What a difference a year makes, especially when the economy is bad. The independents, who went so heavily for Obama in 2008, swung back the other way in New Jersey and Virginia. The experts are mixed on whether this is an early sign of weakness for the Democrats or whether it’s the usual dissatisfaction with the party in power during an economic slowdown, compounded by weak candidates in both races. I think it’s a little of both. We are an impatient people, used to instant gratification. Obama, in office for ten months, has clearly not had time to undo all of the damage of the last eight years, but I say it’s time to move on and hold him responsible for the state of the economy. While we’re at it, I have some other things to blame him for.
Cubs fans are incorrigible; Yankees fans, depraved.
Go Broncos!
-Rusty
Ed, I agree that Bush and the republicans really fouled things up and I agree that Obama inherited a bad situation. What troubles me is that in eleven months, he has turned a bad situation into a total disaster and I don’t see anything this administration is offering that shows signs of improvement in the future.
I think the pundents are way overplaying the things “swung back the other way” line. I the presidential election, about 3.7 million people voted in both NJ and Virginia. In the governors’ races, less than 2.2 million people voted in each state. That is one heck of a lot of people that simply didn’t vote. Now whether that apathy regarding who their governor should be or what may be the question but I wouldn’t define it as a referendum on the President.
I am curious, though, on how/what he has done/not done that has “turned a bad situation into a total disaster”.
Lets not speak in generalities, you tell me one thing this administration has done that you think is good and lets debate it.
LOL, my comment was responding to a generalization that this administration had turned a bad situation into a total disaster. I have no idea what situation was being talked about. If you’d like some things that I think are good, I have a few: pushing for health care reform, closing (or at least trying to) Guantanamo, reversing Bush’s policy on stem cell research, banning harsh interrogation techniques, selecting Sotomayor for the Supreme Court, just to name a few.
Now, if we can just get out of Iraq and Afghanistan….
1. Health Care – It hasn’t happened and it isn’t likely that it will, so there is no accomplishment here – at least not yet.
2. Guantanamo – Open and going strong – no ccomplishment here.
3. Stem cell research – This is a religious or moral issue that I prefer not to comment on.
4. Judge Sotomayor – I agree on this appointment but I wouldn’t consider making an appointment an accomplishment.
5. Banning Interogation Techniques – About 50% of our population would consider this an accomplishment, so I will give you this one.
Considering the hundreds of billions of dollars that have been whizzed away in the past eleven months, the above accomplishment seems pretty miniscule. Want to try again? If so, please limit the debate to one item at a time. I am 80 years old and still work, so I don’t have a lot of time to spend in front of this computer doing research.
How about focusing on the economy? A year ago, the meltdown really seemed to be the thing that pushed President Obama over the top in the election. His first major act was to pass the stimulus package, which HAD to be passed, or our economy may never recover. In fact, unemployment might pass 8% if it was not passed. Now unemployment is over 10%, more really, if you count the people who have given up and left the workforce. And the budget deficit this year is far worse than anything we saw even with the irresponsibility of the previous administration. Risks of massive inflation are looming. I think that is turning a bad situation into something worse. Total disaster? To be determined…
First of all, congratulations: on reaching 80 and still working. Hopefully, you are doing something you enjoy. I have to also congratulate you on flipping the discussion upside down. The best defense is a good offense but that’s another story.
Since you and BG are into Monday morning quarterbacking, simply stating that what the administration did was, at the very least, worsening the situation with the economy, I’d like to hear more on exactly what they should have done. I hear often that the stimulus was a failure with the rising unemployment rate being used as the primary measure. My question is: How bad would things be if there had been no stimulus? I remember hearing a year ago that no matter what, we would reach 10% unemployment. This is/was the worst recession since the 30’s. Where were all the deficit hawks when the debt went from $5.6 trillion to $10.7 trillion between 2001 and 2008? If the economic solution was to reverse that, wouldn’t that be exactly what the Hoover administration did? Should we have cut back spending and raised taxes?
Lastly, on the debt, I agree that we simply can’t continue to go as we have been but our government representatives (both parties) don’t have the guts to make the tough decisions to fix and, quite frankly, we don’t really want them to. Everyone wants their piece of the pie untouched and someone else to pay for it.
P.S. So far we have spent almost a trilion $$ in Iraq/Afghanistan….
Sorry, it struck me kind of late but I just had one of those moments. Here we have an administration that is being beat over the head for both high unemployment and “looming” massive inflation!
