

[daveman]

If you are arguing about statism, yes, but that won't happen.

You can't change how 75% of America feels about the government.

I can offer them a better alternative than subjugation.

You can't offer them a better deal than constitutionalism, son, and that is what they have.

Your last stand was last night.

The TeaP kamikaze charge ended up as they normally do: complete defeat.

Yes, you and all the other progressives have made it quite clear that you believe fiscal responsibility is terrorism.

Good Gaea, man, at least file the MSNBC logo off your opinions.

 

[Geaux4it]

LOL. Silly ass, you are as stupid as ever. The whole time the Teabaggers were throwing their imitation of a two year old legislative tantrum the market was going down. As soon as they caved, the market immediatly made big gains. Now that is the kind of economy that I like owning.

We kick these dingdong malcontents out of office in Novemeber of 14, and have two years to get this nation back on track with investments in infrastructure, science, and the education of our citizens, you are going to see a renewed nation. One that once again is competing in all aspects for being number one, rather than being the competition for first place in political lunacy.

So when's it going to start?

Any minute now. Any minute now...

Oh, yeah, I forgot...next important item on Obama's agenda is Democrat Voter Registration Cards for Illegals, aka "immigration reform".

Because, you know, what's best for the country is his highest priority.

It's for the children

-Geaux

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If you are arguing about statism, yes, but that won't happen.

You can't change how 75% of America feels about the government.

I can offer them a better alternative than subjugation.

You can't offer them a better deal than constitutionalism, son, and that is what they have.

Your last stand was last night.

The TeaP kamikaze charge ended up as they normally do: complete defeat.

Sure, Jake. From your lips to Obama's big ears.

Generations from now they'll still be talking about the liquidation of the Republican moderates of 2014.

"Sure, we've seen similar total die offs in history, but there's usually an asteroid or something. Republican Moderates just vanished in 2014"

 

[regent]

You don't and neither does the author you quoted

More and more it seems posters are questioning historians because the historian's history differs from the posters. The historian cited is a Pulitzer Prize author. So what is your source that FDR's average unemployment was as you say?

It's pretty obvious what the source is.
But it is dishonest to credit New Deal programs for an unemployment rate that stems largely from manpower requirements in WW2.
It is that lying by omission that the libs have down so well. It isn't that what they say is untrue. It is that what they don't say changes the whole picture.

Can you cite the sources for the statistics on FDR's unemployment or not?

 

[Geaux4it]

More free shit from Obama everyone. Please show up at the polls in 2014 and show your support

-Geaux

 

[regent]

FDR depression was 20% average unemployment for 7 straight years

The Great Depression started in 1929 when the stock market suffered a huge crash. Roosevelt was elected to the presidency in 1932. The president who was in office when the depression hit was Herbert Hoover (R). When the depression hit Hoover took the position that the government should not intervene and do nothing to help us out of the depression. As a result conditions worsened and the US fell deeper and deeper into depression as more and more people continued to lose their jobs. Hoover's failure to take ANY action meant that when he turned the country over to Roosevelt America was in a terrible state. As time had passed the effects of the depression hit more and more Americans.

And THAT, ladies and germs, is exactly what I predicted in an earlier post. People have been taught that crap by progressives for so long that when confronted with the truth, they cannot handle it.

The truth is that:
1)Hoover was a progressive
2) Hoover pushed a bunch of "stimulus programs" and other controls.
3) FDR doubled down on those.
4) They had no effect, other than to make things worse
5) Things got better when the war broke out, boosting demand and decreasing supply.
6) After the war Congress refused to go back to New Deal policies and we experienced an enormous expansion.

Hoover preached rugged individualism, have you ever read any of Hoover's speeches, or anything of his presidency or even the Great Depression?
Do you have any idea what caused the Great Depression?
Hoover's RFC was trickle-down, give to business and it will trickle down to the masses.
FDR used the RFC but added a number of new programs called the New Deal.
Things got better before the war ever started, if they hadn't the people would have dumped FDR just as they had dumped Hoover and the Republicans.
We still have some New Deal policies in operation.
The war increased the spending evidence that FDR simply didn't spend enough.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Great Depression started in 1929 when the stock market suffered a huge crash. Roosevelt was elected to the presidency in 1932. The president who was in office when the depression hit was Herbert Hoover (R). When the depression hit Hoover took the position that the government should not intervene and do nothing to help us out of the depression. As a result conditions worsened and the US fell deeper and deeper into depression as more and more people continued to lose their jobs. Hoover's failure to take ANY action meant that when he turned the country over to Roosevelt America was in a terrible state. As time had passed the effects of the depression hit more and more Americans.

