Total Posts:13|Showing Posts:1-13
Jump to topic:

Obama: On spending

HandsOff
Posts: 504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 7:31:49 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
Why does McCain continue attacking Obama on things he denies versus those greater offenses he admits to? Immediately following more than a decade of the most obnoxious government growth a spending spree on record, and in the middle of the worst economic downturn since The Great Depression, Obama wants to expand govenment, spend more money, and provide U.S. citizens with even more undeserved and unaffordable goodies. In an economic crisis, we need to be thinking about what we can do without-- not what else the government can provide us.
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 8:11:44 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 10/28/2008 7:31:49 AM, HandsOff wrote:
Why does McCain continue attacking Obama on things he denies versus those greater offenses he admits to? Immediately following more than a decade of the most obnoxious government growth a spending spree on record, and in the middle of the worst economic downturn since The Great Depression, Obama wants to expand government, spend more money, and provide U.S. citizens with even more undeserved and unaffordable goodies. In an economic crisis, we need to be thinking about what we can do without-- not what else the government can provide us.

One of the best ways to stimulate a depressed economy is through public spending. The Hoover Dam was built during the Great Depression at huge public expense but it did create employment and was a long-term success story.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
HandsOff
Posts: 504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 8:16:32 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
So Brian, let me get this straight; the solution to our current economic situation, which was caused by borrowing and spending money we don't have, is to borrow and spend more money we don't have?
beem0r
Posts: 1,155
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 9:07:20 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
The implied premise there is that government spending created the crisis, rather than a legitimate problem with the housing market and other things that have nothing to do with government. True, perhaps government regulation to control bad market practices could have prevented the problem, but to blame the problem on the government's borrowing and spending has no basis and is clearly a statement made solely to rationalize your personal feelings.
Unless you can back up the notion that government spending has lead us to this.

In either case, Brian brought up a legitimate point, which you dismissed without addressing. Spending can help in a time of economic crisis. People aren't eager to spend in such a crisis, which causes slowdowns and the loss of jobs. Therefore, the government spends instead, creating jobs and putting otherwise untapped human resources to good use.
HandsOff
Posts: 504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 9:22:12 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
I applaude your good analysis. But you don't go deep enough. The reason the stock market crashed after the bailout package was because we voted to pile more debt on a country that is about to collapse under an insurmountable heap of existing debt. Had we had minimal national debt, a balanced budget, and saved borrowing opportunities for emergencies such as our current crisis, we could have written a check (that would have actually cleared) and chalked it all up to lessons learned.
JBlake
Posts: 4,634
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 10:08:56 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 10/28/2008 9:22:12 AM, HandsOff wrote:
I applaude your good analysis. But you don't go deep enough. The reason the stock market crashed after the bailout package was because we voted to pile more debt on a country that is about to collapse under an insurmountable heap of existing debt. Had we had minimal national debt, a balanced budget, and saved borrowing opportunities for emergencies such as our current crisis, we could have written a check (that would have actually cleared) and chalked it all up to lessons learned.

Actually the stock market tanked before the 'bailout', and then again when it was learned that the package had failed the first time around.
JBlake
Posts: 4,634
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 11:13:12 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
No one said that it was going to halt the decline altogether. The point of it is to soften the blow. Everyone readily admits that it is going to get worse before it gets better.

My point was that the fact that it tanked in both scenarios is not proof that it was a cause or not a cause.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 11:36:34 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 10/28/2008 9:07:20 AM, beem0r wrote:
The implied premise there is that government spending created the crisis, rather than a legitimate problem with the housing market and other things that have nothing to do with government. True, perhaps government regulation to control bad market practices could have prevented the problem, but to blame the problem on the government's borrowing and spending has no basis and is clearly a statement made solely to rationalize your personal feelings.

True, it also results from the government's printing of money, government lending, government mandates about what other people have to spend or lend (CRA comes to mind for the latter,) etc. Cyclical contractions are inevitable in a Keynesian economy.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
birdlandmemories
Posts: 4,139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2013 10:17:59 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Anyway, Obama is just spending recklessly. 18 trillion in debt, 8 trillion more than 5 years ago... that's just ridiculous.
Ashton