My remembrance of Econ 101 is that there is an inverse relationship between unemployment and inflation (as unemployment rises, inflation decreases). My guess is that if we ever get to that massive inflation, we will have massively reduced unemployment but then be facing looming massive unemployment.
Sounds like a no win situation. Good thing we have the Fed at the helm.
I thought it was self-evident that borrowing extreme amounts of money, when one is already in severe financial crisis, to spend primarily on programs that are not job creating, is making a bad situation worse. People love to tout the government’s involvment in the great depression as what pulled us out, with job creation from massive infrastructure spending. That paradigm is hardly even being followed here as a minor percentage is being devoted to such things.
Every effect has a cause. What brings about economic financial hardship? Usually excess, waste, lack of structure, etc. Instead of addressing these causes, the president and congress just spend more. The lack of logic is so sad. We should have (and need to) completely cut back and sacrifice in order to truly get ourselves out of this mess. And I call out the employment numbers on this, because the administration touted the whole 8% scare tactic, and then when they saw that this spending package was not fixing things as they told us they would, claimed to have “misread” the economic conditions. And where were the deficit hawks previous to this? Everywhere, including in the media. I was dumbfounded with what happened on the last administration’s watch.
“Bad news, babe – we are almost bankrupt. What can we do? Let’s go out and get another credit card!”
P.S. It is not self evident that “borrowing extreme amounts of money, when our economy is already in severe financial crisis, is making a bad situation worse”. Keynesian Theory says just the opposite.
Let’s see, the question was “exactly what they should have done”? It seems the answer is “completely cut back and sacrifice in order to truly get ourselves out of this mess”.
Now, I’m trying to figure out what “completely cut back” means, in terms of our government. Shut down all government offices, FFA?, TSA, FBI, etc? Shut down all payments (SSA, Vets, SSI, unemployment, medicare, medicaid, etc)? Shut down the military (!!)? How many millions do we put out of work?, how many millions have no income? We’d best keep the cops on the jo. We’ll likely need the military back here.
To me, it’s self-evident that is taking a bad situation and turning it into a crisis, in fact chaos.
Jerry, thanks and I do enjoy my work. I stripe parking lots which is 180 degrees from how I earned my livelihood for forty plus years. It doesn’t require a lot of skill, no mental stress, lots of bending and stooping for exerise, fresh air and I work when I want for as long as I want. Can’t beat it!
As for the economy, the worst recession I can remember prior to this one was in the later seventies under Jimmy Carter. What you learned in Econ 101, (when unemployment rises, inflation decreases) did not apply in this recession. As unemployment rose, so did inflation. I don’t remember how high unemployment reached, but I very well remember that the prime rate went above 20% and annual inflation was 14%.
The first thing Reagan did was cut taxes and yes, he did increase spending. The difference is, he increased spending on things that were needed. We were in the middle of the Cold War and defense spending had been cut to a dangerous low. With the increase in defense spending, combined with the tax cuts, we pulled out of the recession. I really believe that tax cuts, combined with spending on our infra-structure, would have accomplished the same results in this recession.
Jerry, I am looking forward to your reply and BJ, thanks for joining in. I would like to hear your comment, also.
Well, the fact that you can do that work in November sounds like you must be some place with some warmer weather. We’re not doing much of that work this time of year where I am in SD.
I believe, though, the recession occurred in the early 80s under Reagan. The inflation happened in the late 70s under Carter. In terms of getting out of the recession, it seems to me that the Stimulus Bill is pretty similar to what was done then. 35% ($275) billion was in tax cuts. Roughly $100 billion of the spending went as direct payments to folks like unemployment and one time payments. The rest of the spending went into infrastructure, health care, energy, education and homeland security. I’m not clear on how giving the money to the Pentagon is any better for the economy than to these.
That recession lasted about two years. That’s about where we are on this one. It’s said that the 80s recession was over by the end of 1982 but the unemployment rate for 1982 was 9.7% and for 1983 was still 9.6% and for 1984 was still 7.5%. It really didn’t move down significantly until 1988 when it got to 5.5%. It kind of makes one wonder why we remember the Reagan years as such good times. My guess is because after the stock market went absolutely nowhere for the entire 1970s, it went up 200% under Reagan. The rich got richer.
The rich got richer because they worked and didn’t sit on their butts waiting for a government hand out.
While I know this excludes you personally, the largest group today sitting on their butts and asking for a government hand out is your generation. Why do you think that is?
I give you credit, you are a master at spinning. How about some facts to back up that last statement, because I certainly don’t believe you.
