E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSCONCORD, NH -- At a Chamber of Commerce roundtable and brief press conference beforehand, Mitt Romney wasted no time in hammering President Obama's handling of the economy.
"I'm afraid the president is just out of his depth at understanding how the private economy works." Romney told reporters here.
He also said Obama turned Harry Truman's axiom on its head by placing blame for the S&P downgrade on Congress, saying that the new motto for this White House should be: "The buck stops somewhere else."
In a Q&A session with local business leaders, Romney explained his usual seven-point economic plan, and also maintained his support for New Hampshire becoming a right-to-work state. A bill was passed by the New Hampshire legislature earlier this summer, but vetoed by the state's Democratic governor.
In his remarks today, Romney also landed what also might have been a faint jab at Texas Gov. Rick Perry in discussing his Massachusetts health-care law, which he said would never have worked in some other states -- naming only Texas specifically -- where the rate of uninsured is so much higher.
Romney may also have coined a new phrase for future stump speeches. In criticizing the vitriol that has been a mainstay of Washington debate lately, he encouraged President Obama to reach across the aisle and stop what Romney called the "blame presidency."
And answering a question from reporters, Romney shrugged off criticism that he had been absent during the debt debate in Washington.
"I didn’t react day-to-day to every negotiation, because my position was clear. 'Cut, Cap, and Balance' was the right way for America to deal with this financial distress," he said. "You just can’t keep on planning to spend massively more money than you take in and expect that down the road America’s balance sheet is going to sustain a viable economy."
Leave a Comment:
It's easy to take 'shots' from the cheap seats...
Why was Mitten's eerily silent when all hell was breaking lose?
The entire cast of Teapubican characters calling any-ones 'leadership' abilities into question is down right hysterical!
Their too occupied hiding behind the Koch Brothers & Karl Rove's skirts!
You are correct Feisty -- you do it everyday -- hidden behind the skirt of George Soros.
Why that's easy Feisty - he;s leading from behind.
So how come you only like that when it's Obama doing it?
Good point though: who do you suppose has a better working knowledge of credit rating and debt issues - Obama, the former community organizer and senator that railed against raising the debt ceiling, or the mighty Kochs?
They my be very EEEVVVIIILLLL, but they sure do know how to run a business empire. Obama and Tim "the credit rating of the USA will most certainly not be downgraded" Geitner?
Come on old gal, even you know.
AMEN Feisty. The Tea-publicans were warned. Now look what they did. They will be OUT in 2012. Not many Independants will Vote for any of them. And Repbulicans will also be outed in 2012. Obama compromised, no one else did. See what happens...
By their own leaders admission -- they got 98% of what they wanted & NO amount of crab-walking it backwards is gonna change it! ;o)
The tea baggers poll numbers are sinking faster than a luxury liner colliding with an iceberg!
@Indy & Feisty -- they say if you keeping spreading a lie maybe it will be believable. You can keep trying but it won't work. Maureen Dowd -- one of the left's own -- said it best in her NY Times piece on Sunday:
"We own the economy" -- Deborah Wasserman Shultz, Chairwoman of Democrat Party
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57025.html
______________________________________________________________________________
Team Obama has PROVEN once again that a central government controlled economy ALWAYS fails
How many times do the progressive democrats (communists) need this simple historical fact DEMONSTRATED?
Yep Indy - it was those damned tea partiers - so totally powerful they wrecked the whole place in just a few months.
Whereas the progressives and Pelosi, in power for years did nothing but plant roses and sprinkle fairy dust.
By the way Indy, how is Detroit, as a city doing these days? It is a model of progressive ideas, and has been so for years and years, right? It's doing super good?
No nasty republicans in power there, correct?
As I recall the S&P announcement, it seems that Governor Romney has left out a few critical things having to do with the OVERALL dysfunction of government in Washington and the refusal of BOTH SIDES to talk about realistic solutions.
Indeed. Lao Tzu first said that, by the way.
Romney's not only leading from behind, he's leading from WAY behind. Behind the 8-ball, that is.
To run a successful business empire requires you to be evil. Thank you for that admission, Counselor.
One question for you, though. Where was Tim Geithner before he came to the White House? And all those other economic advisers that the President relied on to pull us through this?
Wall Street? Yeah, that's what I thought.
Every bit as competent now as they were then, and still fleecing the rest of us.
I'm sure even YOU could do a better job, Spanky. So, why don't you give it a whirl by telling us all what YOU would do now.
Hey, maybe here comes Ira's rally -- Dow now only down 308.
"The tea baggers poll numbers are sinking faster than a luxury liner colliding with an iceberg!"
What did I hear this morning? 22% favorable rating?
Where are the town halls? Moved to an undisclosed location?
That's absolutely true. In fact, Democrats now own 2 percent.
John Boehner, Speaker of the House of Representatives --
He owns the rest.
Cut , cap and balance
means that Romney was for cuts for the poor, cap all tax increases and balance the budget on the backs of the poor.
The bill cut social security, medicare and medicaid with no cuts to the military all with no revenue increase.
Worst of all the balance budget admendments only real purpose was to create the need for 2/3 majority to raise taxes on the richest in the United States from now on.
The crap bill was dead on arrival at the senate. That's the bill that Romney wanted. Glad to see Romney is as intelligent as the normal tea-person.
AM - if Obama is so anti-wall street why did he hire Geinter?
But hey, as long as we are good on the evil part. Cause there are a few libbies in business, so I guess we know they are evil too.
Me, a better job? I, along with you [or because of you] have finally mastered wall street - I got mostly out.
Gold. It's whats for dinner. Have I mentioned that I have been investing in gold for a little while?
You bet I have. Looking like $2000 per ounce is a reality. :)
I think Romney's glass house must have a reflective surface on the inside.
AM - Obama is the Pres, dems control the Senate. Yet the dems only control 2%? Wow, that is mighty defeatist, even for a libbie like you. And if true, why even bother voting anymore? Just sad.
American First - Debt in ten years will be $30 trillion. You are good with that? You are braced and ready for 1. the president to come out today and talk about more, not less, tax cuts, and 2. some very lean times, right?
I hope you are, or you will likely be disappointed.
BANG ZOOM! Right on the nail head Richard! How do you think he keeps that Ken Doll look so perfect?
WOW listen to the republicans (aka tea people) bragging and cheering about tanking the economy. Just what they've been working towards for two and a half years. Their really proud of themselves. Now tea people, now that you've caught the proverbial car, what are you going to do with it? Didn't think you had a clue, you just wanted to say we won.
Just remember you have to live through this tea party down grade with the rest of us. Hope your jobs secure.
Hmmm...
This is news?
Who believed that Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney (or any sentient being, for that matter) was going to praise President Obama's recent, ongoing, or overall management of the U.S. economy?
The results are what they are.
Glad Timmy's staying.
Just what we need.
Fiesty, love your comments - always! The rest of the GOP numbnuts' comments weren't even worth the time it took to post them. If the Kock[sp] brothers were so good at running private business, how come they had to get ALL their starting capital from mommy and daddy Kock[sp]? You go, girl. Tell the tpers and the gopers how it really is. They are such dimwits, they'll believe anything!
Spanky, until the Senate changes the rules relating to filibusters, no one will ever control the Senate.
Just for perspective, I looked at President Obama's 2012 Budget projections, and here is what it shows with regard to just the health care entitlements - Medicare/Medicaid;
Total projected Revenues for Medicare/Medicaid over the next 10 years = $2.730 Trillion.
Total projected Costs for Medicare/Medicaid over the next 10 years = $10.530 Trillion.
That's a net Deficit in just the Medicare/Medicaid program of $7.790 Trillion.
It's interesting to note that the same Budget projections by Obama for the same 10 year period (2012-2021) show a TOTAL Deficit of $7.206 Trillion, so if it were not for the health care expenses, we would actually show a net SURPLUS of $584 Billion over the next 10 years. These figures reflect the added cost of Obama's new entitlement for Obamacare. The revenues and spending projected by Obama can be verified at the following White House link - See Table S-3;
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf
It's obvious that Medicare/Medicaid is the REAL problem with the Deficits.
My recommendation – Fully fund Medicare with increased payroll taxes of about $71 per month each for employers & employees, and a combination of a small deductible ($10 per doctor visit) for Medicaid beneficiaries plus a National Sales Tax of about 2%. These simple changes would fully fund these programs and lead to a Surplus instead of huge Deficits within 10 years.
Interesting read...
First, gold and bonds are what people move to when equities are in trouble. It's a classic strategy. So there is no surprise that it's happening now.
Perhaps you folks didn't read the same S&P report I did. In their response S&P said they based their decision on the “The debacle over the debt ceiling continued until almost the midnight hour,” and "the effectiveness, stability and predictability of American policy making and political institutions"
For S&P, the debt ceiling negotiations were the tipping point that lead to the downgrade.
