The first journalist busted Obama straight away.

[scooterbug44]

The order is predetermined, the questions may or may not be. Typically the reason they call on certain people is because they can count on them to be respectful and ask the right questions. The press secretary sets it up and may even note where they are sitting to make it seem more natural. (At least that's how it works on West Wing).

 

[Lynnie]

Do you really think so?

The whole thing appeared very polished and 100% scripted to me. I think that most everyone (except maybe the woman correspondent from the Christian Science Monitor) stuck scrupulously to their previously vetted questions and the scripted answers.

I do not think he meant to come across as he did. But, last week, he got upset that he wasn't making progress and it's good that it didn't pass last week as there were plenty of earmarks, pork, etc.......

So, we got past that. I am a very optimistic person and this economy is tenuous at best - I think we all agree on that. For our leader to use words/phrases like 'this will be permanent and irreversible if we don't pass this plan.....' could have been a scare tactic?

And, that is exactly what the journalist wanted to know. The journalist gave him the opportunity to think this one through, which was commendable. Never, never in our history has any economy or situation proven to be permanent and/or irreversible. Not to mention the economists - if we can bring them back - know that these are cycles. We have normal ups and downs in any economy. This one is the anomaly in that in 2001-2002, we took the discount down to 1% (I think that's unhealthy). The discount today is at .25% (even more unhealthy for the overall economy, that is). We are printing money and have nothing to back it up. Since we came off the Gold Standard, there have been several ways to measure our dollar. The most widely used measurement is against GDP, which was down 4th quarter (seriously down)......so, now is definitely not the time to be printing more money, at least not a trillion dollars!

Now, I think we all agree that something has to be done. I personally believe that since we have been living and existing in a credit market and now credit is very difficult to obtain, the weak will fall by the wayside. The strong corporations who have cash and/or can quickly convert other assets to cash are strong. Cash is king (or queen) in a market like this.

I believe free markets should handle this, not printed money. I would like to see alternate plans. And, even placing more serious caps on the corporations - not distribute all of the funds at one time or even in one year.

If our government is going to own corporations, then I'd further like to see strength in our government to run the corporations. The bill proposed failed that test.

The bill that was quickly enacted into law last year failed. I think we all agree on that. Which is why Obama should be a little more methodical in this one. I do not know one American who is for another bail out like this because it helps the Big Dogs. But, I do know several Americans who are certainly in favor of an improved economy and as I have cut back, everyone I know has cut back to make their own fiscal obligations.

 

[amp in srb]

Read that back once and ask yourself why I give your posts little respect amp? I feel you have the uncanny ability to chime in in the middle of interesting and intelligent threads with nothing more than pointless diatribe, and you do it in a way that ruffles peoples feathers through cheap insults and innuendo. I would welcome you and your discussion if you would simply calm down, post smart feedback instead of rhetoric, and back up what you have to say with something, anything that people can grab a hold of and understand.

I've ignored your posts since the last time we bumped heads... clearly engaging you with my little insult this time around was a mistake. My apologies, I'll refrain in the future.

Nothing to see here folks, move along.

Really? Nothing to understand?

Your snark is ridiculous, and frankly unbecoming. You should not, under any circumstances ridicule or try to throw someone out of the dialogue because of a disagreement. Ask for more information if needed.

When I argue that there are real world issues being played out here, things that are tangible, that's incendiary? Really? Sorry. I would argue that's the most important issue NOT being discussed here. Ivory towers crumble because they have no one to take care of the plumbing.

But honestly, a lot of the argument against this stimulus is based on the Japanese plan in the 90's.
I can provide references if needed. That's my point. I'm not sure what your disconnect is. I'm not trying to 'piss you off". You just happen to get pissed off easily.

If, for some reason, you have a problem with my occasional involvement, you have a problem with the whole process. I don't have the time to sit here doing this all day. Sorry. But, please don't dismiss people because they can't spend all their time doing this. That, in and of itself is ridiculous.

 

[BeachSiO2]

To leave substance for style for a minute...

