forgiving the 4 billion dollars is what I would say is in the execution of the idea, not the idea itself, as well as the other things your bring up

Doing something to help was the idea
the way the government did it, both with Bush and Obama was the bad execution of it

i dont like attacking people in their own thread. But he opened the door, defending the indefensible position of an allegedly educated congressman. It truly speaks to the fact a degree has no correlation to intelligence. The college degree might be one of the biggest frauds in america.

thanks for getting my back :thumbsup

lol
If you say so. I think that same thing happened in "Animal House" and more recently in "The Social Network" too.

Did you guys have crazy "frat parties" with hundreds of hot college girls with their tits out too?

Seriously, I was just responding to people making the generalization that university educated folks are dumb. Only here on GFY (or in the mountains of West Virginia) would people equate education with stupidity.

Not saying that educated folks are always the smartest (Thomas Edison is a great example of a guy without formal education), but the vast majority of people who go to college aren't dumb and didn't pay people to do their "tests" for them.

Those of us with degrees already know that.

isn't creationism taught in Alabama schools?

You're assuming I give a shit about what past presidents have done that have to do with the current situtation.

It's about what present president is doing

And the unemployment rate is still at 9.2% so what ever the present one is doing, is wrong, anything other than a plan to act on to correct that, is an excuse.

So tell me, whats his plan?

Simple, getting an education makes you educated, it doesn't make you smart.

The congressman is educated

Take Barry, he has an education

As far as I can tell, the guy never practiced economics, but law. Then there's the potential politics of it.

There seems to be a wide and reasonable consensus that without intervention the systemic risks at play posed a highly likely exasperation (and empirical evidence of a start) of frozen credit and the failure of more than just banks, investment banks and AIG to meet their obligations.

I'm open to an explanation otherwise, maybe marketsmart will offer one.


.

i think, in the end, your attack on contessa was valid. Often during these interviews, people improvise, & fail to respond to a bad idea properly. I remain perplexed by republicans that question the bailout in the face of frozen credit markets. How does a 15 trillion economy run on cash only.

Im also suprised at your critiques of barry given he's the most republican democrat in US history. What other democrat keeps gitmo open, proposes cuts to entitlements, sells out the public option & does nothing on gun control. I happen to think obama is an outstanding president stuck with a completely dysfunctional congress.

Barry graduated from Harvard. Remind us which school you graduated from that made you so "smart" ?

I happen to think barry got into the ivys due to quotas. He basically confessed he was useless in high school. so how does he end up at harvard.

That plus Georgie went to yale. he's possibly the dumbest president in history.

We aren't talking about what past presidents have done, the post asked if called the other presidents by first name or not.

Well, he shouldn't only be focusing on jobs. It would be a bit stupid to only focus on jobs when many of the issues we had help create the job problem, so clearly some things have to be corrected first, like keeping our entire economy going.

Shortly after he took office he actually did start paying attention to the job market, the skyrocketing problem stopped, the rate has come down, and jobs have been created, in and out of his stimulus. Point being, he did not ignore it, at all.

Anyway, Obama's plan, which was put together by 26 leaders in the private sector, included things such as:

• Job education for todays jobs.
• Cutting the b.s. on construction and infastructure projects, also putting back construction workers which is a few million people.
• A huge focus on the tourism business which is extremly large employment and money wise, by making it easier/quicker to get visa's - something that greatly slows this business down right now, even with our weak ass dollar.
• And SBA loans being more available.

Some other aspects that he's already done is investing in new technologies that we can own and produce and sell to the world. Which is why he has such a push for green technology, even if it doesn't happen today or tomorrow, it will happen, and we should be the leaders of it.

While it's fun to think the free market takes care of this, as history has proven, it needs a little bump from the fed now and then to get the free market to wake up. And every time it does, we've seen the biggest economic growths in our Countries history.

the idea itself should have never been executed....

we should have let them fail... :2 cents:




.

I guess you can't read can you

Education makes you educated, not smart

Smart has to do with Intelligence Quotient, it's a mathematical equation thats based on mental age over chronological age, if you are as smart as a 20 year old and are 20 years old, you have the IQ of 100. Your IQ never changes, according to most studies, but I question that sometimes on this forum

Given you're short sided rebuttal and inability to read, I would say your IQ is around 95.

I'll keep my responses short, I have work to do

Government should help when it can, but the way they did was seriously flawed

all of which is not working, green jobs that he put so much money into failed and they have green laying off workers.
And yes, getting the jobs number to improve should after 2 1/2 years should be made a priority

i would like to see the government default. Massive crisis is the only thing that gets the clowns in DC to do anything.

