We've Heard It All Before from Obama...

[RR7]

Why choose 1931 and 1939, and conveniently ignore the fact that it kept getting worse after 31, to a high of almost 25% in 33? From its peak in 33, it actually dropped to the 17.2 level in 39. 33 is also the year the New Deal was enacted, so it seems if you are going to mock FDR's policies as having no effect, then show when they were enacted, and the true effect they DID have, instead of the faulty use of statistics you use. And, you know, the time frame he was actually in office. Am also not sure when he was spending 25% of GDP in that time frame.

 

[Denny Crane]

Why choose 1931 and 1939, and conveniently ignore the fact that it kept getting worse after 31, to a high of almost 25% in 33? From its peak in 33, it actually dropped to the 17.2 level in 39. 33 is also the year the New Deal was enacted, so it seems if you are going to mock FDR's policies as having no effect, then show when they were enacted, and the true effect they DID have, instead of the faulty use of statistics you use. And, you know, the time frame he was actually in office. Am also not sure when he was spending 25% of GDP in that time frame.

1931 was the year before he was elected. 1939 was the year before WW II and it was WW II that ended the Depression and not govt. interference. It wasn't the massive govt. spending for the War, either - it was the bombing of the other industrial nations' factories to oblivion, leaving us as effectively the only industrial producer in the world for the decades that followed that created the demand that got the economic engine going again.

As for % of GDP FDR spent, it was < 10% of GDP when he took office, and ~16% on average during those years. It peaked at near 25% at the start of the new deal.

As for FDR's policies having "no" effect, they did have an effect. It was to deepen and lengthen the depression. If they would have ended the Depression or hastened it's end, unemployment would have been lower in '39 than in '33. Fudging unemployment figures by putting people on the govt. payroll to pick up litter on the highways doesn't make the policies successful.

Govt. spending doesn't have the positive multiplier effect that Keynesian economists claim. It's rather obvious it has a multiplier sub 1, which is a negative effect. For every $100K the govt. taxes and spends, it is TAKING $1K from 100 people who make $10K so they can't spend it. There's your sub 1 ($9K/$10K = .9).

 

[RR7]

he took office in 33. Why penalize him for two years prior to him taking office? That's just stupid.

 

[Denny Crane]

he took office in 33. Why penalize him for two years prior to him taking office? That's just stupid.

Who's penalizing anyone? The Depression didn't start with him.

 

[jlprk]

Why choose 1931 and 1939, and conveniently ignore the fact that it kept getting worse after 31, to a high of almost 25% in 33? From its peak in 33, it actually dropped to the 17.2 level in 39.

So Roosevelt decreased the rate from 25 to 17. He didn't increase it from 16 to 17 as Denny said. Denny must have accidentally chosen the wrong year. Tisk tisk, how careless.

Who's penalizing anyone? The Depression didn't start with him.

It started with Republican Hoover, widely despised for 50 years until the Reagan Revolution revised history with BS like, "FDR made the Depression worse and WW2 bailed him out." Is Bush the new Hoover, or is Hoover the old Bush?

 

[Denny Crane]

 

[jlprk]

After 30 years in the doghouse, Kennedy offered him a bone, to be a member of the new Peace Corps advisory committee!

Well I guess that proves that had Hoover stayed President from 1933-1939, the Depression would have been over by 1939.

 

[RR7]

Who's penalizing anyone? The Depression didn't start with him.

so look at what he did when he took office. He started in 33. How did unemployment do? DOn't start 2 years prior. He couldn't help it getting worse.

 

[Denny Crane]

After 30 years in the doghouse, Kennedy offered him a bone, to be a member of the new Peace Corps advisory committee!

Well I guess that proves that had Hoover stayed President from 1933-1939, the Depression would have been over by 1939.

He also worked for Truman and Ike.

So much for the Reagan era remark.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I agree, politics isn't about right and wrong, it's about being in power. The country comes a distant second. It's pathetic. And it's not going to change regardless of who gets elected.

Not until both sides quit viewing it like a fucking sporting event and actually put the country ahead of themselves. Which will happen shortly after never.

Agreed 100%!

 

[Eastoff]

Agreed 100%!

Great to hear! You don't need to vote this year then. ;]

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

After 30 years in the doghouse, Kennedy offered him a bone, to be a member of the new Peace Corps advisory committee!

Well I guess that proves that had Hoover stayed President from 1933-1939, the Depression would have been over by 1939.

Let's also not forget Hoover's role after WWII for Truman in Europe. He was a great humanitarian and was widely recognized for it.

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-...rt-hoover-for-aiding-post-wwii-reconstruction

 

[3RA1N1AC]

instead of incessantly attacking obama, can anyone tell me why romney is the man for the job?

is this the gop strategy? and all the sheep are just following their lead?

 

[SlyPokerDog]

instead of incessantly attacking obama, can anyone tell me why romney is the man for the job?

is this the gop strategy? and all the sheep are just following their lead?

Romney is white.

White is good.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

well then obama IS half bad

 

[Denny Crane]

instead of incessantly attacking obama, can anyone tell me why romney is the man for the job?

is this the gop strategy? and all the sheep are just following their lead?

A fair question, but not the right one, IMO.