It's based on a negative political outlook...not our ability to pay.
There is no compromise in this divided dysfunctional government so blame both sides.
Blame the folks that won't compromise and blame the folks that did not lead.
Blame the folks that voted in this Congress.
Blame the folks that embraced the TP agenda.
Blame whoever you want...it solves zero cause the problem will continue until the 2012 election.
Oh..Spanky..according to the OMB numbers I saw...and I posted them next week...it looks like we may be near a balnced budget in 10 years.
Spending is ONE piece. Revenue the other.
You need to quote both...otherwise the comparison is invalid.
Obama and Geithner really really need to call "FreeCreditReport.com"
*blushes*
Thank you for the kind words BillyD!
There is so MUCH more to the Koch Brother's crusade against the middle class -- someone could write a book!
Just what did they do Indy? They tried to cut government spending, they tried to get a balanced budget amendment, they tried to cap spending and they promoted balanced spending....and who said "NO" to that?
Please, give me one reason to blame the republicans for the democrats increasing spending for the next two years. You may want to think that the general public (aside from the very vocal liberal minority) is going to continue reelecting people that are spending us into oblivion, but prepare for disappointment come November 2012.
We reap what we sow ........ President Obama and the democrats have tried to spend their way (with our money ) to prosperity. Predictibly, it did not work. Blaming others for the shortcomings of your policies is further proof that it time for you to go. End this Obamunist nightmare in November 2012!!
This downgrade is a direct consequence of the Tearrorist/GOP not automatically Raising the Debt Ceiling.
Sometimes when you "Rock the Boat" it tips over and you DROWN!
Where is the "lord" now. It still is not raining in Texas.
The Teavanglicans are the worst Populist movement to happen to America Period.
These people have NO vision of a Prosperous Future for American.
They only want a mythical Armageddon to happen, and the Crashing of America's economy, with no Jobs in sight is the only Armageddon there will be.
Protecting the Million and Billionaires from contributing is the HELL the T-Tards have reeked on America.
Forget about the Future of our kids because as long as the T-Tards have an Ignorant Voice there is not going to be one.
Mexico, China, and India knows more about the" American Dream" than the T-Tards do now.
The only fault of Obama was not Calling these Anarchist out from DAY ONE!
Romney has a lot of nerves since he made his fortune buying up small business's to kill them and putting people out of work.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE March 16, 2006
INCREASING THE STATUTORY LIMIT ON THE PUBLIC DEBT
Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about America’s debt problem. The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. Over the past 5 years, our federal debt has increased by $3.5 trillion to $8.6 trillion. That is ‘‘trillion’’ with a ‘‘T.’’ That is money that we have borrowed from the Social Security trust fund, borrowed from China and Japan, borrowed from American taxpayers. And over the next 5 years, between now and 2011, the President’s budget will increase the debt by almost another $3.5 trillion. Numbers that large are sometimes hard to understand. Some people may wonder why they matter. Here is why: This year, the Federal Government will spend $220 billion on interest. That is more money to pay interest on our national debt than we’ll spend on Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. That is more money to pay interest on our debt this year than we will spend on education, homeland security, transportation, and veterans benefits combined. It is more money in one year than we are likely to spend to rebuild the devastated gulf coast in a way that honors the best of America. And the cost of our debt is one of the fastest growing expenses in the Federal budget. This rising debt is a hidden domestic enemy, robbing our cities and States of critical investments in infrastructure like bridges, ports, and levees; robbing our families and our children of critical investments in education and health care reform; robbing our seniors of the retirement and health security they have counted on. Every dollar we pay in interest is a dollar that is not going to investment in America’s priorities. Instead, interest payments are a significant tax on all Americans—a debt tax that Washington doesn’t want to talk about. If Washington were serious about honest tax relief in this country, we would see an effort to reduce our national debt by returning to responsible fiscal policies. But we are not doing that. Despite repeated efforts by Senators CONRAD and FEINGOLD, the Senate continues to reject a return to the commonsense Pay-go rules that used to apply. Previously, Pay-go rules applied both to increases in mandatory spending and to tax cuts. The Senate had to abide by the commonsense budgeting principle of balancing expenses and revenues. Unfortunately, the principle was abandoned, and now the demands of budget discipline apply only to spending. As a result, tax breaks have not been paid for by reductions in Federal spending, and thus the only way to pay for them has been to increase our deficit to historically high levels and borrow more and more money. Now we have to pay for those tax breaks plus the cost of borrowing for them. Instead of reducing the deficit, as some people claimed, the fiscal policies of this administration and its allies in Congress will add more than $600 million in debt for each of the next 5 years. That is why I will once again cosponsor the Pay-go amendment and continue to hope that my colleagues will return to a smart rule that has worked in the past and can work again. Our debt also matters internationally. My friend, the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, likes to remind us that it took 42 Presidents 224 years to run up only $1 trillion of foreign- held debt. This administration did more than that in just 5 years. Now, there is nothing wrong with borrowing from foreign countries. But we must remember that the more we depend on foreign nations to lend us money, the more our economic security is tied to the whims of foreign leaders whose interests might not be aligned with ours. Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘‘the buck stops here.’’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.
And the market is off another 350+ pts today. Thank you to President Obama, Mr Reid, and all the liberals in the Senate.
Oh please. Like the gop and the rest of the anti-american t-partiers have no blame in this. How typical of a dittohead to only blame the Democrats.
I could be wrong but the downturn in the market seems to be the market incorporating the impact of the Presidents speech.
There's no way to make this downgrade and the trickle down effects to other financial institutions sound good.
AM: Still say there will be a late day rally.
@Ira -- You either can't read or you like to present conjecture and lies.
http://www.ft.com/cms/af2c4fac-bfc2-11e0-90d5-00144feabdc0.pdf
The S&P does not care -- takes no position -- if the cuts are through reduced spending or increased revenues.
Too easy, Spanky. He's not.
And that's what's wrong with President Obama.
I'm looking forward to it, Ira. No one wants this disaster.
But they'd better GET to it, and soon.
Either way, you can still be my guru as long as you speak Greek.
Ben-636050
You either can't read or you like to present conjecture and lies.
The S&P does not care -- takes no position -- if the cuts are through reduced spending or increased revenues.
I said " Perhaps you folks didn't read the same S&P report I did. In their response S&P said they based their decision on the “The debacle over the debt ceiling continued until almost the midnight hour,” and "the effectiveness, stability and predictability of American policy making and political institutions"
That's a quote.
For S&P, the debt ceiling negotiations were the tipping point that lead to the downgrade.
Where did I talk about where revenue cuts?
Please point out any lie or conjecture...any?
If you think the Tea Party is to blame for this, you are nuts! It is obvious Obama hasn't a clue what he is doing and he will not win re-election. In fact, he may not even be the Democratic nominee.
The President’s speech:
Holy son of Jor-el. Now he endorses the Simpson-Bowles and Gang of Six Plan, where the hell was he a year ago? Why do we need a new Super Committee if these reports exist?
If he was for a balanced approach…that includes revenue… why didn’t he endorse one of the plans or agree to a cuts only plan? There was the choice of a veto.
He keeps saying one thing..balanced approach…yet doing the opposite.
If this is his position, then he needs to stick to it, control the narrative and sell it to the American people.
It’s all about making framing the argument.
The Dow is down over 550.. talk about being wrong....
S&P made it clear weeks ago that unless there was at least 4 trillion in cuts over the next 10 years they would downgrade our debt. So this should be no surprise to anyone. And, in fact, only one proposal would have avoided the downgrade. That would be the Tea Party's Cut, Cap and Balance.
Keep repeating that to yourself Jimmy -- it may help you sleep better the next 5 years! ;o)
PS: Buddy -- the tea baggers do indeed own this mess...
First you have Boehner bragging about achieving 98% of what they wanted & the you have Mitch McConnell crowing about how effective hostage taking proved to be.
Do try to keep up will ya? Or better yet, go read the S&P website, it lays out with clarity who is to blame!
You're the one that needs to keep up Feisty, we're talking Tea Party here! Boehner and McConnel are about as far from the Tea Party folks as anyone. They are nothing more than establishment Washington cronies whose sole interest is staying in power. The Tea Party wanted Cut, Cap and Balance. The only option that would have prevented a downgrade in our credit rating.
