Poll: Bush, Obama nearly tied for blame on bad economy

Originally posted by zroth

In 1920 there was no debt. Duh, there was no central bank.

In 1948 we were $250 billion in the hole.
In 1972 we were $435 billion in the hole.

In 2000 we were $5.674 triliion in debt. (Bush's first year in office)
In 2009 we were just over $12 trillion in debt. (Transitioned out of Bush's era)

Bush doubled the US debt in 8 years.

I am not sure how Obama is even being compared in his 20 months in office.

Fact the United States has always been in debt, starting with what the forefathers agreed to pay for the land to the English and European owners of it, in the aftermath of the Revolutionary War.

Fact the closest the United States ever came to not being in debt was 1821 under Andrew Jackson when it was down to just 22,000.00. However international manipulation at the Second United States Bank who’s charter was due to shortly expire caused runaway hyperinflation and our debt has only grown exponentially ever since.

Fact the Federal Reserve was created in 1911 under Woodrow Wilson a Democrat (though that doesn’t matter but I sense your errant post is politically motivated and biased) so we did have a Central Bank in 1920.

Fact in 1920 we were more in debt than ever because Max Warburg head of the German Reich’s Bank, and Paul Warburg his biological brother and head of the U.S. Federal Reserve, agreed at Lord Rothschild’s insistence that Germany would be responsible for Brittan’s and France’s World War I loans made to them by the Federal Reserve.

Fact this led to our Bankruptcy in 1933 and the United States has been in receivership ever since.

Fact the debt has continued to grow unabated during that time.

Fact some people confuse brief periods where the Federal Government has balanced and not gone over it’s budget as meaning the nation is not in debt.

The nation is always in debt, has always been in debt, and will always be in debt, because that’s how the International Banking Cartel exerts power over nations to rule them through a one world shadow government.

Your post actually contains not one shred of factual information.

Thanks!

Originally posted by centurion1211
This thread is about the changing perception by the voters as to who is to blame. That may not be the same as who is actually to blame, but it will have a profound effect on upcoming elections, and possibly result in obama being a so-called "lame duck" president only half way through his (likely at this point) only term in office.

Here's the problem.

Albeit very slowly, the economy is recovering.

In order for the GOP to regain the whitehouse they need the economy to fail or not recover markedly before 2012.

reply to post by maybereal11


I would not say that the economy is slowly recovering; so much as I would say that the marketplaces and people are slowly adjusting to a bad economy.

This is in large part from people reevaluating their priorities, wants and needs based on their available income and prioritizing their purchases because of that into certain categories as a result.

So what we are seeing in some cases is nominal 1% to 2% increases in sales in certain markets over the previous year, which the government happily publishes, but it of course doesn’t publish the 1% to 5% decreases over the previous year in other markets are what is essentially enabling the incremental and slight increases in others.

While many imagine the stock market is an indicator of the economies vitality it is not, it is an indicator of the stock markets vitality, which the majority of Americans do not have a vested interest in.

The two real indicators are jobs, we are still shedding them, and there can be no economic recovery without jobs no matter what the political pundits and spin doctors say.

The second real indicator is shipping. Shipping, railroad and trucking companies keep track of the actual amount of bulk goods they ship by category.

If those numbers are decreasing (we know the population isn’t decreasing) that means that there is less demand, because there are fewer consumers with the money to purchase those products.

So in other words if basic food stuffs being shipped have decreased by 5% over the previous years, but car sales are up 1%, people are eating less to afford that new car, which is often a necessity to in order to get to work.

Because they are selectively presenting these numbers, by displaying the small increases in some categories and withholding the small but larger decreases in other categories this creates the illusion of a ‘slow’ recovery, but in reality it’s just a realignment of priorities in a bad economy.

As usual they are counting on people being poorly informed and informed with only selective information and not all the information for the sake of drawing a false conclusion for the purpose of partisan politics.