Bush nor Obama actually manage this... they may get an update on it, might give some advice or direction, but they don't really do much other than speak to us about it.

Congress setup the bailout bill, Bush signed it, and some panel or group, made up of judges and politicians, manage the plan that's already laid out.

I think they should have let it fail, they screwed up doing any of the bailouts, even more so when this company has failed before. But being that it did happen, and the goal was to save the company, I really don't see where you get that they badly executed it, when the plan worked. Now they're just trying make it look pretty so the next time they try to nationalize something they'll have a fall back to show how well it worked, in their eyes.

Wow... okay then,

He has put very little into green jobs and most into research, which has sparked competition, and one of the top 25 growing industries in America in the research field alone. As well, green technology overall has more industries in the top 100 growing industries in America, more than any other overall industry. World wide, it's also one of the fastest growing industries, I believe it's in Spain that a major part of the GDP is made up of green train technology.

Before Obama was even president, green jobs 'almost' equaled fossil fuel jobs in America, a few 100k jobs between them, I don't know where it's at today.

Green has been growing for 30-40 years... it didn't start with Obama.

Well, clearly it is a priory for him when he's putting out fast action projects related to the job markets, which don't require congressional approval. I'm not exactly sure what you expect him to do to make the economy add jobs, you don't want him to invest in green, but you expect some magic industry and jobs to appear out of thin air.

Sorry buddy, when corps are making record profits and have record amounts in liquid assets, with the demand they have already, so they don't need more staff, and actually downsize and make even more profits, because that's what technology does... nothing is going to make them hire, unless 'they choose' to do it.

Our only option here is to either let companies in china come in or force us to follow a technology path that will spark worldwide growth again, much like the Internet did. And btw, the Gov fully funded that, from research to infrastructure, even the upgrades in bw, fully funded by the fed - and I don't hear you bitching about this monster that makes us all a ton of money!

Not everything they do is bad.. and embracing a new technology, is truly the only way to save our asses.

Unless you have some other ideas we should all know about?

I realize how government works, but shit goes uphill, the guy on top is ultimately responsible, just like the democrats controling the house and senate during the last two years of Bush , he got all the blame for the shit they did.
Barry is getting the blame for the shit thats going on now

For years, the Obama Administration has claimed that the stimulus will increase employment through ?green jobs?. But what are green jobs? Are they jobs in the solar and wind industry? Yes, but according to a new study, the majority of green jobs in the United States are actually jobs in waste management (garbage), mass transit, and other non-energy areas, and those jobs are not stimulus-related. Even including those mature jobs, the green or ?clean economy? jobs represent just 2 percent of all jobs in the United States, and renewable energy jobs, those touted by the Administration as being ?green?, make up just 5 percent of the ?clean economy? jobs. That compares modestly to the largest sector of the economy?health care?employing 10.2 percent of all jobs, but unlike health care employment, ?clean economy? jobs are growing slower than the U.S. economy.

http://www.instituteforenergyresearc...u-would-think/

i am all for it too...

lets let the cards fall where they may...

i seriously doubt it would be the end of times like the media would like you to believe.. :2 cents:




.

I blame Congress for the screwed up 9/11 hearings, I blame Bush for blocking out his testimony. I blame Bush for starting a false war and nobody else. I blame Bush for super increasing our debt and hiding the war costs. I blame Congress for the bailouts, I blame Bush for signing them. I blame everyone for the patriot act, even Obama for signing it again. I do not blame Obama for the housing or job market situation, at all. I do blame him for the continued spending, directly related to the war costs.

That's how blame works... if you point it in the wrong direction, it shows how little you know about the subject at hand.

Obama should get some blame, but blaming him for not fully correcting a total cluster fuck by this point, is rather ridiculous. When some credit should be given for him stopping the fall and keeping it together after one of the largest economic hits in our History.

and the only differences between us then is I blame Barry for expanding the war, failing to do anything that would actually help the unemployment rate and spending too much time on Obamacare without working with the GOP

Oh and giving the FDA control over cigarette products

I don't blame him for the houseing market, that I blame on the congress and senate and Bush for not seeing the trend and doing something about it

Only part of the money was for green jobs, most of it was for green research. The stimulus did all types of stuff, little bits at a time. You're way hung up on jobs with the stimulus, that was only a part of it, and a big part was shifted to infrastructure projects, which continue to happen today, and is working.

Btw, did you read the report you posted? We have 2.7 million green jobs.... that's a shit ton, that's bigger than fossil fuel energy!!!! Which robs the hell out of us, makes the most profits, and still doesn't hire for shit!