Cmon Don, You know very well that I have not been spinning anything. I have provided facts time and time again. It is a bit disconcerting in that when I do, you just shrug them off and move on to your next spin. But, anyway.
Since I’ve “retired” most of my golfing buddies are about your age. As we chat, I have come to find out that there is almost nothing in this country that has a cost that does not have a “Senior Discount”. It doesn’t matter if you go to the pharmacy, the movie, the hardware store, the restaurant, you name it – there is a senior discount and it is expected. Heck, even the government (at all levels) has senior discounts! I even found out last week when my dentist told me that I need to have some very expensive dental work that if I were 65, I could get a 15% senior discount. I asked him about the 63 year old discount, it was zero. So was the 25 year old discount. Don’t try to tell me that all these businesses/bodies are simply feeling altruistic toward this totally needy group.
A large portion of these “town hall meetings and tea party crowds are also seniors. Their biggest concern? That someone younger than them might get some help and it might cost them “something”. They’re not sure what but they don’t want to lose anything. Now, the real topper is all this bru-ha-ha about not getting a cost of living adjustment in their SSA payments next year. It doesn’t matter that there has been no inflation or that they got 5.8% this year. They are entitled to a COLA. These are the same folks complaining about the government spending money it doesn’t have. But as I have mentioned a number of times, everyone has entitlements – it’s only the others with their hands out that don’t.
I wish I had the time to reply to any thread on here, whether I agree with it or not. That aside – Jerry, please – how is it “providing facts” when you back up your statement about Don’s generation being the largest hand-out group by citing random senior discounts, many of which are voluntarily offered by private entities? Voluntary discount = government handout? Really?
And seniors being concerned about their SSA payments and Medicare? Because they paid into the system, and they are concerned about the return on their forced investments? How dare they! The hypocrisy!
I have the utmost respect for Don’s generation – their strength of character, worthy of emulation, comes from living through the Great Depression and World War II. It came from struggle and self sufficiency, something being lost in greater amounts with greater velocity in subsequent generations.
“Because they paid into the system, and they are concerned about the return on their forced investments?” Really, now? Forced investments? Wow. Forced insurance , maybe, but Don thinks that is “ridiculous”: forcing a citizen to purchase anything.
Exactly how much money does the average 80 year old have invested SSA and Medicare? How much has the the average 80 year already gotten in returns on their investment?
I’ll answer that real quick, Jerry, I paid into social security for over 50 years and I am still paying into it. Also, I paid social security on my employees for forty plus years.
Today, I mailed a check to our dentist for $780.00 for about 1 1/2 hours work on my wife. This was just the first visit, with more to come. I didn’t ask for or receive or expect a seniors discount. You make a big deal out of seniors receiving a 10% discount at some restaurants, that is disappointing.
Social security, in the vast majority of cases, ends up being a monthly check in advanced years / retirement. That is not insurance in the strict sense, as insurance is protection against unexpected loss. Yes, there are (some) survivor benefits. For the amount of money that even my employer and I put in on a very moderate income, I could go out and get life insurance, disability insurance, and invest that money in retirement funds as I see fit. Sad.
There is a huge difference in mandated auto insurance versus these other “insurances.” Specifically, auto insurance is there for the protection of OTHER drivers, that in case you hit them, fair restitution may be made.
It is insurance and has always has been but you aren’t changing your mind as we have crossed this bridge several times before. The fact that you could (maybe) go out and get life insurance, disability insurance and invest in retirement funds is irrelevant. Tens of millions of people didn’t and wouldn’t or couldn’t. That is the point. What happens to them? How about “death panels”?
I don’t agree that there is a huge difference between auto vs health and I explained why earlier. But even if I did agree, that wasn’t the discussion. It was about Don’s comment that “govenment forcing a citizen to purchase anything is ridiculous and then fining them if they don’t is even worse”. He said “anything”.
Don, Both you and BG sure make a point of cherry-picking responses. I generally make longer than two sentence responses and IMO, the paragraph about senior discounts was trying to convey a sense of entitlement. Your response to my issue with seniors wanting a COLA next year, you totally ignore. My issue with seniors yelling at town halls/marches in opposition to health care reform, you ignore.
I already stated you personally were excepted from the generalization. I didn’t bring up the hand out business in the first place you did. But since you bring up your 50 years of payments, I don’t see how that is an answer as to why you are entitled to a COLA next year. I’ll ask you the same question I asked BG: How much have you paid in and how much have you received? P.S. You can’t count those payments you made as an employer.