While temporary census jobs numbering in the millions have offset some of the true numbers on job losses, the truth is that not only are these simply temporary jobs that produce nothing to make the economy more vital, but that there really can be no ‘true’ recovery without jobs, and no ‘real’ recovery unless some of those jobs include manufacturing real renewable economic opportunities based on creating something of real value.

Thanks.

Trying to find "the culprit" for an economic issue is a fools game. The real task, and it's a very complex and challenging one, is to determine the conditions which likely caused us to lean in this direction. These conditions might be the policies of this or that president, or congress, but it's almost never any one party in a vacuum. Our economy is so complex (perhaps stupidly so), that to point to a person or group is ensuring that you are ignoring some other, likely major factors.

Originally posted by maybereal11

Originally posted by centurion1211
This thread is about the changing perception by the voters as to who is to blame. That may not be the same as who is actually to blame, but it will have a profound effect on upcoming elections, and possibly result in obama being a so-called "lame duck" president only half way through his (likely at this point) only term in office.

Here's the problem.

Albeit very slowly, the economy is recovering.

In order for the GOP to regain the whitehouse they need the economy to fail or not recover markedly before 2012.

Just like democrats needed the wars to appear to be going badly to help them win elections in 2006 and 2008? Kerry and Murtha sure tried hard enough to put out such false propaganda anyway ...

It's also a very real possibility the obama's economic policies will be what turns out to be a failure - not just what people say about them. And then will he and the rest of the dems still be blaming Bush after a total of 4 years, or will obama finally take responsibility FOR SOMETHING?

[edit on 8/5/2010 by centurion1211]

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler


The two real indicators are jobs, we are still shedding them, and there can be no economic recovery without jobs no matter what the political pundits and spin doctors say.

THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- JUNE 2010


Total nonfarm payroll employment declined by 125,000 in June, and the
unemployment rate edged down to 9.5 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics reported today. The decline in payroll employment reflected
a decrease (-225,000) in the number of temporary employees working on
Census 2010. Private-sector payroll employment edged up by 83,000.

www.bls.gov...

Excluding census and gov jobs...we are adding jobs.

Also see unemplyment chart here...leveled off and falling.
www.tradingeconomics.com...

and here..
www.bls.gov...

Unemployment peaked in Christmas 2009. We are on the other end of it.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

The second real indicator is shipping. Shipping, railroad and trucking companies keep track of the actual amount of bulk goods they ship by category.

Shipping...analysts measure this by the Baltic Dry Index (international Shipping)

It hit a low of about 680 something in 2009...It's at almost 2000 now.

It's a bumpy road, but it is an upward trend.

See here and select the 3 year chart for context.
www.bloomberg.com...:IND

Also see here for the Cass Index (USA Shipping)

US shipping activity continued to grow through June despite signs of faltering recovery in manufacturing output and consumer spending.


The closely watched Cass Freight Index of shipment activity jumped 9% in June from the previous month and leaped at a racy 19% compared with a year ...

www.ci-online.co.uk...

Here is the Cass Freight Index
2010 Expenditures Shipments

Jan 1.462 0.899
Feb 1.549 0.930
Mar 1.663 0.974
Apr 1.689 0.991
May 1.784 1.014
Jun 1.919 1.106
Jul 1.832 1.011

Significantly up from the bottom in 2009
www.cassinfo.com...

Absent political rhetoric purposes I just don't see the point of doom and gloom claims when the stats say otherwise.

Most objective folks..the ones that have money on the line and thus are uninterested in the politics of economics, agree we are in a recovery.

I admit it's not a boom/bust cycle, but rather a slow recovery, but a recovery all the same and I can do with a break from the boom/bust cycle we have been in for the past 30 years.

[edit on 5-8-2010 by maybereal11]

[edit on 5-8-2010 by maybereal11]

Originally posted by centurion1211

Just like democrats needed the wars to appear to be going badly to help them win elections in 2006 and 2008? Kerry and Murtha sure tried hard enough to put out such false propaganda anyway ...
[edit on 8/5/2010 by centurion1211]

Appear to go badly? Propaganda?