And THAT, ladies and germs, is exactly what I predicted in an earlier post. People have been taught that crap by progressives for so long that when confronted with the truth, they cannot handle it.

The truth is that:
1)Hoover was a progressive
2) Hoover pushed a bunch of "stimulus programs" and other controls.
3) FDR doubled down on those.
4) They had no effect, other than to make things worse
5) Things got better when the war broke out, boosting demand and decreasing supply.
6) After the war Congress refused to go back to New Deal policies and we experienced an enormous expansion.

Hoover preached rugged individualism, have you ever read any of Hoover's speeches, or anything of his presidency or even the Great Depression?
Do you have any idea what caused the Great Depression?
Hoover's RFC was trickle-down, give to business and it will trickle down to the masses.
FDR used the RFC but added a number of new programs called the New Deal.
Things got better before the war ever started, if they hadn't the people would have dumped FDR just as they had dumped Hoover and the Republicans.
We still have some New Deal policies in operation.
The war increased the spending evidence that FDR simply didn't spend enough.

You're such an ignorant douche-bag.

Libertarian economist Murray Rothbard argues that Hoover was actually the initiator of what came to be the New Deal. Hoover engaged in many unprecedented public works programs, including an increase in the Federal Buildings program of over $400 million and the establishment of the Division of Public Construction to spur public works planning. Hoover himself granted more subsidies to ship construction through the Federal Shipping Board and asked for a further $175 million appropriation for public works; this was followed in July 1930 with the expenditure of a giant $915 million public works program, including a Hoover Dam on the Colorado River.[106][107] In the spring of 1930, Hoover acquired from Congress an added $100 million to continue the Federal Farm Board lending and purchasing policies. At the end of 1929, the FFB established a national wool cooperative-the National Wool Marketing Corporation (NWMC) made up of 30 state associations. The Board also established an allied National Wool Credit Corporation to handle finances. A total of $31.5 million in loans for wool were made by the FFB, of which $12.5 million were permanently lost; these massive agricultural subsidies were a precedent for the later Agricultural Adjustment Act.[108][109] Hoover also advocated strong labor regulation law, including the enactment of the Bacon-Davis Act, requiring a maximum eight-hour day on construction of public buildings and the payment of at least the "prevailing wage" in the locality. In the Banking sector, Hoover passed The Federal Home Loan Bank Act on July, 1932, establishing 12 district banks ruled by a Federal Home Loan Bank Board in a manner similar to the Federal Reserve System. $125 million capital was subscribed by the Treasury and this was subsequently shifted to the RFC. Hoover was also instrumental in passing the Glass-Steagall Act of 1932, allowing for prime rediscounting at the Federal Reserve, allowing further inflation of credit and bank reserves.[110]

Lee Ohanian, from UCLA takes a controversial stance, arguing that Hoover adopted pro-labor policies after the 1929 stock market crash that "accounted for close to two-thirds of the drop in the nation's gross domestic product over the two years that followed, causing what might otherwise have been a bad recession to slip into the Great Depression".[111] This argument is at odds with the more Keynesian view of the causes of the Depression, and has been challenged as revisionist by many economists including J. Bradford DeLong of U.C. Berkeley.[112]

The truth is Hoover pursued policies like Obama's: raising the cost of hiring so unemployment stayed high, just like now. The unemployment problem was solved by drafting a good part of the workforce for the war. I'd hardly call that a success. Maybe Obama should lie us into yet another big war and start a draft, like Charlie Rangel keeps demanding.

 

[regent]

And THAT, ladies and germs, is exactly what I predicted in an earlier post. People have been taught that crap by progressives for so long that when confronted with the truth, they cannot handle it.

The truth is that:
1)Hoover was a progressive
2) Hoover pushed a bunch of "stimulus programs" and other controls.
3) FDR doubled down on those.
4) They had no effect, other than to make things worse
5) Things got better when the war broke out, boosting demand and decreasing supply.
6) After the war Congress refused to go back to New Deal policies and we experienced an enormous expansion.

