New study confirms economy was destroyed by Democrat policies

page: 3
15
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedShirt73
reply to post by inverslyproportional
 


Take it with a grain of salt. An article could come out tomorrow saying that the Republicans destroyed the economy and the author was basically a Democrat diehard. Both sides are biased towards the other regardless who writes what.


Agreed, without a doubt neither side is on the side of the people.

The poster I commented on, just seemed to be using one of the oldest tsctics in the book to discredit before review.

It is information bias, it is a known human weakness, and used to exploit human shortcommings.

Very few, even us ATSers are able to overcome it, even knowing it exists.

Just trying to keep everyone honest.




posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by watchitburn
Good job folks. Way to stick it to the corrupt scum.
Keep bickering back and forth about republicans and democrats.



Freaking tools....


Some great posts here tonight, yours is one.


I do wish people at the very mention of banks, not political parties per se, would consider for one minute the scale of things that have been going on. Like HSBC, one of the big banks that survived the storm of the 'financial crunch'. No wonder when it was into money laundering big time. Drug money, terrorist funds, no problem they are both mentioned in the American findings, as far as they went. But, since both of the above are rackets, who is to say that that there was not more racketeering going on and all that implies things like human trafficking, and there you can include prostitution, babies on order, slavery, organs and the list is endless, and each and every one is profit in unimaginable figures, and personal tragedy for individuals, and much more. There is no particular reason to suppose that other banks were not up to the same activity knowingly, and for how long? However the there still remains the question, or rationale of the 'Financial crunch'.
edit on 27-3-2013 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 10:22 PM
link   
I think it would be more accurate to say PROGRESSIVE policies, because Progressives are on both sides of the aisle.



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 10:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Pladuim
 


I have no problem blaming Bush because he started this mess, well you can argue that Woodrow Wilson and the FED, along with Nixon taking us off of the gold standard started this, but Bush really started the spending frenzy... and Obama has only continued, except on steroids. The world lives in a debt based economy, and the only way to survive, at least for a period of time, is to create more debt and more debtors. As soon as that is impossible it will implode.



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 11:31 PM
link   
There's a short thread that deals with our current recovery (slightly) here: www.abovetopsecret.com...
Allow me to quote from the OP.

All evidence points to the fact that the economy could have been fixed and hasn't been fixed. In the economy, Obama has been a complete failure. Fixing an American economy doesn't take eight years. That's misinformation and dangerous misinformation at that.

Let's gather some facts. One group that has studied this is the Federal Reserve Bank in Atlanta. Here's what they've got to say:

U.S. history provides no support for linking low employment and high unemployment in the current recovery with the financial crisis of 2007–2008.

How do we compare to other recessions?

Charts 1 and 2 show the U.S. civilian employment rate and total civilian employment. Judging by these measures, the current U.S. recovery is atypical and very weak compared to other post World War II recoveries. As chart 1 indicates, the unemployment rate has remained persistently high since the recession, persistent in a way that did not occur in any other recession since World War II.1 And as chart 2 indicates, employment has leveled off since the recession instead of resuming its typical, continued rise.

Table 1 shows that employment was back above the pre-recession peak in every post war recession except this one within 3 1/2 years from the start of the recession.

Table 2 shows that the GDP had recovered within three years for each of the post war recessions except this one.

Table 3 looks at the Gross National Product for every severe downturn from 1882. It measures how much GNP was lost in the recession, and how much was gained back in the two years after the recession ended. The only recessions in which the GNP wasn't completely recovered was the Great Depression, and this one.

The report concludes with

The recent slow recovery is most similar to the Great Depression. Low aggregate demand for reasons unrelated to the financial crisis may be an explanation for both episodes, but uncertainty and government policies are an alternative supported by recent research on the Great Depression.

For those of you who trust science, let me repeat part of their conclusion. Recent research supports the idea that the Great Depression and this Great Recession can be explained by uncertainty and governmental policies.


It seems perfectly reasonable to say that our economy is in much worse shape than it had to be, and that was caused by the current administration's policies not the housing collapse.