Perhaps one day SOON it will dawn on Mr. Romney that President Obama does have continuous and ongoing advice from many of the best minds on economics and related fields at his fingertips, just a phone call or meeting away! Perhaps Mr. Romney could possibly be convinced that President Obama DOES talk often to these economic advisors, even on a day to day basis! Perhaps Mr. Romney knows all there is to know about economics and believes every president in history is as "brilliant" as he is on so many subjects. Mr. Romney would have you think that it is a 'piece of cake' to just switch our economy to the on and up position. And it seems many on this thread actually believe his misguided and narrow thinking rhetoric .
OH! I get it now...
Republicans rode the tea baggers coattails to victory in 2010, but now they're attempting to distance themselves because of the colossal mess they've caused...
Who would of guessed? lol
Thanks for clearing that up for me! ;o)
You are obviously confused. But I am glad to be of help.
They have finally done it. Republicans have destroyed this country with their failed economic politics.
Well, if you have lost a lot of money in your 401 K and stock market, thank a Republican-Tea Terrorist.
These dumb a$$es have screwed us all and they can not and will not be allowed to stay in power.
Remember, only 37% of voters voted in 2010, and we the people are going to vote in high numbers to throw these SOBs out.
Once they are gone, we can do what needs to be done, Raise Revenue.
LoL Preferably over drinks and a pizza. ;-)
Redhead - I think you were on a different s&p website
Anna Molly:
Κάθε φορά AM ...
Γιατί να συμβιβαστείτε με ποτά και μια πίτσα;
Γιατί να μην το δείπνο σε Îνα Σάββατο βράδυ;
@Ben-636050,
Are you serious Really, Really?
It's nice to know how NON FACT people vote against themselves as well as their mothers, girlfriends, wives, and grandmothers. Seeming how the Tea Baggers want to tell all women what to do. If you agree with the Tea Baggers on that alone you are well beyond a male chauvinist PIG. This is also including rape and insect forcing the woman to carry the attackers child. How cruel is that.
A woman has a right to choose period.
This is because Slick Mick signed a document saying gays are evil that walk the earth.
Leaders speak out - punks hide and wait for the crowd to go away.
Leader help people - punks fire half the company he takes over, collects millions then tell them he did them a favor. Oh Really Slick Mick.
Leaders take responsibility for what they do - Slick Mick say I quote "I did not create universal health care in my state the elected official did". Oh Really Slick Mick
"Once they are gone, we can do what needs to be done, Raise Revenue."
Spoken like a true leftist/socialist/communist. Raising taxes is the only solution you people have to everything -- except it's not really a solution since you'll just turn around and continue to spend more than you take in. The government already takes plenty from me -- I'll be damned if it takes any more. Anybody with an IQ over 80 would know that this country has a SPENDING problem, not an income problem.
"This is because Slick Mick signed a document saying gays are evil that walk the earth."
Uh, are you referring to that "family values" document that Romney (rightfully) REFUSED to sign? I'd like to know exactly what the f you're referring to because honestly I don't even think YOU know.
I think the article should have been titled "Romney takes a swing at Obama on economy, S&P Downgrade". In my opinion the attack is wild and fails to connect, no hit scored.
Thanks to the Tea Party, the US has been degraded, downgraded, and denigrated.
Thanks to the Republican Party, the stock market has lost nearly a fifth of it's value over the past month.
Great job, Mitt!
Like if Romney was the current President things would be different? What would he do? More tax breaks??? Maybe he'd head up to Palmyra NY, find Moroni's gold plates, auction them off, pay off the national debt, then whisk himself back to the White House in his magic underwear.
You gotta love Willard the Mormon.
The Tea Party threatened not to raise the debt ceiling and let America default. The S&P believed them.
Harry said no. Obama said no. The Republicans were the only party working on actual legislation. 3 separate bills. Harry said no, Barry said no. No no no.
This revisionist history by liberals is hysterical and will be their downfall in 2012, as any thinking human around the globe sees that Barry is an embarrassment, a complete and total failure as a leader. The questions are now being asked by liberal columnists - did you elect a man unqualified? and the answer is a resounding YES.
He provide zero direction, negotiated, then changed the deal. last minute wanted 50% more tax revenue during this rocky economy, it was beyond sophomoric. He is a one trick pony - great fundraiser from the far left, and that is it. Now that he has been exposed as still voting "present", only the leftie kooks will vote for him again.
Feisty Even you in your blind love of liberalism,know in your heart that Mr Obama and his Goldman Sachs posse are leading this country in the wrong direction. And if Mr Romney were black or jewish instead of mormon he would not be subjected to the vetting he is getting by the liberal press.
ssmike
She does, but won't admit to it. Feisty is as partisan as they come. I just click "no value" most of the time because her posts typically have no value. Just be glad that Feisty and her progressive-liberal friends are a minority.
It sounds like Feisty must be Obama's lap dog. Too bad she's a LIB and fighting for the wrong party.
feisty must be doing it right as all of the knuckle dragger's are up in arms at her but I love her style
Thanks!
It's always better to have a bulls-eye on your back then a boot on your neck! ;o)
Keep spinning your non-facts Libertarian.
That's my favorite tactic of you guys, the projection. How you take criticisms leveled at you and try to flip them onto your enemies.
Everyone knows the Republican party and especially the Tea Party embody the idea of obstructionism. They and they alone are the Party of No.
I guess Boehner never walked out on the 4.2 trillion grand bargain huh? The one that would have avoided the S&P downgrade? I guess your party wasn't the one refusing to sign any bargain until it was 10 hours from the deadline? I guess your party wasn't the one with members who vowed to not sign any debt ceiling increase whatsoever?
And then you accuse liberals of revisionist history, the very thing you actively engage in. Nice.
You know what, I take it back. You're not guilty of revisionist history, you're guilty of revisionist reality.
If Gov. Romney really knows what to do about the economy, why is he holding the country hostage? If the Republicans don't choose Romney, or the nation doesn't vote him into office, will he refuse to reveal the magic recipe? Cut, cap and balance is a coward's choice: a balanced budget amendment would take 10 years, and would have to be ratified by 2/3 of the state legislatures. It is not a panacea for the current problem, and would not be operative under a Romney presidency.
Well, since you have already prejudged and preconcluded the obvious fixes, why would he even give people like you the time of day or the satisfaction of a response? He can't fix stupid so why respond to it?
Not only that, kate, a balanced budget amendment is just a dumb idea--especially the GOP version which would require a 2/3 vote by both the House and Senate to ever raise or lower taxes, to ever rid the tax code of loopholes, etc. Grover Nordquist isn't satisfied with a Pledge, he's got his puppets trying to make it permanent.
"You just can't keep on planning to spend massively more money than you take in and expect that down the road America's balance sheet is going to sustain a viable economy."
Looks like Mitt wishes that the W tax cuts on the super rich had expired last year.
And if the republicans hadn't held unemployment for the poor hostage, the tax cuts would have ended.
We all know like the republicans that tax cuts for the rich are more important than American.
When are they going to wake up to the fact that 'trickle down' is an amber colored fluid resulting from a weak prostate.
Yeah - tax cuts only Republicans idea. Yet Obama will trot out a bunch of new ones now.
What will you say then American First? What happens when you have to face it that it is Obama too?
SHould be fun to find out, right?
Well look here, old Spanky is backing away from tea people tax cuts.
Yo Mo - you need to look closer.
Exactly the opposite my friend. In fact, you are about to hear Obama embrace more tax cuts.
Yay! It literally is the only play he's got.
Spanky, are you saying that Obama and the Democrats will be proposing new tax cuts? Could you give us a date when that will happen? My guess is February 30, 2012. What's yours?
Toddlers do tend to take up all of the air when they throw tantrums - teapubs have actually been working on wrecking the economy since Obama was elected. Our system wasn't expected to elected idiots who don't give a crap how they destroy the country. Teabags have been the ones to bring the country to the brink regardless of the harm it could cause. They turned down a bigger deficit reduction because they didn't want any revenue increases or to even let the stupid Bush tax cuts expire for the rich. No matter how teapubs try to spin it, this current mess was brought on by them.
Kate - you REALLY believe that a mere candidate is 'holding the country hostage'? Anyone who pays taxes has every right to ask that their money (that's right - it IS our money) is going for, and to put the fiscal brakes on the reckless spending of the Obama administration. Cut, cap and balance may not be THE plan, but it is more than we are getting from President Obama and the left wing of the democat party.
That's if it is really the Obama administration. So far all the worst decisions of the bush years in still in place today. We are still adding to the debt with unfunded tax cuts and unfunded wars. The republicans are fighting hard to keep it that way.
I have yet to see what an Obama administration would look like.
Until then I just have to keep judging the republican policy that has brought us down. Tea party republicans you held our country hostage to implement your ideals so the 2012 tea-cession is on you.
Jonathan,
If Mitt has the answers for our countries troubles, as he has said, shouldn't he as an American tell us all what those answers are? Or is it more patriotic to keep it a secret until he gets elected?
What it all boils down to is politics. Why would any member of our government actually be HAPPY that such a thing like this has happened? Simple: It's politics, and the worse the 'other side' looks, the better off he'll be.
In my opinion, the first and most important things about a government is that it's pragmantic. When a government starts self canibalizing itself like this, it is no longer pragmatic.
The President has had 2.5 years and TRILLIONS of our dollars to do something good - and he has failed completely. In 8 months, a few dozen Tea Party candidates have caused a recession?
Do any of you liberals really think that any of us believe your drivel?
If you are right, your party is the most inept in history. If you are wrong, your party is the most evil in history.
"CUT, CAP AND BALANCE" IS A POLITICALLY NAIVE PROPOSAL. IT IS SO IDEALISTIC AND LIMITING ON AN ECONOMY, AS TO BE UNWORKABLE.
Problem with a balanced budget amendment is when a natural disaster devastates part(s) of the U.S. How do you pay for a region's reconstruction? What do you cut? Under the right-wing's version of "Cut, Cap and Balance," there would be NO PUBLIC SECTOR MONEY to help such places recover. There would be NO RAISING OF REVENUE AND NO RAISING OF TAXES TO HELP THE VICTIMS, OR THEIR BUSINESSES TO RECOVER. Aside from attempts from private sector churches to help only some families made suddenly homeless, for all practical purposes, THESE TOWNS AND THEIR LAND WOULD REMAIN IN A DESTROYED AND UNLIVABLE CONDITION FOR A LONG TIME TO COME.
That's why you need a public sector budget to operate in a bit of a deficit condition. Yes, you heard right. Budgets allowed to operate in a margin of acceptable deficits creates a flexibility to respond to unexpected changes that a balanced budget cannot offer.
Especially when a 'balanced budget' is further restrained by "capping" and "cutting," the only way to go is downward, since THE HEALTHY GROWTH OF AN ECONOMY WON'T BE ALLOWED, BY CAPPING AND CUTTING IT. I hypothesize that much of "Wall Street" won't go for it, and as for "Main Street," well, when they find out that 'Cut, Cap, and Balance' is not allowing them or their families to rise out of poverty after a disaster strikes, then all of this right-wing idealism and their religious morality legislated into law, loses its validity pretty damned fast!
What Romney says is true, but now is not the time. Like him or not, Obama is the President, and this economy is starting to slip away, not just here, but in Europe. Obama better have a strong message and some good advice at 1pm today, and he better be able to calm down these markets. If he goofs this speech and makes it a partisan campaign message, this could really spiral out of control.
JAS1
WHAOOOO........hope is coming. I agree with you Obama is the President and need to calm the situation and also hope he'll do a good job. For Romney, he's only a vulture. let's listen to the president.
Prediction is what, a 100 point drop after Obama talks?
He is such a good speaker maybe he'll make it all better with some lovely words. Sure he will.
Geinter has to go.
Romney is a candidate for President - he'll get his say, just now is not the time.
The time for Tim to go has long past. Especially now that Obama has unleashed him as nothing but another political hatchet man.
The republicans are hell bent on things "spiraling out of control", that's all they have been working toward for 2 years, who says persistence doesn't pay-off, just set back and enjoy your self induced misery.
Yeah, not like they have had any help with that from Obama, right w?
Consistently inconsistent.
Folks, we don't have to wait for "things" (the economy) to get out-of-control, they ARE out-of-control. Not only are they out-of-control, they will get more out of control in the days ahead. Obama and Boehner had a solid deal to make spending cuts ($4 TRILLION) and to close corporate loopholes and raise taxes on the top 1% by about 3.5%. This would have amounted to increasing revenues by $1 TRILLION. As we witnessed the U.S. House Tea Partiers rejected this credit savings move. Too bad Boehner didn't have control of the radicals in the house. Now, because of this S&P ratings downgrade (AAA to AA+), EVERYONE of us will pay what amounts to a 1% to 2% increase in costs (taxes) of goods and services because of increased interest costs to individuals, businesses, and everything in between.
 I am amazed that there are so few people out there laying the blame for this downgrade and everything else at the feet of those TEABAGGING idiots in congress. How could so many people not realize that they are to blame. Obama wanted 4.3 trillion in cuts. The S&P guys warned them they would need between 4-6 trillion in cuts to avoid default. Guess what? 2 trillion isn't between 4 and 6 unless you are from BIZARRO world!? The rest of the Republicans should be ashamed to exist in the same party. These teabagger guys in congress need to go back to the short bus and leave the rest of the country alone. On top of that the rest of you guys need to wake up and remove the lunatic anarchists from our government before they cause more damage.
WE USED TO HAVE THE BEST GOVERNMENT IN THE WORLD!!! Now all we talk about is strangling our own government for revenue. Yeah Tea party patriot!!! How patriotic is it to KILL you own government!!!!
@Shawn -- It's because the majority of people are intelligent unlike the lemmings who hang on obama's ding-a-ling and swing.
Well said, Shawn.
Ignore Ben numbers, he can't stand it when he knows his side is at fault so instead he makes his usual anti-Obama snark.
The Tea Party and the GOP own the downgrade!!!!!
Republicans wanted to NOT PAY OUR DEBTS!!!! They were on TV advocating DEFAULT. Ron Paul, in fact, ran MANY ads advocating not raising the debt ceiling. You should be careful not to talk about things that you don't understand. First 8 trillion dollars of our debt is treasury debt. That's not owed to CHINA, but to investors who believe in the credibility and liquidity of OUR TREASURIES. The same treasuries that we sold throughout WWII that got our country through the biggest war in history. Now the tea party wants to NOT PAY OUR DEBTS?! Now you tell me how in the world ANY ratings agency could belive that we would keep our word?
They wanted a balanced budget amendment that would force congress to have a two thirds vote to even raise the debt ceiling so we could pay our debts. They can't even pass a simple majority?!
I used to trade futures and bonds. What have you traded? Where is your economics degree from Ben? K-MART?
PS- next time you post a comment with a sexual connotation I'm having you banned permanently. Try that!
Poorly done Shawn.
Congress, at least the House, has passed a FY2012 budget with $6 trillion in cuts over 10 years. In the Senate, Reid quickly killed that legislation after Obama trashed it in one of the most awful speeches you'd ever hear a President make.
Additionally President Obama created a Debt Commission consisting of many members of Congress. They came up with a solid plan, a plan the Obama has totally ignored.
The Left just cannot stand that Congress has done its job, at least the House has, and that it is Obama that has no interest in reducing the deficit and getting the economy back on its feet.
That required a two thirds vote to raise the debt ceiling. You forgot that. You also forgot those weren't actual cuts. They were proposed. The Republicans never actually specified cuts. The bill was two pages long. Can you say RED HERRING? Can you say something bulls leave behind? Have you read the bill? You should read it.
Poorly done Joanna, tsk tsk Poorly Done
By the way aren't you the left? You still speak to people that aren't trying to dissolve the federal government i.e. everyone but Republicans now. Not the mention the fact that you don't know what my politics are. I personally know a dozen Republican law makers.
Shawn
On ron Paul, you're totally right. And, if you look at his voting record, you'll see he's never voted 'aye' on any budget that included deficit spending. So this is Ron Paul, being Ron Paul. And Ron Paul doesn't agree with John Maynard Keyes theories on economics.
UNfortunately, Ron Paul has also proved to be pretty much an Oracle. Look up his predictions and the subsequent events.
You didn't know that?
JoAnna is in dire need of a vacation -- her feed bag is slipping...
Tea partiers really believe that continuing bush's worst mistakes of unfunded tax cuts and unfunded war will somehow magically get us out of debt. Lets just continue the bad policies of bush by still increasing the debt and pretend we care about the debt.
There only brilliant ideal different than bush policy is let's just make cuts on the poor. Yeh, that will make us look like we care about the debt. Our tea party flock is pretty dumb they will believe anything we say. Best of all we get to protect the rich and really do nothing about the debt.
First in response to teknishan:
Yes Ron Paul is the all knowing seer of Delphi. Yes he has predicted the return of Atlantis and Lemuria. Their storm troopers will come to liberate us as soon as we reduce the US government spending to 0 which will trigger an amazing chain of events that will restore our faith in GOLD!!!
Do you hear the angels singing!
In reference to some greedy guy:
Yes Democrats lost an election which allowed morons to get in office. It happens from time to time. See Hitler.. Napoleon.. Tea Baggers
Yeah you get the picture. Guess what winning a single house of the legislature doesn't make you RIGHT!! It just means you won a single house in the legislature. I know I was hoping it would cure world hunger too. It didn't.
