Thread: Barack Obama's presidency, three years on – is it time to give up hope?

Originally Posted by troubador

Well things would have been much worse without Obama.

So your saying anyone else who have spent more money than Obama? 6 trillion dollars spent and unemployment went up? 800 billion dollar bail out and more people are on food stamps than any other time in history?




5"10
193lbs
BF = around 13% (guess)
600mg Tren E, 325mg Test Cyp week

Originally Posted by Thresh

So your saying anyone else who have spent more money than Obama? 6 trillion dollars spent and unemployment went up? 800 billion dollar bail out and more people are on food stamps than any other time in history?




5"10
193lbs
BF = around 13% (guess)
600mg Tren E, 325mg Test Cyp week

TARP (bailout) was a President Bush piece of legislation.

Originally Posted by hoyle21

TARP (bailout) was a President Bush piece of legislation.

It's a good thing that Obama didn't extend it.

Originally Posted by troubador

Well things would have been much worse without Obama.

yeah i know, who else would we have been able to find with his type of experience!

Originally Posted by Thresh

6trillion dollars spent and unemployment went up? 800 billion dollar bail out and more people are on food stamps than any other time in history?

technically only about 1T was "spent" via legislation. the rest of the spending was for extended unemployment benefits and the increase in food stamps which happens after every recession in the US, nothing new there.

none of which would have been needed had the recession not been created by financial deregulation and a complete lack of federal over-site on wallstreet from 2001-2009.

wage growth from 2000-2010 for most was consumed by either inflation, rising energy costs or healthcare spending which all equate to a decrease in disposable income through no fault or action of the individual...end result food stamp usage goes up

deficits increase by about 40% in the years after banking collapses. this is not specific to the US but every country in the world and is a historical economic fact.

US workers are the least protected in the OECD due to having the lowest unionization rate out of all wealthy industrialized countrys. 50% of the job loss in the OECD after 2007 occurred in the US alone because of this. US large firms laid off US workers to save on payroll thus busting profits to keep stock prices high. the US was the only country in the OECD that did not see a decline in GDP during the recession and US large firms saw profits increase by 10% while their foreign counter parts saw a decrease of 10%.

Originally Posted by Thresh

So your saying anyone else who have spent more money than Obama? 6 trillion dollars spent and unemployment went up? 800 billion dollar bail out and more people are on food stamps than any other time in history?

sarcasm

Originally Posted by troubador

sarcasm

:-)


5"10
193lbs
BF = around 13% (guess)
600mg Tren E, 325mg Test Cyp week

Originally Posted by IronAddict

Whether he be black, brown or multi colored, we're phuqed.

Cause the only color that matters is green.

unfortunately this is true

I'll never vote republican

Will a Bursting Bubble Trouble Bernanke?
The Evidence for a Housing Bubble

Authors:
Dean Baker and David Rosnick
Will a Bursting Bubble Trouble Bernanke?
The Evidence for a Housing Bubble
Center for Economic and Policy Research
CEPR
November 2005

http://www.cepr.net/documents/public...le_2005_11.pdf

Ron Paul 2001

Originally Posted by troubador

Ron Paul 2001

RP had a valid point but is nothing new and has been stated by many. overall in the US consumption by those in the 3 lower income quintiles has been fueled by debt since the 80's when wages stopped increasing along with productivity due to the decline in the unionization rate. which effects low paid workers and those in "right to work for less money" states the most.

US trade agreements soon followed then set workers in the lower income quintiles in unskilled and semi-skilled labor jobs to the wolves to compete with other developing country's in the "free market" (cough..cough..bullshit) while high skilled professionals (lawyers, doctors, etc.) in the US were protected. private and gov debt was used to fuel the unproductive and self-serving FIRE economy which brought us the housing bubble, banking collapse and now global recession...

the US version of capitalism and "free markets".......

Originally Posted by Thresh

So your saying anyone else who have spent more money than Obama? 6 trillion dollars spent and unemployment went up? 800 billion dollar bail out and more people are on food stamps than any other time in history?

About that....

Representative Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) led the charge against former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich’s recent statements on President Obama being the “Food Stamp President.”
Armed with graphs and statistics, Gutierrez laid down the facts about the “Food Stamp President.” Yes, he added 18 million recipients to the program; Yes, he increased the cost of spending in the program by $19 billion; Yes, he increased the amount per benefit by $27.38; But no, he wasn’t Barack Obama. In fact, the “Food Stamp President” that Rep. Gutierrez was referring to was former Republican President George W. Bush.

Let’s learn about the “Food Stamp President.” [SLIDE 1]

Here’s fact one.

It shows clearly that the Food Stamp President increased spending on food stamps by more than $19 billion. Let me repeat that: under the food stamp President, the U.S. increased its spending on food stamps by more than 19 billion — with a “b.” The source is the U.S. Department of Agriculture. [SLIDE 2]

Here’s fact two:

Under the Food Stamp President, the number of people using the program increased by almost 11 million people. The source is the U.S.D.A. [SLIDE 3]

Here’s fact three:

Even the amount of the benefit has increased under the Food Stamp President. The amount per benefit increased by $27.38.

Not much? Well how about this fact — the twenty-seven bucks increase per benefit is the largest increase that occurred under any President in the last 30 years.

The source is the U.S.D.A. [SLIDE 4]

Let’s review — and let’s agree, Republicans and Democrats together — that the numbers don’t lie.

Under the food stamp President:

Spending increased by more than 19 billion.

The number of people using the program increased by nearly 11 million.

And the amount of the benefit increased by a historic amount.

We may not like the facts — but sometimes the truth hurts. [SLIDE 5]

George W. Bush is the Food Stamp President.

Under Food Stamp President George Bush, we spent more money, had more recipients and gave each recipient more money for food.

I know some of you are saying: Luis, you’re not being fair! Aren’t there other food stamp Presidents?

Yes, you’re right. [SLIDE 6]
Under yet another food stamp President, spending increased by more than nine billion dollars, the number of recipients increased by almost seven million and the amount of benefit increased by almost seventeen dollars. [SLIDE 7]

George Herbert Walker Bush was also the Food Stamp President.

It runs in the family.

Food Stamp President senior and junior. It’s hereditary — a rampant family disease that makes them want to give food to poor people.