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 11:35 PM
link   
The economy was not destroyed by democrats. It was destroyed by congress allowing risky and idiotic policies concerning the economy to exist. The government should have never let our jobs leave the country, free trade seems only to profit a few powerful individuals. The rest of us got screwed.



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 03:57 AM
link   
I cannot believe that intelligent, logical thinking people believe that homeowners can bring down the whole world economy. If you can't figure out the 2008 collapse was about the wars and their coming to an end and now it is time to pay the piper, you are going to feel real foolish when history finally shows it.



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by camaro68ss
Democrat Policies/ Liberal Policies destroy all civilizations. They destroy the civil society and the economy falls with it.

collapse of the Civil Society = the Collapse of the Economy
edit on 27-3-2013 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-3-2013 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)


Yeah right. We learned our lesson. People can't handle "freedoms: so can we return to the SOCIALIST SYSTEM, or maybe even COMMUNISM because this Democracy business isn't working out? LOL



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 06:37 AM
link   
Conservative Republicans will always support Corporate Enterprise - it is their one true love.

"She so fine...there's no telling where the money went"




Golly...Now where did this economy go? For the past 30 years directly into the pockets of the already super rich. OMG what a shocker! I never would have expected that. I guess the author didn't either.
edit on 28-3-2013 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 07:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Pladuim
 


Thanks to another poster regarding the author of this study....


Robert Moon is an award-winning researcher, published author, and former Regional Coordinator for the Tea Party Patriots. He has organized for conservative causes and candidates for the last fifteen years, is a former Precinct Committeeman and is currently stationed overseas.



So this Tea Party guy has proved that the Tea Party has been right all along.
I would look at this report with a great deal of skepticism and no small amount of humor.
People write anything, true or not, because some people BELIEVE anything.



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 07:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by rickymouse
The economy was not destroyed by democrats. It was destroyed by congress allowing risky and idiotic policies concerning the economy to exist. The government should have never let our jobs leave the country, free trade seems only to profit a few powerful individuals. The rest of us got screwed.


That's right and who came up with the Free Trade Agreement? Ronald Reagan he was a Republican wasn't he? The person who wrote the article is either an idiot or very biased.



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by MOMof3
I cannot believe that intelligent, logical thinking people believe that homeowners can bring down the whole world economy. If you can't figure out the 2008 collapse was about the wars and their coming to an end and now it is time to pay the piper, you are going to feel real foolish when history finally shows it.


Funny, looking around for more information on this subject, I ran into this article from The Daily Beast and not once did they even mention the wars causing the recession. Although I'm sure the wars didn't help, but they were not the major cause.

www.thedailybeast.com...

I really appreciate everyones response, and I will help dig into this more when I can sit behind my computer instead of trying to type on this phone.

Pladuim
edit on 28-3-2013 by Pladuim because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 09:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Pladuim
 


The examiner is hardly a decent source. Fact is the Wars in Afganistan and Iraq have cost 1.4 trillion dollars so far. Iraq alone was costing 300 million a day. The Pentagon on Sept 10th 2001 announced they had lost 2.1 Trillion dollars. The deficit currently is 16 trillion. 1/5th of that can be traced directly to Bush and his "policies". I remember as well the stock market crash happened at the end of Bush's term and had nothing to do with Democratic policies.

Hell yes I blame Bush.



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 09:15 AM
link   
The false left/right paradigm is a tool of control. It is farce and misdirection. To the extent that you consider those of the opposite color as "others", as any name you care to call them, as less than those who think like you do, you are controlled and managed, and you contribute to the bad circumstances we all face.

If you play into the political party game, you are palying into the hands of your masters.

All you have to do to break out of the control grid is to freaking opt out. It is that simple. You don't have to engage in a palace coup. That won't work any way. But if you stop playing their game, turn off the TV, stop taking out bank loans, stop hating Mexicans and gays and jews and arabs and whoever you hate because you have been trained to hate them by the TV and the church and Rush Limbaugh, then you begin to undermine their power and to make a real diference.