And did you also see:

• The “clean economy” is more export- and manufacturing-focused than the U.S. economy as a whole. About 26 percent of “clean economy” jobs are in manufacturing, compared to 9 percent for the entire economy, and the value of exports, on a per-job basis, is twice that of a typical American job.
• “Green jobs” in this assessment tend to pay better than the average American job with median wages 13 percent higher than the average.

You need to start embracing the future.... if more people would, it would take off more - the demand isn't even here yet and it's already winning. This is the best deal we have right now, unless you have some other magic idea up your sleeve.

Here again, I'm curious... when you say this are you simply talking Chrysler / GM or are you talking literally "any" of the bailouts.

I can agree that letting GM / Chrysler fail would have hurt but not been the death knell. But if you mean the whole thing, I'm curious how you would have envisioned it playing out.

Marketsmart is so far avoiding answering the question, resting instead on the vague and simple statement of "i dont fully believe the story that was sold to the people".

I'm not sure what that means or what can be gleaned from that. You want to add something?


.

It's not really complex... the bailout did not solve, fix or correct anything, it did however create problems, a trillion and a half worth of them - during a time when we were at war, spending more than we already had.

This also created a stronger monopoly for the banks and wall street firms, basically nationalizing them in micro ways, handing over 95% of the mortgage loans in our Country to a single firm that is fully managed by the fed, while allowing banks to collect more land rights. Basically, the bailout handed our Country over to corps.

Failing would have kept the power in the hands of the people... and let the free market pickup the slack, bad banks would have went belly up and good banks would have picked up the slack, which does happen when corps or industries start to fall, all over the world.

What wouldn't have happened is a major rebound in stocks, it would have taken longer, much longer - if they ever rebounded again. And without those money flowing towards those investments, it would have moved into local markets, like they naturally do, which benefit us much more than any market investment ever will.

It would have been tough at first, and most of us would have probably lost everything we invested... but we crawled out of that heap of a mess, we would have crawled out either way. I like to think the future without corps pulling every string, might be a little better than the shit hole we have to deal with today.

Now your not including the whole statement, what obama did, only included a small portion of the GREEN, with everything it's 2% of the work force, not the part Obama had anything to do with, so the 2.7 million you're talking about is way off.

I have nothing against green jobs, I have a problem with Barry giving money to companies that are laying off now after getting huge amounts of money

http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/22/pa...timulus-money/

Hehe, Obamacare has a ton of GOP crap in it, hell IT IS the a Republicans healthcare plan and is rather different than what Obama actually started with.

Well, he did campaign on expanding the afghan war and iraq, with exit dates for them both... while I don't support the wars at all, I can't blame the man for doing what he said he would do.

Only one thing could have been done to really cut the unemployment rate, and it still could be done today, is cut capital gains tax, which historically has worked just about every time. But, the results of that wont be American corps opening new business, our weak dollar would pull in major international corps, mostly from China.... and trust me, you do not want that happening, just to save a few jobs.

This build has to come from within, it has to be based around a technology, a production of something... or we're screwed.

Yeah, most people in the cig business didn't like the new regs. Personally, I think any reg is pointless that doesn't make it criminal for them to put chemicals into our smokes. I support our right to make the choice to smoke, but not if it they purposely put trash into make more addictive and kill you much quicker.

Well at least you don't blame him for everything... maybe we can get a few more items turned around on ya at some point.

The article you just posted tells you how much Obama set aside for green jobs, $30b worth... that doesn't mean he spent $30b, and $80b total was set aside for green technology, as you can see most of that was towards research, again not even all of that has been spent.

2%, is what it has grown into, that's freaking huge....

No, the 2.7 million is not way off, it's posted in the article you posted, and it's from the research directly that the report was taken from: http://www.instituteforenergyresearc...u-would-think/

This is a quote form the article "And, according to the report, the ?clean economy? employs 2.7 million Americans. That number of employees is less than the IT industry in the United States, but more than the biosciences and slightly more than the fossil fuel industry according to the authors."


You should point your hate towards bad business owners doing shady shit with money rather than what was actually planned to happen. It sucks Obama hooked up one of his buddies either way, but it's still that company directly that screwed it all up. And you would have a right to be pissed, if this continued, but as little issues have come up, they've squashed them, again one of the reasons why the stimulus went out so slow.

2% is huge, but he only had something to do with a small part of that 2%

One Fitty ownages:pimp

He had nothing to do with that 2% at all. Even if he spent all the money on it, and it went perfectly, you still wouldn't notice the increase.

It's a stimulus bill, setup to "stimulate" something. $30 billion wouldn't make that 2% move for shit, it would only stimulate the market so it has the money to grow - within itself! Again - to stimulate - not force grow! Then $50b in research, means we're waiting like 10 years for results.