Hoover preached rugged individualism, have you ever read any of Hoover's speeches, or anything of his presidency or even the Great Depression?
Do you have any idea what caused the Great Depression?
Hoover's RFC was trickle-down, give to business and it will trickle down to the masses.
FDR used the RFC but added a number of new programs called the New Deal.
Things got better before the war ever started, if they hadn't the people would have dumped FDR just as they had dumped Hoover and the Republicans.
We still have some New Deal policies in operation.
The war increased the spending evidence that FDR simply didn't spend enough.

You're such an ignorant douche-bag.

Libertarian economist Murray Rothbard argues that Hoover was actually the initiator of what came to be the New Deal. Hoover engaged in many unprecedented public works programs, including an increase in the Federal Buildings program of over $400 million and the establishment of the Division of Public Construction to spur public works planning. Hoover himself granted more subsidies to ship construction through the Federal Shipping Board and asked for a further $175 million appropriation for public works; this was followed in July 1930 with the expenditure of a giant $915 million public works program, including a Hoover Dam on the Colorado River.[106][107] In the spring of 1930, Hoover acquired from Congress an added $100 million to continue the Federal Farm Board lending and purchasing policies. At the end of 1929, the FFB established a national wool cooperative-the National Wool Marketing Corporation (NWMC) made up of 30 state associations. The Board also established an allied National Wool Credit Corporation to handle finances. A total of $31.5 million in loans for wool were made by the FFB, of which $12.5 million were permanently lost; these massive agricultural subsidies were a precedent for the later Agricultural Adjustment Act.[108][109] Hoover also advocated strong labor regulation law, including the enactment of the Bacon-Davis Act, requiring a maximum eight-hour day on construction of public buildings and the payment of at least the "prevailing wage" in the locality. In the Banking sector, Hoover passed The Federal Home Loan Bank Act on July, 1932, establishing 12 district banks ruled by a Federal Home Loan Bank Board in a manner similar to the Federal Reserve System. $125 million capital was subscribed by the Treasury and this was subsequently shifted to the RFC. Hoover was also instrumental in passing the Glass-Steagall Act of 1932, allowing for prime rediscounting at the Federal Reserve, allowing further inflation of credit and bank reserves.[110]

Lee Ohanian, from UCLA takes a controversial stance, arguing that Hoover adopted pro-labor policies after the 1929 stock market crash that "accounted for close to two-thirds of the drop in the nation's gross domestic product over the two years that followed, causing what might otherwise have been a bad recession to slip into the Great Depression".[111] This argument is at odds with the more Keynesian view of the causes of the Depression, and has been challenged as revisionist by many economists including J. Bradford DeLong of U.C. Berkeley.[112]

The truth is Hoover pursued policies like Obama's: raising the cost of hiring so unemployment stayed high, just like now. The unemployment problem was solved by drafting a good part of the workforce for the war. I'd hardly call that a success. Maybe Obama should lie us into yet another big war and start a draft, like Charlie Rangel keeps demanding.

So why didn't Hoover's policies work, and FDR's did?

 

[cutter]

Their still going to blame the TEA PARTY because we didn't do enough to stop them. They'll say we knew they were stupid and should have put an end to it. Friggen TEA PARTY, what are they good for if they can't stop a stupid democrat?

 

[PixieStix]

Works for me....now, if only the Republicans would get out of the way

What happens in the next years will happen for and to all of us. Not one side will escape, Republicans and democrats alike.

 

[daveman]

So when's it going to start?

Any minute now. Any minute now...

Oh, yeah, I forgot...next important item on Obama's agenda is Democrat Voter Registration Cards for Illegals, aka "immigration reform".

Because, you know, what's best for the country is his highest priority.

It's for the children

-Geaux

Just for once, I'd like them to do something for American children.

 

[daveman]

Hoover preached rugged individualism...

That alone is proof that Hoover was NOTHING like today's progressives, who preach soft collectivism.

 

[Hoffstra]

60% of GOP Senators and 36% of GOP Housemembers voted for this CR.

So no, the Dems don't own the economy.

We simply own the agenda & direction of the country.

 

[daveman]

Works for me....now, if only the Republicans would get out of the way

What happens in the next years will happen for and to all of us. Not one side will escape, Republicans and democrats alike.

But Democrats will predictably refuse to assume responsibility for their actions.

 

[Contumacious]

FDR Depression?

You should sue your High School -- they screwed you out of an education.


