Log in

No account? Create an account
. ..: .: ..::.: ..:.:.....: ...::: ...::.

April 2011
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

gwen [userpic]
And for the surprise, Bush blames the democrats!

This made me almost laugh out loud in the middle of my meeting:

Bush Blames Democrats for Sliding Economy

Current Mood: quixoticquixotic

I don't entirely disagree with him. Some of it does have to do with Congress-maybe not all of it. But they can block anything he suggests. Try putting a republican controlled congress in with Hiliary or Barak if they get elected and watch what happens to anything they propose. That's why the two party system sucks.

While I agree we need to start focusing on our own for a change (and i've been saying that for years....) there's no clean way to withdraw at this point. Is there stablity? Probably not. But we as a country need to put our foot down in November against all the political people. Not just Bush.

Everyone preaches change. How is Hilary Clinton change? Really. She was essentially in the white house 8 years ago.

I vote for the person, not the party. And this year. I don't think either party has put up someone who can do what needs to be done.

but one thing mom and dad taught me? never discuss religion or politics. And I guess I just did. :(

I suppose I should be more clear:

The roots for the current economy badness are very very well established in GWB's past actions. For instance, he claims that he's trying to work on energy policies, but he ENCOURAGED people to buy gas-guzzling SUVs, among other "no really, you should buy more oil" policies. Also, he ignored a lot of financial people's warnings about where the economy was going if he went a certain route... and then he went that route. Also, *much* of the current problems are in the housing crisis, which had its roots in the housing bubble at the end of the 90's (which are admittedly not his fault).

Anyway, my point is... he's blaming the people who are in congress now for blocking his band-aid policies which are too little, too late to actually fix the current situation. The real blame is that we've been going down this bad spiral for quite some time, and most of it precedes the people he's blaming.

okay. I can see that point. And I can concede to it.

But part of the blame could lie with us as consumers for buying those gas guzzling SUVs (4 wheel drive not important) And also though, financial crisis.

The government is giving us rebate checks and wants us to spend them on home repair, etc. Whereas that money could do better in a bank or paying off some of the credit card debt that has gone out of control by most people. I mean some of the fault has to lie with us as individuals. Why buy a $300K house and $50K when you have to work two jobs and have both parents working to afford it and then wonder why you're in foreclosure? I think that we as individuals are quick to blame the government for all our problems and want them to bail us out. I don't think all the fault can lie with one man either. But that's me. I don't think Gore or Kerry would have done any better in his shoes.

But I can see your point.

Well, sure, there is fault with everyone. However, when you set policies to encourage people to buy the houses that are out of their budget, or to buy SUVs in a time when gas prices are increasing, you are encouraging those people to give in to their unreasonable sides. That is something a leader, especially of a nation, should be much better about.

By the way, you realize I'm registered republican, right?

I'm not saying one party is better than another, just that his blame is silly and quite humorous. He's been a terrible economist the entire time he's been a president. It's the biggest reason I've objected to him, he's pretty much done everything possible to make the economy worse.

In that respect, Gore or Kerry would have done better than him, simply because they are in the category of, "ANYONE ELSE would have made at least one decision better than him!" Hell, the mad men Perot or Nader would have made better economists than him -- at least they have experience with major companies' financial situations. :)

*gasp* a registered republican? living in Allegheny county? no way! ;)

I think its time for Bush to get out of office, I'm just not sure the current choices are the right ones either....

No one is ever going to be perfect for the presidency. It's just impossible to suit all of the people in the country all at the same time.

That being said, I think the current set of choices, as a set, is the best we've had in a very long time. Perhaps even in my lifetime. I don't mean that each candidate is the best in my lifetime, just that there is actual competition between them, and all are reasonable choices in their own regard... we get to actually *choose* who suits each of us the most this election.

I think that we the people of the United States of America must accept *responsiblity* for the actions and the state of this country.

We must all carry the moral weight; and we must all shoulder the burden, going forward.

But I'm not convinced it's rational, reasonable, or moral to argue that the people carry causal *fault*---that when the economy falls, it is because of faulty decision-making by ordinary people, and when the economy booms, it is because the average American has been smarter or more moral.

We can easily gesture towards hypothetical or anecdotal people who've spent beyond their means; and we can easily gesture towards hypothetical or anecdotal people who've gone into debt because they had no alternative; and there's certainly a murky group in the middle who went into debt because it seemed reasonable to them, and half of that was because we have all swum in a context of false and misleading information and the other half is that perhaps we have not, as a group, questioned the world around us enough.

But it would be a bad idea to forget, I think, that these are the selfsame American people who have in other times and other places gladly sacrificed and labored for the common good; the selfsame American people who love, and work, and strive, and seek the American dream; the selfsame people who, just yesteryear, were filled with fire for liberty, justice, and the greatest aspirations of the soul. And if we ask why it is that they are so different now---so worthy of the blame you offer them---then I think we must say, the water that at one time is a pool is at another time a river, a bottle of drinking water, or the sea; that is the nature of people everywhere to look to those around them and those above them to understand how to express the burgeoning desire for righteousness and labor on behalf of that righteousness within them; that when people preach that greed is good, then the good shall be more greedy; that when people preach that we should spend, then the good shall spend more; when people preach that we are wealthy, then people shall live more as the wealthy do; when people preach that we must hate, then the good shall preach more; when people are shewn that a thing is wrong, then they shall do it less; when people are taught that what is right is what can be gotten away with, then they shall founder, bereft, rudderless, broken, and ultimately cling to whatever false or true idols of virtue they can find. If America founders it is the burden of all of us, for we *must* claim that burden if it is not to founder; but it is the *fault* of those who, in whatever fashion, find themselves as a group in a position to shape the banks of the river in which the water of our people flows, whether they shape it consciously towards woe or simply fail through human inadequacy or willful blindness to understand the unintended consequences of their actions.

I think that the most damaging wound in America is that we have lost the sense that we must stand together, and the second worst is that we have lost our understanding that the people must hold authority to account and be ever vigilant against that degeneracy power so naturally encourages, rather than turning an ever fearful eye towards the mob of people of which they are a part (whatever false divisions they may imagine in it) and clinging to unquestionable authority to protect them from ourselves.

See: Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class.

The housing bubble is NOT a 90s thing. That's early to mid 2000s, and was caused by the feds stopping oversight of lenders (in fact, Eliot Spitzer was in DC specifically to take the feds to court over them not allowing NY state to enforce laws that would have prevented much of the current problems when he was outed by the Bush DoJ), which allowed the current credit and housing crises to occur.

I distinctly watched it happen in '99 in full force. I distinctly remember saying at that point of time, "The housing market is overinflated now, this is a dangerous time to buy."

If it was that bad in '99, it had already been underway. The early part of the first decade did not help that problem, to be sure.

You were living in the Bay Area then, if memory serves. The rest of the country didn't go insane on real estate until 2002/2003, with the peak in 2005.

I'll grant that it peaked in 2005, but I did see signs of it even in my Mom's neighborhood (Squirrel Hill) in Pittsburgh before the year 2000.

Really, the larger point is that the housing bubble was probably not GWB's fault. It is very definitely rooted in events that happened before his presidency.

<sarcasm>yeah - let's drill ANWR to get at some really pointless amount of oil that isn't going to stop demand going up anyway, sure. Wonder who owns stock in those companies.</sarcasm>

I think any rational person capable of reason is constantly astounded at what comes out of the President's mouth. The most amazing thing is that there are people who still believe the fallacies he is pedaling. Boy has our education system failed those people.