That's how it works, the Internet didn't fire up over night... it was researched, invested, and built up over like a 30 year period. Lucky for us, we can now reduced that down to less than 10 years, because of technology.

If he dumped money into it, forced States to hire the labor, and did something major like the interstate project, then you would see the numbers change. But in todays money, that's going to cost a hell of a lot more than what the stimulus package has.

Oh I've read your posts a few times and most of them are border line retarded. obviously, you think of yourself as a smart one thus was my question.
When I asked you about "how mexicans get on welfare program without valid ss number" you posted link to baby anchor article. Kinda makes me think it your IQ score came back negative.

And you don't have any work "top do". You've been posting here all day long. No wonder you're so successful with bouncing around from one gig to another.

Love how you're here just to attack me, you should know that someone has already been banned in this thread for that.
So next time you want to compare IQ's, you might want to come prepared

i dont believe the credit markets would have collapsed and i dont care what anyone in banking or govt has to say otherwise. we will never know because it didnt happen..

what i do think is that this made up collapse was a way for the banks to shift all of their toxic debts off the books and get the govt to clean up their mess..

banking executives made billions off of the derivitive market basically committing fraud by selling assets as A rated when they were in fact D- at best..

banking C's ceo' cfo etc.. should have been sent to prison..

but instead the govt cleaned up the mess with taxpayer money..

on top of that, the fed continues to give banks money at 0%..

that is utter bullshit..

i can go on and on.. but this is why i would have let the banks fail because in reality i dont think anything would have happened.. this was a controlled demolition of taxpayer money..






.

Wow, Im the one attacking you and talking about IQ? How about you read some of your post first.
Its not the IQ got you pissed, the one about work. Isn't it?

Totally... Many people forget a bank can't really fail unless the reserve fails. They're absorbed into the single corporation that they all fall under, the federal reserve. A bank simply creates separation between the citizens and the central bank. So them failing, just goes right back to the fed either way. Let'em fail!!!

Bailout wise, let's also not forget to point out that we bailed out international corporations, banks, and insurance companies, that were not located in America at all.

Another one that should have failed is the Airlines. But it was played off as the Industry, when the Industry wasn't dead. The few good ones, which are rather good, would have came out strong, but this stopped them from doing that.... I would have love to have seen it happen, I still want it to happen, it still needs to happen.

Auto Industry should have failed as well, if they were going to bail anyone out it should have been the companies that backbone off of them, that hire a major amount of the work force - in America. We have more than the big 3, two could fail giving us one big one and plenty of small ones. If they really wanted to help, they should have invested in already smaller established, American car companies matching those with backbone companies, that could have used the money to manufacture more cars, thus creating jobs, and holding them when they could meet the demand.

The last bailout happened so damn fast... how anyone knew what could have or would have happened, on either side of the fence, is beyond me. And we can see now, theft of our tax dollars is exactly what happened - and enough reason to why it shouldn't have happened.

Edit: I forgot one, wall street firms... fail bastards, fail.. they shouldn't have been allowed to stay alive. Don't care who backs our mortgages at banks, that's part of the reason we had the issue in the first place... let'em all fail then close the rest of them down for just being douche bags.

You act like a gun thats full of blanks, you make a bunch of noise but are completely useless.

your IQ has just gone down to ignore

So your contention is that the bailout did not solve the problem of frozen credit markets where companies and countries (like Brazil) who had nothing to do with CDS's, etc. found themselves unable to meet their obligations since they could not use the normal credit market.

Sorry, but it did fix that problem and all the other commentary you offered after that is just that, commentary.

It would have been more than just tough at first. What your talking about experiencing is the great depression (same basic economics at play) but times 10. I think that is the difference that I'm driving at.

And the idea that the future wouldn't have corps pulling the strings after a collapse doesn't seem obvious to me either.

I still have not heard a reasonable explanation for why collapse would have been better.


.

no, i disagree.. we have been trying to use economic principles used during the depression and they dont work..

you are talking opinion here and not based on anything other than what economists and other so called experts are telling you..

we have no idea what would have happened if we let the banks fail..

i believe that backed into a corner, the banks would have figured out how to survive without the bailout..

it is my opinion that this entire scenario was deliberate..

go watch a few of the better documentaries out there and you might change your mind..

and i am not talking about tinfoil shit, i am talking about what led to this in the first place and how the banks knew exactly how this would play out..

i would have rather faced the consequences of a global collapse than do what the govt did..

and btw, letting the banks have money at 0% has not freed up the credit markets one bit...





.