It's unfair for some states to unleash people this stupid on the rest of us.

FDR depression was 20% average unemployment for 7 straight years

When the depression hit Hoover took the position that the government should not intervene and do nothing to help us out of the depression. .[/SIZE][/FONT]

HUH?

Bullshit. He did exactly what your Messiah is doing now.


Led by President Hoover, the government embarked on what Anderson has accurately called the “Hoover New Deal.” For if we define “New Deal” as an antidepression program marked by extensive governmental economic planning and intervention – including bolstering of wage rates and prices, expansion of credit, propping up of weak firms, and increased government spending (e.g., subsidies to unemployment and public works) – Herbert Clark Hoover must be considered the founder of the New Deal in America. Hoover, from the very start of the depression, set his course unerringly toward the violation of all the laissez-faire canons. As a consequence, he left office with the economy at the depths of an unprecedented depression, with no recovery in sight after three and a half years, and with unemployment at the terrible and unprecedented rate of 25 percent of the labor force."


.

 

[Londoner]

Debbie Wasserman Schultz said they did. Obama and Reid have full control of the economy. So the answer to "do the Dems own the economy?" is obvious.

No! They don't. They never will.

Their policies have given us the worst economy since the FDR Depression but it's Bush and Boehners fault, maybe Reagan's fault too.

Dems are against private ownership of anything even their own failed ideas

The housing and financial meltdown that happened on Bush's watch was - according to your party - Carter, Clinton and the Dems fault.

9/11 happened on Bush's watch ... but it was Clinton's fault, as if he chose to ignore the August warning and leave the Eastern Seaboard undefended.

For 8 years Bush took responsibility for nothing and now you're pointing the finger at the other side.

The Sequester or CR reflects Republican Spending levels. These levels are far less than the Dems want, and they are far less than the spending levels of the Bush years where W didn't veto one piece of Republican Pork ... Bridge to Nowhere. We didn't hear a fucking peep when Bush doubled Clinton's spending and raised the debt ceiling 7 times, 3 of which were with a GOP House and Senate. Not a fucking peep.

I agree with you though. It is Obama's economy. He allowed himself to be filibustered and obstructed to death. FDR and LBJ would have outsmarted the bastards trying to destroy his economy but Obama lacked the political courage to fight. All legislation is being stopped by a Republican House that has been told that even a 1% compromise with Obama will result in a Koch funded primary challenge. It's politics and Obama is losing. It's a failure of leadership. It's the Carter syndrome.

But since you didn't complain about the Bush spending years, and since Bush failed to take responsibility for stuff that happened on his watch, you and your party lack credibility when you talk about accountability. It just sounds silly.

 

[Londoner]

And don't talk to us about private property.

Your current party started with Reagan's promise for free markets and it ended with the Bush/Paulson TARP, the greatest bail out of capitalism in history. What a fucking farce.

Your party is funded by corporations who beg the nanny state for patent protection - so that big government can build a monopoly fence around their investments (private property). Please study the lobbying empires that GOP friendly corporations have created to suck subsidies, bailouts, and regulatory favors from the nanny state. They have contempt for market outcomes. They live off the taxpayer and convince stupid people that they care about freedom. You've been lied to and the rest of us are paying the price.

 

[francoHFW]

eXCEPT THE tp has cost the economy 1 per cent in growth THREE TIMES WITH PHONY CRISES, AND BY BLOCKING A JOBS BILL, AND have blocked ALL oBAMA POLICIES since 2/4/2010....iT'S MORE theirs, the feqqing morons...

 

[GWV5903]

Their policies have given us the worst economy since the FDR Depression but it's Bush and Boehners fault, maybe Reagan's fault too.

FDR Depression?

You should sue your High School -- they screwed you out of an education.


It's unfair for some states to unleash people this stupid on the rest of us.

Why is it the first words out of your mouth include "sue", could it be that you're a liberal???

The End of the Great Depression

To many at the time, President Roosevelt was a hero. They believed that he cared deeply for the common man and that he was doing his best to end the Great Depression. Looking back, however, it is uncertain as to how much Roosevelt's New Deal programs helped to end the Great Depression. By all accounts, the New Deal programs eased the hardships of the Great Depression; however, the U.S. economy was still extremely bad by the end of the 1930s.

So you had what kind of education?

F'ing idgit...

You're the poster child for education, face it stupid beat the hell out of your dumbass...