During the 50s and the 60s there were hard times for minorities in this country. There were always but I witness just the 50s and 60s and from then on. When ever a store or business would hire an African American or a minority, that business was boycotted by the white community. Sometimes that involved beatings, hangings and false accusations of a criminal nature. That was the way a small group of people instilled fear in the community. Most people to avoid controversy and harm, would stay away from that business. And the business was taught a lesson.
The actions this congress has taken have brought all those memories back. It is as if the congress is telling the country: "that is what you get for hiring a black man". I am not African American but remember those times and those times were not moral.
Mr. McConnell's and this congress objective of "making sure President Obama fails" remind us that this had happen before and that apparently we are repeating a portion of our history which does not deserve to be repeated.
@American -- Again you spread ridiculous statements. Both the wars -- and now a third that is continuing without Congress -- and the tax cuts have been continued and extended by this administration. Obama has continued the Bush policies. Pretty stupid huh? LOL!!!!!!
Too bad Obama, the commander in chief, has the power to end those wasteful wars, yet inexplicably chooses not to do so.
Right American First? Obama is just another cowboy in a different hat.
A war monger.
Shawn - and others - It would be refreshing to see if we can make our points without throwing out personal insults. The fact is that the deal this past week (agreed to by both parties) was supposed to have prevented a downgrade of our debt. What S&P did was what they would do with any individual or company that had acted as irresponsibly with their finances. S&P did their job. The message - get the debt and deficit situation under control, or there will be further downgrades, resulting in higher borrowing costs to all of us. We need to get the government spending under control - period.
For a laugh, check out crazy eyes on the cover of News Week.
I suggest the first cut in spending be the money we borrow and add to the debt for tax cut to the richest in the United States.
Surely that is one thing we can stop spending money on.
Americans First-3238795
Amen to that.
So the party in control of the Senate and which owns the white house is going to blame a few dozen House Tea Party folks for this debacle? Hilarious.
Obama voted against the debt ceiling increase as a Senator.
Obama said no no no to all Republican ideas, and had nothing from Harry and the senate until the last 2 weeks of this mess. Talk about running out the clock.
On top of that the buffoon of a President had no plan at all, but instead called Republicans names and blamed them, while also telling them that everything they passed he would veto.
You crazy lefties have some sense of responsibility.
This MESS was caused from the last 4 years of a Democrat Congress spending like irresponsible teenagers. If a few dozen in congress can bring down the Senate and Obama, Harry and Scary can definitely bring down Bush, and they did.
But boy what an embarrassment for Obama - a few dozen country bumpkins take down his presidency - not much of a politician, but then his record showed as much.
Libertarian
All you do is recycle the same crud points where you shift valid criticism of teabaggers onto Dems where the same criticisms don't apply. Saying "No,no,no" like a bunch of toddlers throwing a tantrum has been trademarked by the Teabags.
"But boy what an embarrassment for Obama - a few dozen country bumpkins take down his presidency"
You admit they're country bumpkins but you forgot one thing. They haven't taken his presidency down. Because people know where the real blame lies: with obstructionist idiots.
Then we have the real mature members of your movement like Ben talking about swinging on Obama's ding a ling. Your words Ben, not mine. Are we in 8th grade or something?
Try all you want, you're not going to win by saying 'No' over and over backed up by lowbrow shock value trash talk. A majority of us in 2012 will lay the blame exactly where it's due. On you and yours.
Romney failed to mention that he was against the debt ceiling increase last week and for the country to default. What kind of leadership is that? Romney didn't bother to get into the discussion until after he heard a deal had been reached and it was safe to come out of hiding. What a yellow streak he has running down his back....cluck, cluck, cluck.
It is not his fight now and it is not his place to enter into important negotiations at this point. Oh, if nominated, he'll bring it to obama in the debates, but he did the honorable and adult approach by letting our lawmakers do their jobs. He should have -- and only did -- comment on the action.
Ben, you do realize when Romney was Governor of MA, the state was ranked 47th out of 50. So, he can say all he wants about the economy, but his record stinks as far was job growth. Hey, go ahead and deny that it is the Tea Baggers/Republicans that are the cause of this mess. You obviously voted for Bush twice thus making you and your ilk just as much as fault as the current Congressional GOP. After all, those with any intelligence know that the bulk of America's debt is from two unfunded wars, Pharma D, and unnecessary tax cuts. Raise taxes from 1965 rates and over half the battle is won!
Ben numbers. Baloney, the conservatives never have a problem voicing their opinion about everything President Obama does and says including when he is out of the country. If Romney wants to prove that he is a leader, where was he? Where was his idea for getting debt under control? He didn't voice an opinion because he has no ideas and because he's a chicken, he's scared he'll say something that the other candidates won't like. Romney is the "front-runner" emperor who has no clothes.
Ben,
Romney is not going to be the next President. He is not qualified.
@tree -- The left continually lie about those facts which center on job "growth." In fact, during Romney's term, MA beat the national average for unemployment and that is from the U.S.Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Compare these numbers to the US unemployment rate of 7.8% when Barack Obama took office in January 2009. By January 2010, it was up to an astounding 9.7%, and in January 2011, it was 9.0% -- now at 9.1%. Yet, in spite of these miserable numbers, President Obama’s supporters have the gall to criticize Romney for an average unemployment rate of 5.2%? I'd put that record up against this failed president any day.
@Jody -- It is not Romney's place to interject his ideas during negotiations when he was not asked. He was acting Presidential, unlike this failed president who sent out his surrogates this weekend to attack S&P. What a cowardly tactic. He waits til now to speak and again can't show up on time.
@Indy -- You may be right about Romney and him being president, but your reason is so far off it's too funny. The most inexperienced president in our history is now taking this country down -- his Mission Accomplished.
Indy -
He's more qualified than Obama was...
...And still is.
the buck stops elsewhere ---- that line is priceless!
I can't wait for the debates!
Sadly, the president isn't in a position to fix what needs fixing. The power lays in Congress' hands and the Teapublicans are opposed to doing what needs to be done.
The Congress, the House at least, has passed a FY2012 budget with $6 trillion in cuts over the next ten years and entitlement reform. Obama trashed it in one of his speechs, and Reid killed it in the Senate.
The President created a Debt Commission, a Commission consisting of many members of Congress, and they returned a plan for reducing the deficit/debt. Obama completely ignored their recommendations.
Congress has done its job. When does Obama think he might do his job?
Now is not the time for cutting the budget. I see that many people have not study US history or else they failed it just like the other Teabaggers/Republicans!
Because more debt is so clearly the answer. Sure it is Tree Hugger.
Now back to the forest with you.
Palin with her Paul Revere story is a shinning example of the tea baggers understanding of history.
Bachmann with her blacks were better under slavery is a shining example of the tea baggers understanding of history.
Romney with his I though health insurance was a good ideal until Democrats wanted to do it. Lets go with cut, crap and balance. That is what he chose the plan to protect the rich. Too bad during his flip-flops that he landed on flop and the tea party.
Recessions are a great time to cut off all spending Spanky. That way we can make it worse like its supposed to be right Spanky? God forbid we should try to increase jobs. Oh wait that requires actually passing a law to do that. We all know the Republicans couldn't legislate their way out of a paper bag much less actually put together a bill that would make it through the Senate. Yeah we need to just cut the government spending to 0. We all know that then all the businesses would agree to treat us right and all that lead in our kids toys would just be ok gosh darnit, and those oil companies would just do what was best for us. We would all have jobs and everyone would be soooo happy. After all its the US government that's the problem. After all we don't have enemies out there. We don't need this new fangled "LAW ENFORCEMENT" stuff. China and Russia are so happy that you "patriotic" folks finally agree that the US government is the real problem. *CAN YOU FEEL THE SARCHASM MUST I SPELL IT OUT*
SO all you got is blanket generalizations?
I am all about being taxed enough so that means I don't know anything about history, right American First?
See I understand history and know what out of control governments do to countries. Why even if you are not a fan of history we can look to contemporary times, right AF? You liking the PIIGS, and the roles of the government and their debt? Not so good my man. In fact piss poor.
Why so sill today, my man?
Spanky, Shawn is right, the worst thing you can do in a severe recession is to enact massive government spending cuts. We need to cut, but you have to be very careful in this sort of economic climate. One of the reasons unemployment is not dong well is because of the cuts. And to pretend the teapubs put any budget worth passing is asinine. They would have made the economy even worse and it could NEVER pass. They refused to compromise and they WANTED to bring the government to default. No matter how many times you all try to pretend otherwise, it was the teapubs that brought this all to a head, and have done great damage to the country so they could try to protect the interests of the elite. There are plenty of video clips of them telling us exactly what they were doing. Just because they stupidly thought nothing bad would happen doesn't let them off the hook. They were told by everyone with brains.
