relax

Author Topic: Obama and his economic team get failing marks from economists  (Read 11146 times)


Offline Harlan

  • Governor
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2102
  • Gender: Male
  • Lemon Pistachios
    • Photos...
Re: Obama and his economic team get failing marks from economists
« Reply #1 on: March 13, 2009, 11:08:54 AM »
Interesting: http://news.aol.com/main/obama-presidency/article/obama-economy/380586

Right, but which economists? This was a Wall Street Journal poll (which doesn't necessarily mean anything -- the WSJ is mostly an excellent newspaper), but they do have a specific method of polling economists, and that method generally gets Republicans. From the WSJ spreadsheet for Feb. 2008:

Quote
Which presidential candidate would be worst for the economy?               
Hillary Clinton   50%            
John McCain   5%            
Barack Obama   40%            
Mitt Romney   5%            
               
Selection of comments:               
Clinton win would mean divisiveness would rule.               
Obama would be worst, but not a lot of difference among the four.               
Good news is that the leading contenders all at least have economic advisors that know something about the economy.               
My mother taught me not to speak ill of anyone except Alan Greenspan.         
      

This said, I'm a liberal, and I wouldn't give the Obama administration much more than a C+. Pretty good job on the stimulus, given political constraints in the Senate. Decent job on communication. Pretty bad job on the banks and the credit crisis.

Offline Billz1981

  • Senator
  • ********
  • Posts: 1040
  • Gender: Male
Re: Obama and his economic team get failing marks from economists
« Reply #2 on: March 13, 2009, 11:33:16 AM »
It would be interesting to see their polling data adjusted against party identification.  In other words, economists could be for or against a candidate for various reasons, but still see their economic policies as problematic.

In fairness to President Obama, I think we should hold out on judgment.  He is dealing with an unprecedented economic crisis.  I disagree with most of his fundamental economic assumptions, but I do respect that he's trying.

I do think that this speaks to a point I made throughout the election.  Obama prior to becoming president existed only as potential energy.  Now it's time to deliver on his promises.  But people hung their hopes on him more than any other candidate in memory.  Heck, he even branded himself as the "hope" candidate.  And it turns out, Obama is just a man, and a politician like any other.  I don't fault him for it, but it was a bit naive of the American public to expect him to transcend all that.  Maybe what I think is about to happen to the economy will be cathartic.

Offline Sweeper

  • Mayor
  • ******
  • Posts: 876
Re: Obama and his economic team get failing marks from economists
« Reply #3 on: March 13, 2009, 01:53:01 PM »
Wait, Wait , Wait! He spends a considerable amount of time talking about how awful everything is, to get a "stimulus" package passed which has very few stimulants. He does this for the sole purpose of getting a favored liberal agenda jammed down the throats of tax paying Americans. For which our progeny will be paying, probably, their entire life. He then endorses a porked up budget bill, in direct contradiction to his many promises. He quadruples the deficit and then promises to cut that in half. And when all that is done, when all the hyped up fear mongering, all the predictions of the Apocalypse start coming to bear, he sends out Lawrence Summers to say the economy is doing poorly because people are irrational in their fear.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090313/ap_on_bi_ge/obama_economy
Well guess what Larry? It was your administration that purposely pumped up and use the fear to get the government more involved in the day to day lives of the American people.

Next up; Cap and Trade. Let see how the Global Changling folks try to convince people that the unseasonably cool last year was because we don't give enough money to Al Gore.

Offline essen

  • Governor
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2000
Re: Obama and his economic team get failing marks from economists
« Reply #4 on: March 13, 2009, 07:44:50 PM »
Obama prior to becoming president existed only as potential energy.  Now it's time to deliver on his promises.

I actually think he's stuck relatively well to his promises so far, considering he's only been in office since January. In fact I think he's going way too quickly and signing away too many dollars at once. But so far, those dollars haven't struck me as being much against what he said when he was running, aside from seeming like he couldn't possibly have had enough time to look through and think about everything before signing it (which is a big concern). As for earmarks, I thought McCain made the bigger deal about being against those, and Obama ended up getting roped into the discussion.

EDIT: That said, if I hear the phrase "The worst economic/financial crisis since the Great Depression" one more time... well, I'm going to be annoyed.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2009, 08:00:46 PM by essen »

Offline EddieStjohns

  • Council Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 307
  • Gender: Male
Re: Obama and his economic team get failing marks from economists
« Reply #5 on: March 13, 2009, 09:15:55 PM »
"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money"

Margaret Thatcher

Offline Debbie

  • Senator
  • ********
  • Posts: 1151
Re: Obama and his economic team get failing marks from economists
« Reply #6 on: March 16, 2009, 03:59:53 PM »
"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money"

Margaret Thatcher

There goes the 'S' word again!

Offline merm

  • Administrator
  • Governor
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2643
  • Gender: Female
Re: Obama and his economic team get failing marks from economists
« Reply #7 on: March 16, 2009, 04:26:14 PM »
It's really surprising to see people claim Obama is a Socialist. Many of my conservative friends are suddenly coming out of the woodwork saying that the government is moving towards Socialism. If that's the case I want to know where they've been the last 8 years?! Talk about expansion of government!

That being said, I hardly think Obama qualifies as a Socialist by conservative definition. The repetitive use of this word by the right shows how out of touch they remain with reality. While I welcome the change in the White House, and have more confidence in Obama on an intellectual level, he really hasn't broken from Bush's economic policies in any substantial way.