While I abhorred President Bush's "speeches", I have to say there is one thing that drove me nuts last night. In the entire 10 minutes of prepared marks by President Obama, I did not see one time where he stopped and looked straight ahead and I was looking for it!!! It was from one teleprompter to the other and I was getting whiplashed. Then when they panned out, you could see them... aarrgghhh. I am worried that they have become his crutch.

Now I understand it was his first press conference but please sweet little 8lb 6oz baby Jesus have my president be able to give a speech and look at the camera every once and a while for me. Bill Clinton could do it......

[/Off my public speaking soapbox].

 

[30ashopper]

But honestly, a lot of the argument against this stimulus is based on the Japanese plan in the 90's.

The response by the Japanese government to the 90's downturn is analyzed due to the similarities between their situation and our current situation. Other government spending responses are often analyzed as well, including the response to the great depression and the subsequent impact of war spending, the downturn in the 1950's under Eisenhower, Kennedy’s response to the downturn of 61-64, and the downturn in the 70's. Japan and FDR happen to be good models to study because they involved a credit crisis, deflation, and massive stimulus spending on the part of the government. The fact that these initiatives generally failed over the short term in bringing about an upturn in the markets make these historical events prevalent to our current analysis. Their long term effects are also disputed which add weight to the argument that maybe, we are approaching things from the wrong direction. I believe the ball is in Keynes court to prove government spending solves major private sector downturns as the evidence is not forthcoming in these situations. We are, after all, talking about trillions of dollars in debt. Guessing, IMHO, is not an option.

What is that quote, "those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it"? I think Santayana said that.

I can provide references if needed.

Please do.

 

[Lynnie]

The response by the Japanese government to the 90's downturn is analyzed due to the similarities between their situation our current situation. Other government spending responses are often analyzed as well, including the response to the great depression and the subsequent impact of war spending, the downturn in the 1950's under Eisenhower, Kennedy?s response to the downturn of 61-64, and the downturn in the 70's. Japan and FDR happen to be good models to study because they involved a credit crisis, deflation, and massive stimulus spending on the part of the government. The fact that these initiatives generally failed over the short term in bringing about an upturn in the markets make these historical events prevalent to our current analysis.

What is that quote, "those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it"? I think Santayana said that.



Please do.

Interesting - so your point is study those periods' stimulus efforts and try something different? FDR was only popular for a short period - Eisenhower was good with the Interstate System - is this what Obama is trailing? Jump starting the economy with construction? Don't we have enough of that with vacancies and distressed properties not being completed? I think part of the interesting situation here is the number of white collar human capital that are jobless. A friend of mine said, "Yeah, I can't see any executive getting out there and doing blue collar work." Well, IMHO, the bottom line is you do what you have to do to get through this. I don't mind a little manual labor - as long as I can sport my fishnets at night with a handsome man type!!

 

[30ashopper]

Interesting - so your point is study those periods' stimulus efforts and try something different? FDR was only popular for a short period - Eisenhower was good with the Interstate System - is this what Obama is trailing? Jump starting the economy with construction? Don't we have enough of that with vacancies and distressed properties not being completed? I think part of the interesting situation here is the number of white collar human capital that are jobless. A friend of mine said, "Yeah, I can't see any executive getting out there and doing blue collar work." Well, IMHO, the bottom line is you do what you have to do to get through this. I don't mind a little manual labor - as long as I can sport my fishnets at night with a handsome man type!!

This bill is such a huge spending boondogle, I really have no grasp of what they are trying to do or what effects it will have. That's why they are calling it the "Great Experiment". In a year or so, we can look at the employment numbers graph again and know if it worked short term or not. In four years we'll find out if massive government spending of debt actually creates growth. Both parties have a lot riding on this.

 

[30ashopper]

whoa, wait a minute, "sporting fishnets"? did you just mix the subject of fishnets and economics?

 

[Lynnie]

whoa, wait a minute, "sporting fishnets"? did you just mix the subject of fishnets and economics?

Why, any self-respecting Southern woman type would mix it up just a tad...... ;-)

 

[LuciferSam]

Why, any self-respecting Southern woman type would mix it up just a tad...... ;-)

Sport fishnets. Those are the best kind.