Lib -
I thought last summer was 'Recovery Summer', and the summer before that as well. Heck, they said that we weren't in a recession this summer either.
So, are you admitting that Obama and Biden lied about the economy? Or are you saying that we are in a recession just because it suits you?
OK - I'll bite - what 'needs to be done'?
JAS1,
Congress has NOT done their job until they PASS legislation that is tenable to all constituancies, not just the one you like.
Until they comprimise and PASS something that actually becomes law; a bill that is embraced by a majority of all constiuents, they have done nothing but throw ideological mud!
Lied? No, I would not say LIED. I think he said what he thought (or hoped) would be the case, and he should have said it differently, but at that point it was important to try to keep positive because negative expectations can be self fulfilling when it comes to the economy. But I think we've been in a deep recession since 2008 and if not for Obama we would be in a depression now - and we could well go into one now. I'll say it again, I do not agree with everything Obama has done, but one I think the republicans have been a huge part of where we are, both back in Bush days AND now, with the teabags. They have no clue about economics, and they don't listen to people who actually do know. They make up their own "facts" and then try to deflect blame when they are proven wrong. I hold them responsible for the dysfunction in government now, more so than Obama or dems. Sure, they have their part too, but it is nothing like what is coming from the fringe, which is pretty much most republicans now. I've never felt so negatively about a political party since back in the old moral majority days.
Tammy-311614,
RE: your post #7.8
If you had even a little knowlege of economics you would know that the President nor the Vice President decides when a recession begins or ends. That task is left to The National Bureau of Economic Research's (NBER) Dating Commettee. If you want to know more read the below.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/04/12/when-does-a-recession-end-its-not-just-an-academic-debate/
Have a GREAT day!
The recession would have ended by now if it weren't for Teabag obstructionism. Period. End of Story.
And Spanky, you are being ignorant of history. Right before the Great Depression we enacted a massive 'cuts only' approach and it sent us into a nosedive.
But sure, do the same exact thing in a very similar situation and expect it will get results.
Will democrats EVER admit that they are in charge??
Will republicans ever admit that the massive unfunded spending that took place under Bush when they were in charge caused this mess? Will republicans ever admit that their reckless spending and tax policies are the root cause? When will republicans take responsibility for THEIR ROLE in creating the huge deficits and debt? Clinton fixed their giant mess the last time; this time their giant mess caused a near Depression and it will take President Obama and democrats a whole lot longer to fix.
Spending that not only took place under bush, but is being forced on us today, the very same spending by the very same republicans.
The only difference, the republicans demanding we keep things the same have decided that it's now Obama's fault.
Rob, the Democrats are in charge of what? Certainly not the House. In fact, Boehner is in charge of only a part of the House with 80 Tea Baggers and 165 so-called Republicans how can he get 218 votes for anything? No one will ever be in charge of the Senate until the filibuster is eliminated. And as for any president, he/she can propose anything but nothing happens until Congress acts.
And people wonder why Congress is dysfunctional.
NO
"I'm afraid the president is just out of his depth at understanding how the private economy works."
Willard has plenty of experience in the private economy. While at Bain Capitol he specialized in taking over companies, firing the workers, out sourcing the jobs overseas and selling the bones for a profit.
But when Willard become a governor, his state languished and ranked 47th in job creation.
What a clown.
Actually, MA was upgraded financially under Romney's watch.
By Andrew Sum and Joseph McLaughlin | July 29, 2007
AS MITT ROMNEY pursues his bid for the presidency, his record as Massachusetts governor will come under scrutiny, including how the state's economy performed during his administration. Our analysis reveals a weak comparative economic performance of the state over the Romney years, one of the worst in the country.
On all key labor market measures, the state not only lagged behind the country as a whole, but often ranked at or near the bottom of the state distribution. Formal payroll employment in the state in 2006 was still 16,000 or 0.5 percent below its average level in 2002, the year immediately prior to the start of the Romney administration. Massachusetts ranked third lowest on this key job generation measure and would have ranked second lowest if Hurricane Katrina had not devastated the Louisiana economy. Manufacturing payroll employment throughout the nation declined by nearly 1.1 million or 7 percent between 2002 and 2006, but in Massachusetts it declined by more than 14 percent, the third worst record in the country.
While the number of employed people over age 16 in the United States rose by nearly 8 million, or close to 6 percent, between 2002 and 2006, the number of employed residents in the Commonwealth is estimated to have modestly declined by 8,500. Massachusetts was the only state to have failed to post any gain in its pool of employed residents. The aggregate number of people 16 and older either working or looking for work in Massachusetts fell over the Romney years.
We were one of only two states to have experienced no growth in its resident labor force. Again, without the devastating effects of Hurricane Katrina on the dispersal of the Louisiana population, Massachusetts would have ranked last on this measure. The decline in the state's labor force, which was influenced in large part by high levels of out-migration of working-age adults, helped hold down the official unemployment rate of the state. Between July 2002 and July 2006, the US Census Bureau estimated that 222,000 more residents left Massachusetts for other states than came here to live. This high level of net domestic out-migration was equivalent to 3.5 percent of the state's population, the third highest rate of population loss in the country. Excluding the population displacement effects of Hurricane Katrina on Louisiana, Massachusetts would have ranked second highest on this measure. We were a national leader in exporting our population.
From 2002 to 2006, the level of real output of goods and services did increase each year, rising by 9 percent over this four-year period. This modest rate of growth, however, fell well below the 13 percent rate of real output growth for the nation, and the state ranked 14th lowest on this measure. Labor productivity growth underlies all of the increase in the state's output, but little of this productivity improvement accrued to the typical worker or family in the Commonwealth in the form of higher wages or earnings. Between 2002 and 2006, the median real (inflation adjusted) weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary workers in Massachusetts is estimated to have fallen by $10 or nearly 2 percent. The real income of the average (median) family in Massachusetts in 2005 was 1 percent below its value at the time of the 2000 Census while median household income was 3 percent below its 2000 value. Median household income fell even more sharply in the nation. Family incomes in both the United States and Massachusetts have become more unevenly distributed since 2000.
There is one additional area in which Massachusetts was a national leader over the past five years, the rise in housing prices. Between 2000 and 2005, the median self-reported home price in Massachusetts increased by nearly 95 percent versus an increase of only 40 percent for the United States. The median home price ranked fourth highest among the 50 states, and the median value of homes relative to household income was the third highest in the country. The high affordability cost ratio encouraged the high levels of outmigration from the state of young families with children.
Real world experience has shown that a governor is limited in his power to influence the course of economic development in a state. A full-time governor who is deeply committed to the economic well-being of a state's workers can, however, make some difference. The state unfortunately did not receive such leadership over most of the past four years. Jokes about Massachusetts may receive some half-hearted laughter on the national campaign trail, but few working men and women in Massachusetts should see anything funny about the state's lackluster economic performance during the Romney years.
Andrew Sum is director and Joseph McLaughlin is research associate at the Center for Market Studies at Northeastern University.
Sorry, but these people have a political agenda or were paid to come to those conclusions. Otherwise if they were true researchers, they would have published just the facts without the political innuendo. Go find an impartial report. Go fetch Therman.
Ben now you go find something that disputes Therman's post. You should have no problem being all the other reports back your thinking.
Any links to backup that claim Ben? I didn't think so just another tea person lie.
Mo - You need to give a person a chance to respond. Now read them and weep.
‘An economy that is deep and diverse is again producing jobs and reducing already historically low unemployment,’ Standard & Poor's wrote in its upgrade of the state's bond rating.” (Charles Stein, “State Seeing End To Fiscal Downturn,” The Boston Globe, 6/27/05)
“The Commonwealth Snared Its First Credit Upgrade From Fitch Ratings Since 1998 On Friday When The Rating Agency … [Cited] How Well Massachusetts Weathered The Economic Downturn That Began In 2001.” (Helen Chang, “Bay State To Debut New Credit,” The Bond Buyer, 7/11/05)
“Fitch Ratings upgrades the rating of $14.4 billion Commonwealth of Massachusetts full faith and credit general obligation (GO) bonds to 'AA' from 'AA-'. The upgrade reflects the commonwealth's economic recovery, enabling surplus operations and the rebuilding of reserves to strong levels. Prudent financial management through the recent downturn has positioned Massachusetts well.” (Fitch Ratings, Press Release, 7/8/05)
Simply put, the economy is based upon what the donors want. These donors have had Congress in their measly hands for many, many decades and that in not apt to change ANYTIME soon because Lawmakers would lose out. Imagine the truth. Donors often give to both Parties so that they can hedge their bets (wishes) in whomever wins. To be truthful, big time donations = bribes. The bribed individual than does the bribers bidding's. Donors win, Americans lose. That is business as usual.
