Obama Approval Ratings Dip in New Poll

[one...two...tree 2,762]

If he had followed the example of Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge, this recession would already be well out of the trough and Obama would be hailed as a God.

Most economists would disagree with that assessment.

I know.

Most economists follow Keyne's Swiss Cheese logic.

I'll take Swiss over Limburger any day.

So would most economists. Which is why we are forced to endure the poverty and unemployment generated by lasting depressions for years to come.

We need sound economic policy now more than ever.

I agree...but as to what is defined as sound is the issue. I find it intriguing that there is such an ideological divide with economics. There's got to be wiggle room in the middle somewhere.

At the very basis, the divide lies in who should manage one's economic affairs--The individual or the State.

Most economists advocate the later, which leads to poverty and depression.

The former, however, leads to economic prosperity and rising standards of living.

Through analysis of the government's economic policies, this is an empirically-proven fact.

That's not accurate in the least, Matt. Most economists, particularly the ones who embrace Keynesian economics are believe it is a mixture of both the private and public working together for solutions.

[Heracles 417]

At the very basis, the divide lies in who should manage one's economic affairs--The individual or the State.

Most economists advocate the later, which leads to poverty and depression.

The former, however, leads to economic prosperity and rising standards of living.

Through analysis of the government's economic policies, this is an empirically-proven fact.

That's not accurate in the least, Matt. Most economists, particularly the ones who embrace Keynesian economics are believe it is a mixture of both the private and public working together for solutions.

I am still waiting on Matt to show me an example of his approach and its success in the real world, as the top 20 GDP per capita nations seem to show otherwise. China's GDP is actually growing at 7.8% and they are all about government involvement.

Public / Private cooperation is exactly the way to go. Signs of that are in every developed country. To the contrary, the end result of allowing companies to do what they want is everywhere in America. Run down cities and broken dreams. For example, allowing private industry such as oil companies and auto companies (individuals) to buy up and rip out rail from various cities in the 60's, so they they earned a profit at the expense of everyone else. Now America is left with severely inadequate public transport options.

Edited July 21, 2009 by haza

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Its going to take a long time to get us out the mess that George put us in

This wasn't George's economic mess. Depending on whom you believe, it started during Reagan's administration, but equally guilty are all the administrations who followed. Their laissez faire policies perpetuated the initial problem. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Greenspan is by far the biggest player in all this mess.

(Some even blame Tricky ####### for taking us off the gold standard). Personally, I blame Bob Dole for pushing the compromise bill that made employers make matching payments for Social Security and Medicare, thus creating a huge fund that has artificially reduced the deficit, while at the same time, increasing national debt by creating long term obligations that can never be honored in full.

I think think folks call that a Ponzie scheme. People generally go to jail for things like that.

[Heracles 417]

Health care and SS must be reformed and modernized.

The both need the opposite solutions. Healthcare needs a public (single payer) option that covers the basics as well as basic preventative care. SS should be scraped. It should be replaced with a unlimited private 401K equivalent plan and coupled with a aged pension option for people who over 67 that do not have any 401K left to draw from or it has run out, due to their age. Employers would mandatory have to contribute 8% on top of your salary to the 401K equivalent.

[mRx 16]

At the very basis, the divide lies in who should manage one's economic affairs--The individual or the State.

Most economists advocate the later, which leads to poverty and depression.

The former, however, leads to economic prosperity and rising standards of living.

Through analysis of the government's economic policies, this is an empirically-proven fact.

That's not accurate in the least, Matt. Most economists, particularly the ones who embrace Keynesian economics are believe it is a mixture of both the private and public working together for solutions.

I am still waiting on Matt to show me an example of his approach and its success in the real world, as the top 20 GDP per capita nations seem to show otherwise. China's GDP is actually growing at 7.8% and they are all about government involvement.

Public / Private cooperation is exactly the way to go. Signs of that are in every developed country. To the contrary, the end result of allowing companies to do what they want is everywhere in America. Run down cities and broken dreams. For example, allowing private industry such as oil companies and auto companies (individuals) to buy up and rip out rail from various cities in the 60's, so they they earned a profit at the expense of everyone else. Now America is left with severely inadequate public transport options.

A good example would have to be from 1921-1927. Secretary Andrew Mellon maintained very low taxation during this period. The Federal Funds rate was nearly in line with the supply/demand market for money. State-coerced regulation was low, and investment was high. I don't have the figures, but wages and standards of living rose significantly.