I realize he's only been in office for a short time though, and there's a giant mess to deal with at the moment. Talk about learning on the job. At any rate, I'm glad to have him as president, even if I don't think he's as far left as the right makes him out to be, or as I'd like him to be.

Offline Billz1981

  • Senator
  • ********
  • Posts: 1040
  • Gender: Male
Re: Obama and his economic team get failing marks from economists
« Reply #8 on: March 17, 2009, 10:31:24 AM »
There goes the 'S' word again!

Is the issue that you don't see what is going on as related to socialism, or that you don't see socialism as a problem?  Or is it that you just think the word is overused?

Offline casicua

  • Senator
  • ********
  • Posts: 1193
  • Gender: Male
Re: Obama and his economic team get failing marks from economists
« Reply #9 on: March 17, 2009, 11:28:39 AM »
Is the issue that you don't see what is going on as related to socialism, or that you don't see socialism as a problem?  Or is it that you just think the word is overused?

My gripe with the use of that word recently is that it seems to be nothing more than a hollow buzzword being used to villify Obama. Much like when people kept throwing around words like "fascist" at the Bush regime, it seems to me like people just trying to throw a negative term at him enough hoping to make it stick.
To touch on Merm's point- Obama has been in office for barely 2 months now, and people are already making that assumption. I think that the last 8 years have been far more "Socialist" than Obama's 2 months in office- Lest we forget Bush's Stimulus check (Just flat out giving money to every taxpayer under a certain income? That sounds pretty socialist to me)
But I suppose only time will tell. I like the job he's doing so far.

Offline Harlan

  • Governor
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2102
  • Gender: Male
  • Lemon Pistachios
    • Photos...
Re: Obama and his economic team get failing marks from economists
« Reply #10 on: March 17, 2009, 11:41:37 AM »
Good grief. The first sentence of the Wikipedia entry:

Quote
Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating public or state ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and a society characterized by equality for all individuals, with a fair or egalitarian method of compensation.

I'm not exactly sure how trying to rescue the capitalist system (from itself) is equivalent to advocating state ownership of the means of production! Even if the large banks have to be eventually nationalized, it would be for perhaps as long as... a week. And then they'd go back to private ownership.

Obama is a moderate liberal with a fondness for paternalistic libertarianism. Nobody on his team wants the government to run the financial system, or the manufacturing sector, or really anything that it doesn't currently run already.

Offline EddieStjohns

  • Council Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 307
  • Gender: Male
Re: Obama and his economic team get failing marks from economists
« Reply #11 on: March 17, 2009, 11:43:01 AM »
'The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' - Ronald Reagan

 


Offline Debbie

  • Senator
  • ********
  • Posts: 1151
Re: Obama and his economic team get failing marks from economists
« Reply #12 on: March 17, 2009, 12:59:27 PM »
Is the issue that you don't see what is going on as related to socialism, or that you don't see socialism as a problem?  Or is it that you just think the word is overused?

It has become another buzz word.  I think it is being used in a threatening way, to frighten people.  I have not lived in a Socialist nation so I am not really an expert.  I do have cousins who live in France and Sweden and they seem to have a pretty good quality of life.  All over the world, there are people who live well, and there are people who live in dire circumstances.  There are people who are free and there are people who live in tyranny.  I do not equate Socialism with tyranny or anything particularly negative.  For those who equate socialized medicine with long lines, red tape, lack of services etc. I would like to share my recent medical experiences with them.  On top of the recent fiascos my husband and I have experienced, we have paid a fortune for our procedures, in spite of having 'good health coverage'!

Offline enigmacat

  • Governor
  • ***********
  • Posts: 3817
  • Gender: Female
  • I am not a minion of evil. I am upper management.
Re: Obama and his economic team get failing marks from economists
« Reply #13 on: March 17, 2009, 02:40:11 PM »
What exactly is perceived as socialist about Obama's administration?

Offline Sweeper

  • Mayor
  • ******
  • Posts: 876
Re: Obama and his economic team get failing marks from economists
« Reply #14 on: March 17, 2009, 03:41:34 PM »
My gripe with the use of that word recently is that it seems to be nothing more than a hollow buzzword being used to villify Obama. Much like when people kept throwing around words like "fascist" at the Bush regime, it seems to me like people just trying to throw a negative term at him enough hoping to make it stick.
To touch on Merm's point- Obama has been in office for barely 2 months now, and people are already making that assumption. I think that the last 8 years have been far more "Socialist" than Obama's 2 months in office- Lest we forget Bush's Stimulus check (Just flat out giving money to every taxpayer under a certain income? That sounds pretty socialist to me)
But I suppose only time will tell. I like the job he's doing so far.

Scary,

I agree with just about everything you just said (that's probably the reason for the neg nods). The noted exception is that I believe tax cuts are people keeping their money, not the government giving away money. It may seem like a difference without a distinction, but I think from a philosophical standpoint it does matter.
Also, I don't like the job he is doing so far. GWB was severely criticized for using the threat of terrorism to advance, what some believe, as an assault on personal liberties. O'Bama (Happy St. Pat's Day) is using the threat of a depression to advance an assault on financial liberties.
So why the governance by crisis? I believe that it is because there is no way that a free populace would accept many of these programs is they weren't constantly bombarded with worst case scenarios.


 

Visit our sister site Jackson Heights Life