One other note: Exactly who are the "Big Donors" of the Tea Party? And what are their reasons for donating? The answer may surprise the most loyal member of the TP.
Romney gives the President too much credit
Isn't it BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS Obama KNOWS he STILL is taking the US down the path of European socialism even though CURRENTLY PROVEN to be a SPECTULAR FALURE
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Barack Obama, enshrined in history as the "downgrade President"
The current Congress will have to assume that enshrinement. (Unless someone made the presidency a dictatorship while no one was watching.)
The countries that are doing the best financially? Germany (socialist), China (communist), and Northern Europe (socialist).
I always believed in the free market, but now I'm beginning to wonder if unregulated capitalism just doesn't work.
Funny how most of those European 'socialist' countries are still rated AAA. Not doing so bad apparently.
It's the "unregulated" version of capitalism that has never worked because of greed and corruption in the private sector occurs when left unchecked.
I believe in capitalism but also believe that capitalism must be regulated to do the right thing because businesses will never do it on their own.
Germany and northern europe are socialist?
are you sure about that one?
I thought they were capitalist with extensive social programs. But they run a balanced budget. AND they don't make continual war and, thus, have the money to expend on socialist programs in their place. They also don't have things like the DREAM act, which bleeds government money to illegal aliens.
Oh, and China has nowhere to go but up still. The national gdp is still only around 7T, and it has 4x more people than the US. So 4x more people, 1/2 the GDP = 1/8 GDP per capita. Yeah, don't set your watch by this nation.
Call me crazy...
Matt, for capitalism to work, markets must be open and competitive neither of which is the case today. New corporations are rare, but merged corporations are commonplace (e.g. ATT&T + T-Mobile). Unregulated corporations (heard of any anti-trust actions lately?) with closed markets spells economic oligarchy.
Madison what is a "SPECTULAR FALURE"?
BTW: that's the tea party down grade. At least get your facts straight.
According to S&P the US needs to cut $4 TRILLION in spending IMMEDIATELY
Easiest solution?
REPEAL OBAMACARE NOW
SAVE at least $10 TRILLION over 10 years
Madison,
Boehner walked away from a 4T deal. What say you?
Greece, Spain, Portugal, countries that hand out "cash for cronies" and run up unsustainable DEBT like Obama
_________________________________________________________________________________
By 2020 at Obama's rate of spending INTEREST paid by US taxpayers to Red China will finance their ENTIRE military budget
$4 Trillion in FUTURE cuts by a FUTURE congress in exchange of tax increases TODAY?
A deal only attractive to an member of Obama's failed Obamanomics team/ Leftist idealogues who don't care about hard working citizens and unborn generations PAYING for Obama's INSANE spending/payoffs TODAY these IDIOTS obviously never BALANCED a checkbook let alone a BUDGET how on earth can anybody in their right mind hire a PROVEN tax cheat for Secretary of the Treasury these Keynesian nit wits keep CLAIMING this is soo soo complicated and foolish voters believed them and went on automatic pilot well NOW voters have CAUGHT ON to the CONSTANT LIES THAT FOR YEARS SUPPORTED THE MAD SPENDING AND VOTE BUYING
___________________________________________________________________________________
"Never let a good crisis go to waste" -- Team Obama
I think Madison wants a Republican back in the presidency so that the cost of the wars will come off the ledgers. That's the Republican way of doing business: Fight a bunch of wars, but keep 'em off the books so no one knows that we're actually spending trillions fighting them. . . . Yeah, that's the kind of representation we need to bring back, right? And that's the kind of math that Republicans want you to believe.
So Madison,
How much does the deal that Boehnor passed (1.8T) cut immediately?
Hypocrital ideolog....
Sorry Madison but President Obama's health care plan hasn't went into effect yet, not until 2014. So your solution wouldn't save a dime. Try again. Fox is really making you look stupid.
Madison, from the CBO report:
... you were saying?
Romney, Obama, they both suck.
As usual... gutless and clueless. What's with this guy?
Obama would be over his head in a mud puddle. Tell us something we don't know Mitt.
'Cut, Cap, and Balance', a plan tailor made to balance the budget on the backs of the middle and working class while at the same time cutting taxes for the rich, pretty clear who Romney intends to fight for if he got elected.
For his own pocket, of course.
No president can arbitrarily adopt federal law or policy. When Congress starts thinking about the future being more than the next election, maybe we can start moving in a direction that eventually will bring some level of prosperity back to America.
Step one is put the brakes on new spending. Step two is to reduce existing programs and expenditures. Step three is increase revenue as painlessly as possible which is to eliminate as many credits, exemptions and deductions as possible. One good place to start is to limit the mortgage deduction to one's primary residence only.
Step one should be to target new spending into areas that will create jobs by rebuilding those things this country needs and that have been neglected for decades. Creating jobs drops the deficit faster than spending cuts because too many cuts means less demand and fewer jobs.
Jody -
We can't afford any 'new spending'. Why do you think we were downgraded in the first place?
Yes we can afford it, at least temporaril. We were downgraded on the 30 year Treasury bills only, not the short term ones. We have not reached the breaking point, we're not even close. Everyone is just scared of the "T" word because it is beyond their level of comprehension. The long term scenario however, needs to change.
And as to why? How about the fact that certain house members where calling for default? How about the fact that neither side was willing to give in? How about the fact that they could not put their differences aside to avoid a circus? Markets like stability, what Washington showed was a complete inability to provide it. Obama has no balls, the Democrats keep spending, the "conservative" Republicans spend even more and refuse to raise revenue, and the TP wants to collapse the world economy. What do you expect?
On the other hand, I smell a rat. It's kind of convenient that the DOW dropped 500 points the day before the downgrade. Someone knew something and they acted upon it. Or, in a more evil version, someone is in cahoots with S&P and the whole thing was planned.
President Barack Milhouse Obama is just like Nixon - point your finger at everyone else and never accept blame. And both are and were liars.
What a loser.
President Obama isn't in charge of Congress and he did not create the massive debt this country has. Talk about the side that doesn't take responsibility--try the GOP. Where were their calls to cut spending while they were in power and they never paid for one single piece of legislation passed while Bush was president, not one.
Who introduced the $800B porkulus bill, Jody? Congress? No, this was Obama's big, Keynesian, flop.
Who took the lead in affecting policies that have tripled our deficit? That would be Obama, Jody.
Re read Senator Obama's speech in 2006 on not raising the debt ceiling. He now knows that playing with the debt ceiling is not a game. One the tea-partiers have yet to discover.
But his speech was right on, the moment I read it, I thought, the congress should have listened.
You know as well as I do the republican policies that did so much damage to our debt are still in effect, in full glorious harm and are still today demanded by the republican tea party.
Who exactly has tripled our debt?
Americans First - you are deft in your disinformation. You ever work for the press in the Soviet Union during the Cold War? Because your MSLSD talking points are nothing but disinformation.
Willard Romney is a proven failure as a governor.
What Romney won't tell you because his big corporate donors would become little corporate donors
Tax Cuts: The B.S. and the Facts
By Larry Beinhart, AlterNet. Posted November 11, 2008.
That tax cuts stimulate the economy is taken as a matter of faith, but the brute facts suggest otherwise.
The Myth
Do tax cuts stimulate the economy?
Yes. Tax cuts allow people to keep more of their own money. Therefore, they have more to invest and spend into the economy, and they have more money to start business and create jobs, therefore also helping to stimulate the economy. -- Yahoo Answers
I think when people take a look back at this moment in our economic history, they'll r ecognize tax cuts work. They have made a difference. -- George W. Bush
The Realities
The brute facts are these:
The Three Great Tax Cuts: Boom, Bubble, Crash
1. Hoover
During World War I, the top marginal tax rate went up to 73 percent -- not the highest ever, but pretty high.
In 1922, a series of rate cuts began. Down to 56 percent, 46 percent, and finally, in 1925, it went down to 25 percent.
The stock market took off. There was a boom. But the boom was a bubble.
It was followed by the Great Crash of 1929.
There were bank failures and the Great Depression.
2. Reagan
From Franklin Roosevelt's second term all the way through to Jimmy Carter -- from 1936 until 1982 -- the top rate was in the 70 to 92 percent range.
Then along came Reagan in 1981. In 1982, he cut that down to 50 percent.
The economy went into "the worst recession since the Great Depression."
His supporters argued that it was all Carter's fault and that the new policies would take time to work. The tax cuts stayed in place. In 1987, there was another round of tax cuts. They took the top rate down to 38.5 percent. It would stimulate the economy!
There was a boom. But it was a bubble.
Then, in October 1987, there was a crash -- the worst since '29. It was called Black Monday.