Don't even begin to try to pull a "look where that led us"; It wasn't until 1927 when the Federal Funds rate was lowered, and inflation commenced. This was so Ben Strong could help his buddy over at the Bank of England with their gold-drain problem.

The period of 1921-1927 was a period of great prosperity, and surprisingly (to you), it was provided by the market, not the government.

[mRx 16]

If he had followed the example of Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge, this recession would already be well out of the trough and Obama would be hailed as a God.

Most economists would disagree with that assessment.

I know.

Most economists follow Keyne's Swiss Cheese logic.

I'll take Swiss over Limburger any day.

So would most economists. Which is why we are forced to endure the poverty and unemployment generated by lasting depressions for years to come.

We need sound economic policy now more than ever.

I agree...but as to what is defined as sound is the issue. I find it intriguing that there is such an ideological divide with economics. There's got to be wiggle room in the middle somewhere.

At the very basis, the divide lies in who should manage one's economic affairs--The individual or the State.

Most economists advocate the later, which leads to poverty and depression.

The former, however, leads to economic prosperity and rising standards of living.

Through analysis of the government's economic policies, this is an empirically-proven fact.

That's not accurate in the least, Matt. Most economists, particularly the ones who embrace Keynesian economics are believe it is a mixture of both the private and public working together for solutions.

I don't believe these "mixtures" work well at all, Steve. And history will side with me on that.

The government works together through the power of a fist. That's hardly what I would consider working together.

[nowhereman 1]

If he had followed the example of Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge, this recession would already be well out of the trough and Obama would be hailed as a God.

Most economists would disagree with that assessment.

I know.

Most economists follow Keyne's Swiss Cheese logic.

I'll take Swiss over Limburger any day.

So would most economists. Which is why we are forced to endure the poverty and unemployment generated by lasting depressions for years to come.

We need sound economic policy now more than ever.

I agree...but as to what is defined as sound is the issue. I find it intriguing that there is such an ideological divide with economics. There's got to be wiggle room in the middle somewhere.

At the very basis, the divide lies in who should manage one's economic affairs--The individual or the State.

Most economists advocate the later, which leads to poverty and depression.

The former, however, leads to economic prosperity and rising standards of living.

Through analysis of the government's economic policies, this is an empirically-proven fact.

That's not accurate in the least, Matt. Most economists, particularly the ones who embrace Keynesian economics are believe it is a mixture of both the private and public working together for solutions.

I don't believe these "mixtures" work well at all, Steve. And history will side with me on that.

The government works together through the power of a fist. That's hardly what I would consider working together.

I'm with Steve on this one... both the private & public sector need to cooperate with each other to get us out of the economic mess we're in. Citizens need to do their part as well (e.g. a major reason for the mortage crisis is people bought houses they could barely afford & when the recession hit they lost the narrow thin margin between being able to pay the bills & not being able to).

[mRx 16]

If he had followed the example of Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge, this recession would already be well out of the trough and Obama would be hailed as a God.

Most economists would disagree with that assessment.

I know.

Most economists follow Keyne's Swiss Cheese logic.

I'll take Swiss over Limburger any day.

So would most economists. Which is why we are forced to endure the poverty and unemployment generated by lasting depressions for years to come.

We need sound economic policy now more than ever.

I agree...but as to what is defined as sound is the issue. I find it intriguing that there is such an ideological divide with economics. There's got to be wiggle room in the middle somewhere.

At the very basis, the divide lies in who should manage one's economic affairs--The individual or the State.

Most economists advocate the later, which leads to poverty and depression.

The former, however, leads to economic prosperity and rising standards of living.

Through analysis of the government's economic policies, this is an empirically-proven fact.

That's not accurate in the least, Matt. Most economists, particularly the ones who embrace Keynesian economics are believe it is a mixture of both the private and public working together for solutions.

I don't believe these "mixtures" work well at all, Steve. And history will side with me on that.

The government works together through the power of a fist. That's hardly what I would consider working together.

I'm with Steve on this one... both the private & public sector need to cooperate with each other to get us out of the economic mess we're in. Citizens need to do their part as well (e.g. a major reason for the mortage crisis is people bought houses they could barely afford & when the recession hit they lost the narrow thin margin between being able to pay the bills & not being able to).