If you're not satisfied with the status quo, making a change gives you hope the status quo will change as well.

The issues with the status quo are numerous and have been discussed quite a bit here. However, if you say something like "45M people need food stamps now" and that it's a reflection of how the govt. is managed, you're attacking obama.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

not directed at you, although you do post the occasional anti obama meme for laughs

its fine to be against obama, just wondering if any of you are actually pro romney

 

[Denny Crane]

not directed at you, although you do post the occasional anti obama meme for laughs

its fine to be against obama, just wondering if any of you are actually pro romney

Watching the RNC, I thought that most of the speakers who came before Romney would be a better candidate and better president than he.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

Watching the RNC, I thought that most of the speakers who came before Romney would be a better candidate and better president than he.

i think that is the general consensus...so wtf is the deal with that?

is it his hundreds of millions of dollars? the fact that bain owns clear channel? because...blecht

if the gop gave me someone worth voting for i would have, but this is just pointless

 

[Eastoff]

i think that is the general consensus...so wtf is the deal with that?

is it his hundreds of millions of dollars? the fact that bain owns clear channel? because...blecht

if the gop gave me someone worth voting for i would have, but this is just pointless

Yes, he is the John Kerry of this election.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

its fine to be against obama, just wondering if any of you are actually pro romney

I actually had high hopes for Obama and felt we needed a change in direction. Unfortunately, Obama has been a monumental failure. Therefore, I think another change in direction is warranted. As for Romney, I doubt he'll do much. He doesn't generate much hope, if any, in me.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

I actually had high hopes for Obama and felt we needed a change in direction. Unfortunately, Obama has been a monumental failure. Therefore, I think another change in direction is warranted. As for Romney, I doubt he'll do much. He doesn't generate much hope, if any, in me.

im kinda burnt out on "hey this guy sucks, lets put the other party in power" every few years, it almost seems designed to be that way, thereby never accomplishing anything

and on and on we march into the abyss

 

[Denny Crane]

2nd terms aren't usually that great anyhow

when the prez becomes a lame duck, congress can push him around more. So presidents tend to focus on foreign policy stuff. Like maybe trying to earn that Nobel Peace Prize.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

maybe the president should be randomly selected from the house every 2 years

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

im kinda burnt out on "hey this guy sucks, lets put the other party in power" every few years, it almost seems designed to be that way, thereby never accomplishing anything

and on and on we march into the abyss

And this tells me what I discovered many years ago- no one political party has the answers. The best answers come when the two parties work together and compromise for the sake of the people.

 

[jlprk]

He also worked for Truman and Ike.

So much for the Reagan era remark.

Let's also not forget Hoover's role after WWII for Truman in Europe. He was a great humanitarian and was widely recognized for it.

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-...rt-hoover-for-aiding-post-wwii-reconstruction

Irrelevant. When I said Hoover was widely despised (for not resisting the Depression, which covered almost all of his 4 years, the way Roosevelt did with creative programs), I meant despised by the people, not by a few charitable people at the top who felt sorry for him.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

I actually had high hopes for Obama and felt we needed a change in direction. Unfortunately, Obama has been a monumental failure. Therefore, I think another change in direction is warranted. As for Romney, I doubt he'll do much. He doesn't generate much hope, if any, in me.

It seems to me like the direction never actually changes very much.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

It seems to me like the direction never actually changes very much.

True. The last 20 years have been a steady downhill spiral.

 

[maxiep]

instead of incessantly attacking obama, can anyone tell me why romney is the man for the job?

is this the gop strategy? and all the sheep are just following their lead?

Trimming the size and scope of the Federal Government

Getting rid of Obamacare

Lessening regulations on businesses

A stronger dollar through appointing a new Fed chair

Ending the sequestration cuts on defense

Reforming tax policy, lowering rates for all while getting rid of loopholes

Actually putting someone in charge of the executive who knows how to get rid of waste in a bureaucracy

Treating our friends like friends and treating our enemies like enemies.

I could go on and on and on and on, but that should be sufficient. President Obama has made this election a very easy choice for me.

 

[chris_in_pdx]

Trimming the size and scope of the Federal Government

High-Fucking-Larious that you think the Republicans have any desire to do this.

Getting rid of Obamacare

With Romneycare? Oops.

Lessening regulations on businesses

Yep, because Wall Street sure knows how to regulate itself.

A stronger dollar through appointing a new Fed chair

I have no idea what you think this is going to do, but okay.

Ending the sequestration cuts on defense

Some small government.

Reforming tax policy, lowering rates for all while getting rid of loopholes

Yeah. Chance in hell of happening? None. Rich will get loopholes while middle class and poor get fucked.

Actually putting someone in charge of the executive who knows how to get rid of waste in a bureaucracy

Romney can't buy departments of the government and then spin them off via bankruptcy. He's out of his league.

Treating our friends like friends and treating our enemies like enemies.

More Fox News propagandic bullshit.

I could go on and on and on and on, but that should be sufficient. President Obama has made this election a very easy choice for me.

I'm glad you live in Oregon, where your vote will be meaningless.

EDIT: If you are currently living in Colorado, your vote might matter. I suppose... it's your right to vote as you see fit. I will do the same.