71% voters Say Obama’s Policies Have Driven Up Deficit <-----MUST READ - New England Patriots Forums

***NEPatriot*** · 08-05-2009, 04:34 PM

71% Say Obama?s Policies Have Driven Up Deficit - Rasmussen Reports

Quote:

Seventy-one percent (71%) of U.S. voters say President Obama’s policies have increased the size of the federal deficit, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

Only five percent (5%) say the president’s policies have cut the deficit, and 10% say they have had no impact. Thirteen percent (13%) are not sure.

Eighty percent (80%) of investors say Obama’s policies have driven up the deficit, a view shared by just 57% of non-investors.

Not surprisingly, 88% of Republicans blame the president’s policies, compared to 52% of Democrats. But 79% of voters not affiliated with either party agree.

Yes, we can !!!!!! Can we stop blaming Bush for this mess?????

***apple strudel*** · 08-05-2009, 04:42 PM

Context, of course, is wanting here. These poll results are like saying that people know 1+1=2. We all know that there is a deficit problem, and the reason for that is due to preventing an even more severe recession than the one we are currently digging out of. Would you trade a deficit increase for a decade of recession? I think most people would. Of course we will have to work to eliminate the deficit next. Nobody's pretending this is not the case, though.

***NEPatriot*** · 08-05-2009, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by apple strudel

Context, of course, is wanting here. These poll results are like saying that people know 1+1=2. We all know that there is a deficit problem, and the reason for that is due to preventing an even more severe recession than the one we are currently digging out of. Would you trade a deficit increase for a decade of recession? I think most people would. Of course we will have to work to eliminate the deficit next. Nobody's pretending this is not the case, though.

Let me get it straight. You avoid a 'severe recession' by putting yourself in debt further?

Sound good to me.

The sad thing is 'smart' liberals start to realize that Obama SUCKS but it's too late. Obama is destroying the economy of this country with his socialism programs.

resnor · 08-05-2009, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by apple strudel

Context, of course, is wanting here. These poll results are like saying that people know 1+1=2. We all know that there is a deficit problem, and the reason for that is due to preventing an even more severe recession than the one we are currently digging out of. Would you trade a deficit increase for a decade of recession? I think most people would. Of course we will have to work to eliminate the deficit next. Nobody's pretending this is not the case, though.

Wait...what??? You are trying to say that passing the trillion dollar stimulus was necessary to avoid a 10 year recession? You mean, similar to the 10 year recession that Japan went through, after following similar plans to rescue their economy? You can't borrow money to get rid of a depression. Case in point...China isn't too keen on buying our treasury notes now. Know what happens next? Interest rates get raised in an effort to entice buyers. What happens to the dollar, and the American economy, after that?

If I wanted to go get all conspiracy theorist here *and I'm not a conspiracy kook*, one could argue that the government WANTS massive inflation. If inflation kicks into high gear, the U.S. can just shovel a bunch of money at the Chinese, and say, "Here ya go! Debts paid off," even though the dollar at that point is worthless.

***Patters*** · 08-06-2009, 07:46 AM

We certainly have a larger deficit under Obama's policies. That's common knowledge. That said, prior to Obama, Reagan and Bush were far and away the biggest deficit spenders. So, my attitude towards Republicans who complain about deficits now is that they are simply political opportunists and hypocrites. Obama's policies have stablized our economy, and we can address deficits by raising taxes on the wealthy. It's not a problem for a nation with an economy as large as ours.

***apple strudel*** · 08-06-2009, 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by resnor

Wait...what??? You are trying to say that passing the trillion dollar stimulus was necessary to avoid a 10 year recession? You mean, similar to the 10 year recession that Japan went through, after following similar plans to rescue their economy? You can't borrow money to get rid of a depression. Case in point...China isn't too keen on buying our treasury notes now. Know what happens next? Interest rates get raised in an effort to entice buyers. What happens to the dollar, and the American economy, after that?

We've been over this, and we also learned from the Great Depression. It's a well established economic lesson, you need to ease the credit crunch and get people borrowing again. It's called priming the pump. Use the search for more information and discussions on the topic, there's gobs of justification for it.

Quote:

Dr. Mike Walden, North Carolina Cooperative Extension economist in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences at N.C. State University, responds:
"The government we're talking about here is the federal government, and the tools the federal government has at its disposal are designed to try to get more spending in the economy, and that's essentially what you want to have happen when the economy is slow or in a recession. You want to generate more spending. And the two agencies that do this are, number one, the federal reserve, and what we would see the federal reserve do is, number one, to cut interest rates, which they have been doing, and essentially print more money and send that money to the banks so the banks have money to loan to people so they'll go out and borrow it and spend it. And then the other group that's on the job here would be the president and the Congress together through the federal budget, and here they would either increase government spending - for example, go out and build more roads and bridges and so forth - or they would reduce taxes. As we talk, the plan is to reduce taxes through rebates. Now, the analysis of whether these tactics work comes to the conclusion that they often can't reduce or prevent a recession but they can blunt the effect, maybe shave some of the negatives off the edges, maybe reduce the negative impacts of a recession by somewhere between 25 and 33 percent. But there is a cost to these actions, and that is that the government is going to go into debt more. They're going to borrow more, and this will have to be funded later from taxpayers."

Economic Perspective: Can the government prevent a recession?

***tanked_as_usual*** · 08-06-2009, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by apple strudel

Context, of course, is wanting here. These poll results are like saying that people know 1+1=2. We all know that there is a deficit problem, and the reason for that is due to preventing an even more severe recession than the one we are currently digging out of. Would you trade a deficit increase for a decade of recession? I think most people would. Of course we will have to work to eliminate the deficit next. Nobody's pretending this is not the case, though.

how do you it is preventing an even more severe recession.......so far, little of the stimulus money has been spent, so it is reasonable to assume that thing are simply cyclical and the recession turned on its own

TARP (by Bush) has been much more instrumental because it corrected the fundamental problems with liquidity that the banks had.......

***apple strudel*** · 08-06-2009, 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanked_as_usual

how do you it is preventing an even more severe recession.......so far, little of the stimulus money has been spent, so it is reasonable to assume that thing are simply cyclical and the recession turned on its own

TARP (by Bush) has been much more instrumental because it corrected the fundamental problems with liquidity that the banks had.......

Jesus Christ, it's right above your post. Next time, keep reading.