Yes...seven years and those wars were just going just lovely lol

Mission Accomplished!!!!

[edit on 5-8-2010 by maybereal11]

reply to post by maybereal11


Once again no, adding jobs and a decrease in the number of people on the unemployment roles is not the same thing.

People who's benefits run out, and people who stop looking for work through state employment agencies, have not necessarily found jobs.

Its just a way of looking at the situation from the top down, as opposed to the bottom up.

Futher your own figures show a decrease in overall shipping from June to August, so that is not a solid upward trend, and is alarming because the next market years cars should be being shipped in July.

Considering car sales have been up 1% in July the decrease in shipping denotes a sacrifice in other consumer markets for people to be able to afford the purchases that led to that slight increase.

Your assessment is only going to be as good as the quality of information you obtain, and it's detail by the way.

Nor do your shipping figures show how the tonnage breaks down into categories.

The spin doctors play wordgames, like a decrease in unemployment versus an increase in employment.

It's not an accurate reflection and it's purposefully meant to not be an accurate reflection.

It's not about doom and gloom my friend, it's about understanding the true situation.

Thanks.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Futher your own figures show a decrease in overall shipping from June to August, so that is not a solid upward trend, and is alarming because the next market years cars should be being shipped in July.

Yes June up, July down..august to be determined, that is the way indicators work. If you look at the 1 yr, 2 yr, 3yr trend...it is a significant upward trend from the bottom in 2009.

You are bright. We can be honest can't we? Not just sieze on July and declare a trend?

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by maybereal11

 

Once again no, adding jobs and a decrease in the number of people on the unemployment roles is not the same thing.

Both are an improvement from 2009...

reply to post by maybereal11


Once again though you have to consider how other non-durable good portions of the market play into it, when it comes to determining whether you have a recovery or a readjustment.

If hotel bookings, movie reciepts, recreational areas, and other service industry segments that revolve around no shippable product are still way off their 2004-2007 highs then you have clear evidence of those who are employed but strapped simply adjusting and modifying their spending habits.

I think we might agree that entertainments and recreation are important aspects of enjoying a truly quality oriented life.

How many peope are opting to now clean their clothes at home instead of sending them to the cleaners? How many people are now mowing their own laws instead of paying someone? How many people are opting to eat at home instead of dining out? How many people are renting a movie versus opting going to the movies. How many people have opted to go camping and drive to a national park, instead of fly to a Disney resort?

How many of these people have chosen to do this out of necessity to balance their budgets or put food on the table.

These are all factors that have to be looked at, the total picture, and honestly a dip in shipping in July could be troubling, as it's not only prime vactaion time, when people are often consuming, but also prime back to school time buying of durable goods too.

I won't go so far as to say the economy isn't improving, I would go so far to say is that there really isn't enough information out there in one place, or even a consortium to easily get an accurate reflection of the true big picture.

The media and politicians focus on narrow points of focus for talking points both pro and con.

I have seen a marginal but sustained increase in my own business, but I personally believe its because so many people have avoided the market place as long as they can and after making readjustments are making necessary and vital purchases.

I can honestly say my own numbers are still 60% off of 2006 highs, though they are up from a 30% low based on those figures.

Because I am in business for myself and have to budget accordingly I can't afford to misidentify trends or make critical decisions on incomplete or misconstrued information, but I do nonetheless look for trending patterns to gauge short term and long term expenditures.

My jury is still out based on the overall data.

Seasonal cycles, deprivation in depressed markets that people can no longer afford to stay out of, and how people are in fact readjusting their spending habits all have an impact on various specific points of the economy.

I know one thing though, and that is for anyone to use my services they have to have a job or business themselves to afford to and have a need, and because of that my business can't truly recover until the hemorraging of jobs actually stops and employment of real sustainable and renewable living wage jobs and businesses increases.

Thanks.

[edit on 5/8/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


I also own my own business.

Not much in your post I can disagree with.

My business is up from last year, but it is still off from 2006 numbers.

Last year nearly bankrupted me. I survived by the skin of my teeth and leaning heavily on Credit Cards...so while this year isn't "bad"..it will be a few years before I recover from the debt of last year. I couldn't bring myself to declare bankruptcy...so I will be running very lean for a few years and I'll need a few good years to get back to even and YES I have lost touch with my dry cleaner, cut my own lawn now and grimmace when my wife reminds me how long it's been since our last vacation...but I am alive and kicking and I know a lot of my competitors that can't say the same.

What can I say beyond that? This year is better than the last. the Dems will say it is better than it is, the GOP will say it is worse, but at the end of the day...the malls are crowded again, even if people aren't spending like they used to...we are on our way...at a snails pace...but undeniably on our way IMO.

In the end I believe we are recovering...at a snails pace...but recovering.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Once again no, adding jobs and a decrease in the number of people on the unemployment roles is not the same thing.

People who's benefits run out, and people who stop looking for work through state employment agencies, have not necessarily found jobs.

You are absolutely right Proto, they do not count people who have exhausted their unemployment benefits and still haven't found a job, the numbers are meaningless.

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
reply to post by centurion1211

 

Fact is, if you wanna get technical, Bush warned Congress before the recession and they ignored him completely.

I wanna get technical, where is it recorded where Bush warned congress about banking scams? Bush promoted the scams.

reply to post by maybereal11


Well our situations mirror one anothers except for the fact I carry no debt, but I had to do a lot of lifestyle readjustment in order to favor and meet only the most critical expenditures.

My lifestyle is radically different today than it was in 2007.

Really two completely different people when you get right down to it, and those changes involve eliminating several thousand dollars of monthly expenditures that went into the local economy.

The truth is that consumer habits and corporate policy are the two most critical factors in determining the economic health, vitality and sustainability of the economy.

The government's role in it is a very limited one.

Where government has failed, is through the educational process.

Because so many people rely on government learning institutions, and media reports released by the government, they often as a result end up crippled through a lack of understanding of the true factors that drive the economy.

The truth is that the economy has been in dire straights since the mid seventies, and has functioned by hiding inflation through raping third world nations of goods and labor to produce goods at a fraction of the cost. That though has stripped our essential and critical manufacturing capabilities and renewable sustainable living wage jobs and made the economy dependent on a series of bubles starting with a stock market bubble, followed by the savings and loan bubble, followed by the dot com bubble, followed by the real estate bublle, followed by the banking bubble to simply inject large amounts of cash through credit into the economy to keep it moving.

Yet the truth is all these bad ideas required consumers making bad decisions, and what the government has failed to do is better educate people on the real risks and the real impact their own consuming and borrowing habits actually have.

That isn't partisan, that's just failure of government in general to educate through real information and espouse fiscal common sense.

Personally redistribution of wealth to me has come to signify taking money from one sector (luxury and entertainment) to transfer it to other sectors (energy, housing and food).

To take it from one nation to the next as we pay for cheaper resources, and cheaper labor, and often cheaper quality abroad, so the Corporate Executives and Stock Holders can still recognize a healthy and flat return, at the expense of the wage earners, and the long term viability of such unmitigated greed.

Much of this too does have to do with International Corporations favoring an international government and redistributing wealth to basically create a parity amongst nations in the standard of living, but that necessitates to a large extent radically decreasing the Americn standard of living while only marginally increasing other nations standards of living.

Bottom line we both know we don't have as much money in our pockets as we once did, and its not because we aren't willing to work or innovate, or are innefective at what we do.

We are actually the survivors (to date) that have been able to inovate and adjust, but by both our own admissions things are slightly better than they were at there worst, and that is cause for some optimism, but when you look at the true underlying driving factors, that is cause for some pessismism because those critical ellements really have not changed at all.

Thanks my friend.

Originally posted by Aquarius1
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

 

Once again no, adding jobs and a decrease in the number of people on the unemployment roles is not the same thing.

People who's benefits run out, and people who stop looking for work through state employment agencies, have not necessarily found jobs.

You are absolutely right Proto, they do not count people who have exhausted their unemployment benefits and still haven't found a job, the numbers are meaningless.

This is true and what is also interesting when it comes to the numbers when they hired millions of census workers they proclaimed a net job gain without specifying that it was the result of millions of census workers being temporarily hired.

Now that they are firing those temporary census workers they are excluding them from the 'decrease' in unemployment citing them as 'government' jobs, yet when they added them to begin with they added them as an increase in employment not citing they were government jobs!

So it's really all about creating an illussion, but the truth is we all know whether we have a job, and whether we are making ends meet, and far do many of us don't and aren't, and no accurate statistic really displays how that number might be increasing or decreasing.

Thanks my friend.

reply to post by centurion1211

Also there are others to blame for the state of the US economy and
in fact the world.

They are a new breed of pirate, they traded their parrot and
eye patch for a nice suit and expensive shoes.

The roam wall street and places like it and create mind bending
fantasy financial instruments and then use soft money to have
politicians pass laws so that the OTC market is not regulated.

Then they hide their $1,200 Trillion derivatives bubble there,
and do "test runs" on countries like Iceland.

Ppl have written books on the pirates, and the revolving door
between the government, but reading is hard for most ppl and
TV is easy and Sports and American Idol is on !

But the writer did get some video released on the web.



How the scam was run in written words.

theinternationalforecaster.com...

Even warren buffett warned of the colossal ponzi scheme over
6 years before the first "trickle" unspooled in 2008.

www.marketwatch.com...

Also fresh on Buffett's mind: His acquisition of General Re four years earlier, about the time the Long-Term Capital Management hedge fund almost killed the global monetary system. How? This is crucial: LTCM nearly killed the system with a relatively small $5 billion trading loss. Peanuts compared with the hundreds of billions of dollars of subprime-credit write-offs now making Wall Street's big shots look like amateurs. Buffett tried to sell off Gen Re's derivatives group. No buyers. Unwinding it was costly, but led to his warning that derivatives are a "financial weapon of mass destruction." That was 2002.

I say first trickle because this monster has grown to surreal
size that is larger than the global money supply.

But those who understand the fractional reserve central banking
system find that as no surprise.

Good Luck to all the good ppl !

Originally posted by maybereal11
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

 

In the end I believe we are recovering...at a snails pace...but recovering.

They did this by printing massive amounts of money, backed by nothing,
and they have done it a few times so far.

A direct injection of inflation that basically makes any money you
have saved worth a little less and increase the price of goods.

In crash we may see deflation for awhile, but then inflation will
hit certain items that will be in demand.

This suckers rally is the same thing that happened after 1929.

img88.imageshack.us...

The biggest difference between then and now is we did not import
over 70% of our oil.

If our money is made worth a lot less, and nations want hard
currency such as silver or gold this whole house of cards will fall.

Typical American response to a poll question.

Ask the average American and they will blame whoever Fox News is blaming at the moment (Obama). That's the only reason to explain why more people think it's his fault.

What a clueless country.

Originally posted by The Sword
Typical American response to a poll question.

Ask the average American and they will blame whoever Fox News is blaming at the moment (Obama). That's the only reason to explain why more people think it's his fault.

What a clueless country.

Really in your country you don't hold your leaders to account for the state of affairs?

Regardless of who's fault it is (England's) and the deceptions involved (Rome's) once again an American political vassal (Obama) lied to the American people and claimed he had 'answers' and a 'team' that could 'solve' the problem.

I don't watch Fox news or the BBC.

I do though pay attention to what people say and hold them accountable for those things!

Thanks.