That's an effect of the cause. The cause is outlined succinctly in my post on the previous page.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Poor Steven. His kneepads are gettin worn!

[mendeleev 68]

A fact that support Steve is the fact that the Chinese stimulus, relative to their economy, was way bigger than what Obama or anyone in Europe has tried. And theirs is the first economy to return to robust growth.

It is a combination or private and public contributions that, working together, can lead an ailing economy back to growth in the current circumstances. Obama's stimulus. to the extent that it has shortcomings, was simply too small. But it was the biggest he could get through, given that in those days he was heavily invested in trying to get bipartisan support. It was his mistake that he tried to gain the cooperation of those who are more wedded to their ideology than to the welfare of the nation!

Edited July 21, 2009 by novotul

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

A fact that support Steve is the fact that the Chinese stimulus, relative to their economy, was way bigger than what Obama or anyone in Europe has tried. And theirs is the first economy to return to robust growth.

It is a combination or private and public contributions that, working together, can lead an ailing economy back to growth in the current circumstances. Obama's stimulus. to the extent that it has shortcomings, was simply too small.

I do wonder where all these infrastructure projects that they were talking about were going on. Doesn't seem to much in the way of that going on over my way.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

A fact that support Steve is the fact that the Chinese stimulus, relative to their economy, was way bigger than what Obama or anyone in Europe has tried. And theirs is the first economy to return to robust growth.

It is a combination or private and public contributions that, working together, can lead an ailing economy back to growth in the current circumstances. Obama's stimulus. to the extent that it has shortcomings, was simply too small.

I do wonder where all these infrastructure projects that they were talking about were going on. Doesn't seem to much in the way of that going on over my way.

Keep on wonderin! Watch out for a little cap and trade sneakin up behind ya!

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

A fact that support Steve is the fact that the Chinese stimulus, relative to their economy, was way bigger than what Obama or anyone in Europe has tried. And theirs is the first economy to return to robust growth.

It is a combination or private and public contributions that, working together, can lead an ailing economy back to growth in the current circumstances. Obama's stimulus. to the extent that it has shortcomings, was simply too small.

I do wonder where all these infrastructure projects that they were talking about were going on. Doesn't seem to much in the way of that going on over my way.

That's because you saps in SoCal didn't vote in enough Nancy supporters. There is more orange around the North Bay Area than I have seen in years. Somebody is paying CalTrans, and it ain't the State of California writing IOU's. Overtime too! Crews are running more often than not, day and night, sometimes seven days a week.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think I'll play some Journey. Might even post some youtube links in a bit. Apparent alls well with the world if there's bad 80's ####### rock playing in the background.

A fact that support Steve is the fact that the Chinese stimulus, relative to their economy, was way bigger than what Obama or anyone in Europe has tried. And theirs is the first economy to return to robust growth.

It is a combination or private and public contributions that, working together, can lead an ailing economy back to growth in the current circumstances. Obama's stimulus. to the extent that it has shortcomings, was simply too small.

I do wonder where all these infrastructure projects that they were talking about were going on. Doesn't seem to much in the way of that going on over my way.

That's because you saps in SoCal didn't vote in enough Nancy supporters. There is more orange around the North Bay Area than I have seen in years. Somebody is paying CalTrans, and it ain't the State of California writing IOU's. Overtime too! Crews are running more often than not, day and night, sometimes seven days a week.

I don't live in SoCal.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I think I'll play some Journey. Might even post some youtube links in a bit. Apparent alls well with the world if there's bad 80's ####### rock playing in the background.

A fact that support Steve is the fact that the Chinese stimulus, relative to their economy, was way bigger than what Obama or anyone in Europe has tried. And theirs is the first economy to return to robust growth.

It is a combination or private and public contributions that, working together, can lead an ailing economy back to growth in the current circumstances. Obama's stimulus. to the extent that it has shortcomings, was simply too small.

I do wonder where all these infrastructure projects that they were talking about were going on. Doesn't seem to much in the way of that going on over my way.

That's because you saps in SoCal didn't vote in enough Nancy supporters. There is more orange around the North Bay Area than I have seen in years. Somebody is paying CalTrans, and it ain't the State of California writing IOU's. Overtime too! Crews are running more often than not, day and night, sometimes seven days a week.

I don't live in SoCal.

I thought you lived around Los Angeles, at least at one time.