Barring that, and if you keep thinking of those liberal, lefty, commie hippie fags as somehow your enemy, then you remain firmly under the control of your corporate/state masters.

Choice is yours.

Namaste



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pladuim

President Bush went to Congress repeatedly for years warning them that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were going to destroy the economy (17 times in 2008 alone).Democrats continuously ignored him, shut down his proposals along party lines and continued raiding the institutions for campaign contributions on their way down.



Yeah, I too remember Bush repeatedly advocating for the elimination of Freddie & Fannie.

He was ferocious!






Unless Bush was a Democrat, there may be a glitch in your theory.

The blame clearly falls on both parties and the cause was initiated long before Bush took office.

It began when a Republican controlled congress push through the repeal of "The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933" via the enactment of "The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act," also know as the "Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999." Respective versions of the GLB Act were authored and introduced by (R)Phil Gramm of Texas, (in the Senate) and (R) Jim Leach of Iowa as well as (R)Thomas J Bliley Jr. of Virginia, (in the House of Representatives.) To make a long story short, The GLB Act passed both Houses on Nov. 4, 1999 and was signed into law by President Clinton on Nov. 12, 1999.

And so began the downhill slide into the creation & collapse of the housing bubble along with the "too big to fail banks" who were selling their garbage, re-package as AAA rated securities, to unsuspecting investors.

GREED is what caused the economic collapse, plain & simple.



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 09:42 AM
link   
It's my opinion that, as another member already stated, Gramm-Leach-Bliley (reapeal of Glass-Steagal) was what really put the killshot into the heart of our economy.

Regardless of whom wrote it, sponsored it or signed it into law, it was this piece of legislation that deregulated the banks.

It paved the way for deposit-holding banks to co-mingle with the investment banks, using deposits for shady ventures. It also allowed for the introduction of complex and unethical derivative markets to be established that has now become THE market bubble that will bring us down.

Blame the left or right, I don't care......but in the end it was the government leaders that bowed down to the almighty corporate banks and allowed these flood gates to be opened.



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 09:53 AM
link   
as with anything....who gains and who loses monetarily.... housing crisis, two wars, bank bailouts, tax cuts, 9/11,



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by GArnold
reply to post by Pladuim
 


The examiner is hardly a decent source. Fact is the Wars in Afganistan and Iraq have cost 1.4 trillion dollars so far. Iraq alone was costing 300 million a day. The Pentagon on Sept 10th 2001 announced they had lost 2.1 Trillion dollars. The deficit currently is 16 trillion. 1/5th of that can be traced directly to Bush and his "policies". I remember as well the stock market crash happened at the end of Bush's term and had nothing to do with Democratic policies.

Hell yes I blame Bush.


So, are you saying the housing market collapse that Bush and other republicans warned everyone about had nothing to do with the recession?

Pladuim



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Pladuim
 


Not saying that all. What proactive steps did Bush take in regards to his warnings? Oh thats right nothing. His illegal war in Iraq did more damage to the economy than what you may think. That 1.4 trillion figure does not factor in long term costs to the VA or benefits to soldiers families who were killed in combat. I have heard they give families 500 thou if the son or daughter or husband or wife is killed. I think Bush was guilty of driving the economy into the ground. And standing by and doing nothing as it happened. He was the least popular President in history at the end of his term which actually is very telling. Nixon? Nope. Carter? Nope.



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by GArnold
 


This started before Bush. The system they were using was so irrational and was going along with practices they knew failed in the past that I have to wonder if this whole mess was planned by someone advising the people in government. Deceit gone wild, thinking that we are more advanced than those before us, and overeducated idiots running the country is a large part of the problem. There are a lot of conservative Economists that were telling and hinting to the government that their chosen path wouldn't work but instead of listening to them the government chose instant gratification paths that were proven to be short lived in the past. Maybe four years of world history should be mandatory for congressmen, no other classes allowed.





new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join