Do the Liberals ever learn? (Rhetorical question) Obama is desperate to get the economy moving...

[njfan47]

and in the absence of an economic policy, wants to try to repeat the sins of the Clinton administration. And how stupid do the writers think the readers are when they mention the irresponsible lending practices of the mid-2000's. With the peak having taken place in 2006, clearly the practices of 2004 and 2005 wouldn't have caused a collapse so soon; instead, it was the Clinton policies of 1995-2000 that aimed to get everyone into a house that were the cause.

That's the problem with liberals, they always want everyone involved, instead of just those who earn the right to get involved. Of course, President Incapable will be out of office and giving speeches to brainwashed audiences when the effects of this policy are felt.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...b4370c-9aef-11e2-a941-a19bce7af755_story.html

 

[sammyk]

Yea Trickle down economics was a gem

 

[njfan47]

Trickle down economics worked a hell of a lot better than Clintonomics or obamanomics. Clinton artificially juiced the economy about halfway through his eight years and it led to a crash in home prices- eventually. That's always the key word with these policies, the work well in the present time period, but fail eventually.

Same with what is happening now with car loans and now home loans. If you don't know what the obama administration did to promote car sales growth, you should probably read up on it; then, you won't be surprised when the used car market is flooded in a few years and the effect on the economy is felt, as the auto manufacturing industry contributes substantially to annual GDP.

Another example is the $60 trillion in debt (corporate, government, etc.) that has been created since the bubble burst. It helps growth now (because money is cheap), but will hurt long-term if and likely when some of that debt is defaulted on down the road.

These liberal policies set the economy up for a bigger recession than normal. Trickle down didn't do that because it was based on organic growth, not on financially created growth, as we have now due to Europe failing after 50-60 years of liberal economic policies and now liberal immigration policies and the USA under pressure due to having elected a president who neither understands nor cares to understand economics. It's the price you pay.

 

[sammyk]

Says who a straight ticket republican. Trickle down economics works great for those with all of the money. Stop sniffing the Rush Limbaugh glue my friend. I am sure you can cite a gazillion ways trickle down economics works and I am sure i can find a gazillion articles on how Clintons economics worked. Listening to some of you guys is like the adults in Charlie Brown wonk wonka wonk wonk wonk wonk wonk. So relax and realize that Clinton economics will be back soon in the White House and keep on trucking

 

[paul from philly]

Says who a straight ticket republican. Trickle down economics works great for those with all of the money. Stop sniffing the Rush Limbaugh glue my friend. I am sure you can cite a gazillion ways trickle down economics works and I am sure i can find a gazillion articles on how Clintons economics worked. Listening to some of you guys is like the adults in Charlie Brown wonk wonka wonk wonk wonk wonk wonk. So relax and realize that Clinton economics will be back soon in the White House

I don't know about your last statement Sammy. She has lost 7 out of the last 8 primaries/caucuses and I don't think the DNC is liking that too much. I was having a conversation with someone here at work and a HUGE part of the equation still needs to be answered. Running mates!!

 

[sammyk]

http://money.cnn.com/2015/06/15/news/economy/trickle-down-theory-wrong-imf/ Ah she will win even Fox news know that

 

[njfan47]

Says who a straight ticket republican. Trickle down economics works great for those with all of the money. Stop sniffing the Rush Limbaugh glue my friend. I am sure you can cite a gazillion ways trickle down economics works and I am sure i can find a gazillion articles on how Clintons economics worked. Listening to some of you guys is like the adults in Charlie Brown wonk wonka wonk wonk wonk wonk wonk. So relax and realize that Clinton economics will be back soon in the White House and keep on trucking

Sammy, it's interesting that you say I could cite ways that trickle down worked and you could FIND ARTICLES! I love it. You're basically saying "I don't know of any examples, but I will look it up and see what I can find." I love ya man, but you have given me a good laugh that I'll remember for a while! Thanks!

And Clinton economics failed in the long run because of the Clinton Housing Bubble that ruined the lives of so many people. He basically propped up the latter years of his term by borrowing from the future and putting large masses of people into houses that they couldn't afford, and here's the key phrase, Sammy, OVER THE LONG TERM.

 

[njfan47]

http://money.cnn.com/2015/06/15/news/economy/trickle-down-theory-wrong-imf/ Ah she will win even Fox news know that

Sammy, this is where some critical thinking by you could have helped. So, the study looked at 150 countries; that's great. What was the difference from country to country? What was the high end of the range and the low end of the range. Did some Middle Eastern countries exaggerate the results based on a much wider gap between rich and poor? Why study 150 countries; how about looking at the USA, Germany, England, Japan, etc., the world economic powers who make up the bulk of world GDP? And why did they arbitrarily pick the top 20%? What happens when the top 10% have such an increase? And the top 30%? And what might the bias of the International Monetary Fund be? If you know anything about the organization, you will know that many on the left in the USA want the IMF to run the world economy, not the USA. Think, Sammy. Think.