Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Sean Payton's Vicodin

GM heading for bankruptcy... again.

65 posts in this topic

My post:

Obsessed? So the recession that happened under bush isn't partially his fault?

Riveting tale, chap.

Where Davidson Deac runs with it:

I just ask if you guys were going to continue to be obsessed with Bush jr. You are the only one who said anything about whose fault the recession was. But since you brought it up.

Recessions generally aren't the "fault" of any specific president. In fact, given the size of the US and World economy, in most cases blaming the president is simplistic and mostly a result of bombastic partisan politics. There are a few cases in which specific policy decisions by a president or the government led to a recession (for example the recession of 1937) but for the most part, they happen for a number of reasons, most of which have very little to do with government policy. George W Bush didn't cause the recession of 2008. He played a role, just as many others (republican, democrat, or none of the above) did, but it was a relatively small one. The forces that caused the 2008 recession had been building longer than many of the posters on this board have been alive.

People like to say that the crisis was caused by shortsightedness, stupidity, and greed. They may be partially right, but those conditions are always with us, and its highly unlikely that they were any worse from 1990-2007 than during previous times in our history.

IMO, it was just part of the economic cycles that have been occurring since our country got started. Worst than many, but certainly not the worst. And while many want the government to try to legislate recessions into history (and Obama is certainly trying), IMO thats impossible and we are always going to have them. They come, we rebound eventually and do well for a while, only to see it all happen again.

You should read a book called This Time its Different.

With most of the fluff removed:

Recessions generally aren't the "fault" of any specific president. George W Bush didn't cause the recession of 2008. He played a role, just as many others (republican, democrat, or none of the above) did, but it was a relatively small one.

You saw the word fault in the same sentence as bush and assumed I blamed him for the whole thing, just so you could go on your little rant :lol:

Ah well it was still a cool story bro even if it had nothing to do with me or what I said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My post:

Where Davidson Deac runs with it:

With most of the fluff removed:

You saw the word fault in the same sentence as bush and assumed I blamed him for the whole thing, just so you could go on your little rant :lol:

Ah well it was still a cool story bro even if it had nothing to do with me or what I said.

My original comment wasn't even directed at you specifically, not sure why you seem to assume it was. But the board left wing is definitely obsessed with Bush, just as the right was with Clinton during the bush. Only the election of Obama seems to have cured it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Normally the President does not have a lot of control over the economy.

However, Bush took the unprecedented steps of taking a surplus and instead of saving it, decided to just cut taxes instead. He then started 2 very large wars without funding them, as well as a pretty giant Medicare project. This is more of a deficit spending issue than an "total economy" one but to conservatives, they are somehow one in the same. I think it can be easily argued that Bushes deficits were ones of choice, while Obamas were mostly ones of necessity. Cue Keynesian doubters -

When the housing crash happened and all the banking tricks were exposed, we had nothing in reserve so it was deficit spending to save the economy or let it crash. Bush and Obama saved it, but for some reason Obama is the one getting hit as some kind of big spender.

But hey we can't blame anyone now, its all water under the bridge, unless you are a Muslim Socialist who engineered all this to allow Islamic Fundamentalists to take over the country.

Lots of conservatives do fault Bush for much of the fiscal problems. I think its part of the reason for the rising (relatively) popularity of the libertarian side of the house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My original comment wasn't even directed at you specifically, not sure why you seem to assume it was. But the board left wing is definitely obsessed with Bush, just as the right was with Clinton during the bush. Only the election of Obama seems to have cured it.

What the hell? All I did was reply.

Am I not allowed to respond unless I'm specifically singled out? Wow that's good to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are of course free to respond, but you should probably try to stick to the topic at hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the topic we were discussing, the GM bailout will be mostly Obama's. It won't effect the election, but it will impact his legacy. If GM survives and gets stronger, Obama will be remembered as the guy who saved GM. If they collapse or end up costing the government a lot of money, he will be remembered for costing the taxpayers a fortune.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's true, although it's not just GM Obama is trying to save, it's all the suppliers and the towns dependent on GM as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's true, although it's not just GM Obama is trying to save, it's all the suppliers and the towns dependent on GM as well.

True and I don't blame him for doing it. In reality, he didn't have much of a choice. Perhaps he had choices in the methods used to save them, but he had to do something. Remains to be seen whether he made the right decision or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually would have believed you, Deac. That I read too much into your comment and thought you were talking about the recession during Bush's term when you mentioned a recession in your post. If your post had stopped here:

I just ask if you guys were going to continue to be obsessed with Bush jr. You are the only one who said anything about whose fault the recession was.

"Sorry man, I must have misunderstood--"

BUT SINCE YOU BROUGHT IT UP

Blah blah blah. Leave Bush alone. Rant. Rave. Read this book it totally confirms my bias and stuff. Blah blah blah. The end.

Your intent is so fukin obvious there's no point in you backpedaling. Just an excuse to segue into all that bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites