The point is that the Dems spent too much money, not just that they spent some money at all.
Um, Dubya spent almost as much $ on stimulus spending as Obama did. Yes, some of Dubya's has been paid back, but how the hell can you say, with a straight face, that Dubya's $700 billion in TARP spending isn't "too much" spending yet Obama's $780 billion stimulus is?
I think you missed the point I'm making (or are sidestepping it). I'm not comparing Bush's spending in 2008 to Obama's spending in 2009/2010. I'm looking at four recessionary cycles which have occurred in the last 30 years and comparing them. I'm making note that in 3 of the four cycles, spending during the recession itself increased only modestly, but in one spending increased dramatically. I'm then noting that in the first three cases, the recession turned around almost like clockwork right around 2 years after starting, but in the fourth case, the one in which spending increased dramatically instead of modestly, that hasn't happened. Unemployment specifically has remained high, when in all the others you can see a very clear reversal.
I'm then speculating that the reason this recession is different than those others is because of the higher spending rate
And as a side point, I'm also noting which parties were in power at the time. In the first recession we had a Dem congress and GOP president. In the second, we had the same. In the third, we had a GOP congress and a GOP president. In the fourth, the one where we haven't recovered, we very initially had a GOP president and Dem congress, but then the Dems won the white house and large majorities in both houses. The relevant point there is that Bush spent the necessary money on TARP (unfortunately with some extra spending the Dems slipped in as well). Then Obama doubled that amount in the Recovery Act. Then he and the Dems spent even more money in various stimulus amendments added into energy, omnibus, jobs, and education bills over the next year.
That's why the spending was so much higher. So if I'm right that the increased spending is why the economy isn't recovering, than it's pretty safe to put the fault squarely on the Dems.
And when did the recession start, numb-nuts? December of 2007 is the commonly agreed time-frame, so it isn't a stretch to say Obama inherited it from Dubya- WHOM STARTED YOUR "TOO MUCH" SPENDING WITH TARP!!!
It doesn't matter who was there when the recession started. The question is who spent the extra money that pushed us from "enough to help" to "so much we're going to have a debt problem". That part of it clearly fell to the Dems. Let's also not forget that the Dems controlled congress in 2008 when TARP was passed. That bill was about half again as expensive as the original plan called for. The Dems dropped a bunch more money into it, and spent the money poorly IMO. It still worked, and it was still necessary, but TARP was more expensive than it had to be because of the Democrats
Add in even more spending after that, and this is why we're in a deficit crisis today. The numbers are pretty hard to argue with. I'll post them if you want.
Obama's stimulus ALSO propped up many States that were on their way to bankruptcy, which we can BOTH agree was necessary. Dubya's propped up banks/lenders & insurers, which was also necessary.
You can label anything as "necessary" if you try hard enough. The Dems spent too much money. Period. Neither you, nor I, probably want to go into so much detail to look at every dollar spent and where it went, but the end result was that far too much money was spent and this caused a second economic problem.
Oh, & Obama's stimulus included $281 billion in tax cuts- which I'm SURE you are for. So really, you're talking out of your ass here.
Hahahahahahaha! Please tell me you're not going to repeat that bit of lie/rhetoric.
Very little of those "tax cuts" were really cuts in tax rates, or even deductions. They were "tax credits", which is basically increased spending laundered through the IRS. They are in no way at all what conservatives are talking about when we speak of cutting taxes. The fact that the only people who insist that those tax cuts were things that conservatives should have liked are liberals, while conservatives rejected them pretty universally as a scam should be your first clue that they weren't something that conservatives liked or wanted.
But keep on blaming Obama's stimulus if it makes you feel better: but it ISN'T the reason we may be heading for another Recession no matter how hard you try & make it so.
First off, it's not just an official measure of recession that matters. Other factors in the economy matter as well, even if we're not in full recession. The rate of recovery has been anemic. Normally, there is a "bounce". We didn't get one this time. I'd also suggest that all those people who are unemployed right now aren't so thrilled with the fact that since GDP growth is positive instead of negative, that this means we're not in a recession, so everything is just peachy.
The jobs haven't come back. And that's something lots of people kinda care about.
It's too bad that Obama didn't compromise with Republicans back in 2009
He didn't have too as he had the majority in both the house & senate, at the time.
Which would be a far better ringing endorsement if the decisions made didn't have such negative consequences. Consequences that the side he ignored and overruled warned about repeatedly.
They've shown no willingness to compromise at all.
Are you fuc
king kidding? The bill Boner (Yes, that's an intentional misspelling) passed on was a better deal for pubbies than the one that passed, & it lowered the deficit more than the one passed by including the closing of tax loopholes & the raising of taxes on the top 2%!
Once again. It was such a great deal for the GOP that the only people insisting it was a great deal for the GOP are Dems and liberals. Does it ever occur to you that maybe it really wasn't such a great deal for conservatives and that's why they rejected it?
Are you fucking delusional or just retarded?!
I'm not the one who sounds like the political equivalent of a used car salesman. Edited, Aug 24th 2011 2:24pm by gbaji