Much of the bubble money had gone into -- ohmigod! -- real estate.
Suddenly there were bank failures! More than during the Great Depression. There was a Savings & Loan crisis! There had to be a bailout.
3. Bush II
George Bush came into office with the healthiest, post powerful economy in American history.
He immediately cut taxes. The top marginal rate went down from 39 percent to 35 percent. He also cut capital gains taxes and inheritance taxes. A recession immediately ensued. But he persisted.
Eventually, the economy began to grow.
Employment didn't grow very much. Median income went down. The stock market was pretty flat. But the financial sector -- and only the sector -- grew.
Which should have made it obvious to someone, that it was … a bubble.
There was a crash.
Bank failures. A bailout.
The three worst economic disasters in American history follow the exact same pattern: tax cuts, boom, bubble, crash.
High Taxes Correlate with Strong Economic Growth
The four periods of greatest economic growth in American history, by pretty much any measure, are:
A lot of ink, sweat and ranting have gone into proving that the New Deal did not end the Great Depression. Nonetheless, the economy grew 58 percent from the time Roosevelt came into office and when the United States entered the war.
Some of that anti-New Deal rhetoric also claims that the recovery began under Hoover. Perhaps, but to say so is also to say that it began with tax hikes.
Likewise, many right-wing critics insist that the Clinton boom actually started under Bush the First. It is necessary to remember that Bush the First also raised taxes (from 28 percent to 31 percent) and was soundly thrashed by the conservatives for doing so. Stephen Moore of the Cato Institute called it "The Crime of the Century" and explained at length how it had brought ruin to America.
Tax Increases Are Followed by Economic Growth
Three of the four high-growth periods cited above followed significant tax hikes.
The fourth, the Truman-Eisenhower years, began with a top tax rate of 91 percent -- it couldn't get much higher.
Moderate Tax Increases Are Followed by Flat Growth
John F. Kennedy is generally credited with starting the tax cut craze.
He proposed it, but, as with all his ideas, it was Lyndon Johnson who actually got it enacted. The top rate was cut from 91 percent to 77 percent, then to 70 percent, on all income over $200,000 for a single person and over $400,000 for a married couple.
That's where it stayed, through Nixon, Ford and Carter.
The Dow Jones average was pretty much the same when that period ended as when it began. Median personal income stayed roughly the same.
These are the brute facts.
I call them that because there20doesn't appear to be any theory to explain them.
A noted conservative (a sane one, not William Kristol) recently wrote to me in a private e-mail exchange on this subject:
"I am unaware of any (or many) respectable economists (maybe I've missed some) who have suggested that higher taxes have proved to be a formula for better economic growth."
Actually, I am too.
Even now, in the midst of the Bush disaster, I constantly see and hear tax cuts, particularly at the top, described as "pro-growth." So I went and looked at the numbers -- tax rates, tax cuts and tax hikes -- and placed them alongside job growth, the Dow Jones, growth in the GDP and median income.
The brute facts say the opposite of the myth.
The belief in tax cuts is a subset of the belief in Free Markets, with a capital F & M, which is a theological belief.
How do we distinguish a theological idea from a scientific (or rational) one?
According to Karl Popper, the great thinkers in the philosophy of science, a scientific idea has to be capable of being refuted. There has to be some theoretical test that could come out the wrong way, which would then say the theory is wrong.
On that basis, Popper rejected Marxism and Freudianism, along with religious theology, because no matter how many times they didn't work, there was20always some explanation that said that the theory was right and if you just looked at the facts in some other way; you could make up some story that said your theory was still right.
The quintessence of theological thinking goes like this. The preacher says, "The world will end next Saturday night! The Bible says it must be so." Everyone in the congregation wakes up safe and sound on Sunday morning. They head off to church and believe whatever he says in that sermon, too.
In science, we come up with a hypothesis. Then we set up an experiment. We see what happens.
Economics is complex. It takes place in the real world where many factors are at play and we can't control for them all. Still, none of the major tax cuts since 1913 have led to significant, sustained growth. Two them were followed by instant recessions (Reagan and Bush), and three of them, when they were sustained, were followed by bubbles which were then followed by the three worst crashes and sets of bank failures in modern times.
It's time to throw out the theory, accept the facts, and come up with new ideas.
It is sad but true, Paul, but ideology always trumps history.
Black is white. True patriots are anti-government. Taxes are evil. And as Calvin Coolidge said, "The business of America is business."
And even more sad is that we haven't even come close to seeing the worst yet.
Paul,
Thanks for presenting the facts. Unfortunately, people will not believe the real culprit to our debt is the erosion of tax revenues by George Bush, primarily, and also done by Obama to save capitalism. They would rather believe S&P who played a major role in giving AAA ratings to those mortgages that were bundled and are now worth a hoot. They overlook S&P which gave Lehman Brothers an A rating just before they tanked. And, before they downgraded our government's AAA rating, they made a $2 trillion dollar error which the White House caught. They acknowledged it as a mistake and recognized they should have caught this simple error. But that doesn't stop them. They then go right ahead and downgrade our credit rating. I wish investors today would not panic and realize S&P has no credibility, and that we do not have a short-term problem as S&P believes, but a long-term problem. One which Krugman recognizes isn't hard to fix.
As Krugman points out today, we have very low taxes by international norms, and we have higher healthcare costs by international norms than other countries. As Krugman further says, if we just move a little more towards international norms on both problems, we can solve our budget. But that will mean we cannot buy into the juice that our debt is the number 1 problem, that "death panels" exist in the modest effort made by Obama to have Medicare run more effectively and bend the curve on such costs, and that tax revenues are too high--a big falsehood since they are at the lowest percentage level of our economy in 60 years-- and we should not raise taxes on the rich.
Instead of trusting S&P today and going crazy over the stock market, it would do us all well to pay attention to Krugman. It would all do us well to realize that the real culprit, which caused our debt has been the erosion of tax revenues, especially under Bush, but also by Obama who needed to do that to save capitalism.
Paul, as you can see no one disputes the facts. It's not that they believe in theory versus facts, its greed and ignorance. The greedy will say whatever is necessary to get what they want, and the ignorant tend to believe whoever shouts the loudest.
As said in American President:
If only more people understood.
Paul, do you think they will put this information on Faux news?
You know, I think most people don't care who caused it right now. They just want someone who can keep the stock market from loosing money. I'm kinda tired of watching my 401K loose money the last couple of weeks. It would really be nice if the president would stop playing the blame game and FIX IT. It would be nice if the Congress would stop playing the blame game and FIX IT.
Mitt might be correct, but when is he going to come to grips with even his own party does not him as President. Will someone tell Mitt the GOP is still pushing Perry and anyone else to run for President.
Obama is a failure and was never qualified to be president. He will now say that he is a victim and will blame everything and everybody for his failure.
That's right, Mitt. It's Obama's fault because he gave you teabaggers everything you wanted and then suddenly the economy collapsed again. Gee, why does this sound familiar?
Toasty brain - he did not give us a balanced budget amendment dum-dum - the most important part of the deal.
rebel. what do you suggest we do during the ten years it will take to adopt a new Constitutional amendment? You do know, don't you, that no president or Congress can amend the Constitution all by their lonesomes?
I know it is a long process. So what is your point Bruce? Don't do anything because it takes time? Sort of like drilling for oil?
That's as ignorant as it gets my friend.
That wouldn't do ANYTHING, RWC. We got downgraded because the teabaggers in congress refused to raise taxes, and were willing to force the country to default to get what they wanted. That is the reason we got downgraded, not some silly little tea party fantasy about the constitution.
The only purpose of the cut, crap bill was to make it virtually impossible to raise taxes on the richest again. Just why is this so important to our country now?
In a real crisis wouldn't the rich be expected to pitch in and help too?
I know it is most important to blame Obama for everything. But how about the republicans acting like they love our country and doing something for America instead of the rich for a change.
Americans First that goes for both parties. Please remove the blinders.
The downgrade and blame presidency.
What a complete fraud...he said that he wouldn't have supported the Debt Reduction bill, so he would have let the country default and the U.S. would have be downgraded even further, probably A+ status or lower.
This will forever be know as the Tea-bagger downgrade, and Willard "Mitt" Romney is doing his best to shake his liberal past and pander to the ridiculous righties. Pathetic!
is this romney 4.0? or are we already on 5.0? also, what has romney ever done besides blow up the same bubble everybody else was blowing up when he was "running" a business? also, didn't boner crow and crow about how the republicans had forced obama to give them everything they asked for? also, didn't romeny endorse obamacare? also, didn't romney lose to mcfail in the 2008 primary?
There is something creepy about Willard Romney. Kinda like that plastic headed "Burger King".
Comical. That was a good one!!