When social security ws enacted in 1935, each contributor was to have an individual account. The wage earner paid into this account and the employer contributed a matching amount. This account was to earn interest and at retirement age you receive a monthly income, the amount being determined by how long you worked and how much you paid in. Social Security today doesn’t even remotely resemble the original concept. I have no knowledge of seniors wanting a COLA next year and I personally am not concerned. If the economy remains lousy and unemployment keep climbing, I would not expect nor want a COLA. However, I realize that some recipients need this adjustment just to survive.
I forgot to address your comment on the Town Hall meetings. I never attended one but I have attended the Tea Party meetings. The last one on November 7th, locally, was a representation of all age groups. One speaker was a young Marine that had served in Iraq. The organizer was a young woman that I judge to be about 35 years of age. Veterans of all ages and four wars were well represented and we received recognition that was appreciated. I was told that ex-President Clinton referred to us as “tea baggers”. Coming from a draft dodger, his opinion means nothing.
Some time ago, I downloaded the entire text of the 1935 act from the SSA.gov site. Clearly, it’s a long read, but I don’t see what you see. I see it talk about taxes to be paid and benefits to be paid. Maybe you can direct me to the section of the bill that you get your interpretation from.
I’m surprised you haven’t heard of the COLA thing, I hear about it, literally, every day on TV, Radio, the net. But then, I’m not out there painting parking lots – maybe, I need a job!
So, how much do you think you have paid? Received?
I replied and when I hit submit, I lost it, so I will try again.
I have drawn social securiy for 15 years. It started at $840.00 and has graduated to $1120.00 monthly. I have retired employees that draw more han I do and I have an English friend that only worked in this country for ten years and he draws more than I do. I estimate that I have drawn about $180,000.00. As to what I have paid in, I have no idea. I paid in the maximum amount every year except two. Two years before I sold my company, I reduced my salary about 40% due to the fact that I was spending the majority of my time with another business interest. Little did I know that the amount you draw is based on your salary for the last five years you are employed.
If I had invested the same amount weekly in Budweiser stock for 50 years, what do you think the amount would be?
Don – this is from the ssa.gov website:
Are my retirement benefits figured on my last five years of earnings?
Social Security benefits are based on earnings averaged over most of a worker’s lifetime. Your actual earnings are first adjusted or “indexed” to account for changes in average wages since the year the earnings were received. Then we calculate your average monthly indexed earnings during the 35 years in which you earned the most. We apply a formula to these earnings and arrive at your basic benefit, or “primary insurance amount” (PIA).
Since I’m having a difficult time tracking down historical BUD quotes as they merged with InBev this year; do you already know the answer? Did you buy the BUD stock?
One last question on SSA. I forgot whether you were/are married and if your wife got a check on her own earnings or on yours? I’m working on your total return on your “investment”.
Jerry, you made the statement that my generation is the largest group that sits on heir butts expecting a government hand out. I accused you of spinning and asked you to back it up with facts. All I got was something about yur golf buddies expecing a senior discount.
You kept insisting that I estimate how much social security I have received and how much I paid in. I answered you the best I could, so now I am asking you again: Back up your spin on my generation with some facts.
Let’s try this by removing my golfing buddies story from my reply:
A large portion of these “town hall meetings and tea party crowds are also seniors. Their biggest concern? That someone younger than them might get some help and it might cost them “something”. They’re not sure what but they don’t want to lose anything. Now, the real topper is all this bru-ha-ha about not getting a cost of living adjustment in their SSA payments next year. It doesn’t matter that there has been no inflation or that they got 5.8% this year. They are entitled to a COLA. These are the same folks complaining about the government spending money it doesn’t have. But as I have mentioned a number of times, everyone has entitlements – it’s only the others with their hands out that don’t.
I’ll add a recent comment by my favorite conservative:
The Washington Post’s George Will summed up the situation in a recent column.
“Because the cost of living declined 4 percent last year, the 57 million are not entitled to the actual COLA, but they evidently are going to be declared entitled to monetary consolation for the misfortune of not experiencing misfortune,” Will wrote.
Jerry, I am going to bow out and let you have it. I don’t have time to figure how much money I would have made on stock that I didn’t buy. Instead, I am going to stripe parking lots, catch fish and explore historic sites in my motor home. Catch ya later!
P.S. I stayed in two RV parks in your state this summer. One in Keytone and one in Wall. We enjoyed our visit, especially Mount Rushmore and Custer State Park.