AAR
Click here for full forums index
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
 
How would you rate Obama's performance so far?
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    AAR Forum Index -> The Wild Wild West Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
bookmark



Joined: 06 Nov 2007
Posts: 323

PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 2:19 pm    Post subject: How would you rate Obama's performance so far? Reply with quote

Happy? Satisfied?
Unhappy? Dissatisfied?
Neutral?

I put it in the WWW forum just because it's politics related.

I'm dissatisfied.

I'm very concerned that he keeps spending money and getting us further and further into debt. I haven't seen him do anything to help lessen the debt. All these stimulus plans and putting money into things when we don't have to begin with. Where is he getting the money?

I'm not a very political person and am not completely knowledgeable about politics. I go by my common sense mostly regarding this subject matter.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Vol Fan



Joined: 30 Dec 2008
Posts: 308
Location: Tennessee

PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 3:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Let me start by saying that I'm not registered to either party. But for the most part of my life, in fact up until the Bush second election, I've always voted Democrat. My parents are Democrats and many of my extended family are Democrats. But being independent, I've prided myself on voting for the person, not the party.

That said and admitting up-front that I did not vote for him, I think he has done one of the worst jobs of any president in my life time. I am in my 50's too, so I've been around for many of them. He is bankrupting our country, virtually making any job growth non-existant, corrupting our laws and our Constitution. I have more fear for our safety now than I ever did before. He is making this strong country look weak around the world. He refuses to listen to what people want (or at least what the majority want) and pushes program after program down our throats before anyone has the ability to really have discussions/processes and learn about what it is really all about. I have a husband who has many health issues and I am the only one who is working. I am also taking care of my elderly mother. I am terrified of what is going to happen with this health care mess coming down the pike and the tax hikes next year.

And on the social side, he has split this nation like no one before, causing race relations to actually fall steps backward, making us into welfare states by making more & more dependent on the government and making people not just depend on the government, but actually expect to be taken care of.

Like I said, I've voted mostly democrats my whole life. But this democratic party is not the democratic party of old. I fear he will destroy this country before he is out of there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
maryskl



Joined: 25 Apr 2009
Posts: 354
Location: Alabama

PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 4:01 pm    Post subject: Re: How would you rate Obama's performance so far? Reply with quote

bookmark wrote:
Happy? Satisfied?
Unhappy? Dissatisfied?
Neutral?

I put it in the WWW forum just because it's politics related.

I'm dissatisfied.

I'm very concerned that he keeps spending money and getting us further and further into debt. I haven't seen him do anything to help lessen the debt. All these stimulus plans and putting money into things when we don't have to begin with. Where is he getting the money?

I'm not a very political person and am not completely knowledgeable about politics. I go by my common sense mostly regarding this subject matter.


I am probably neutral at this point. The economy was so far in the tank that doing nothing was not possible unless we wanted the entire infrastructure to collapse. Letting the tax cuts on those making over $250,000 per year expire next year is projected to generate between 1.6-3 TRILLION dollars in tax revenue over a ten year period (less if you leave the tax cuts for those under $250K). As the economy improves (and it will), the major corporations will let loose of a lot of that capital they are hoarding and start rehiring workers and giving raises. When that happens, tax revenues will increase even more.

The USA debt is about 13 trillion. The home mortgage debt in the USA is about 11 trillion. These are only bad things if the debtors cannot pay their debts off. Just as we are never going to be in a position where everyone in this country owns their home outright, the country is never going to be in a position where there is no debt. Paying it down enough that the interest charged is less would be a good thing. I am not an economist and do not claim to have a full understanding of markets, debt, etc., but I do believe that the hue and cry we are hearing about increased spending is mostly a political ploy and of very little value in doing something to help further the economy. Just my opinion of course <G>.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bookmark



Joined: 06 Nov 2007
Posts: 323

PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 6:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Vol Fan wrote:


That said and admitting up-front that I did not vote for him, I think he has done one of the worst jobs of any president in my life time. I am in my 50's too, so I've been around for many of them. He is bankrupting our country, virtually making any job growth non-existant, corrupting our laws and our Constitution. I have more fear for our safety now than I ever did before. He is making this strong country look weak around the world. He refuses to listen to what people want (or at least what the majority want) and pushes program after program down our throats before anyone has the ability to really have discussions/processes and learn about what it is really all about. I have a husband who has many health issues and I am the only one who is working. I am also taking care of my elderly mother. I am terrified of what is going to happen with this health care mess coming down the pike and the tax hikes next year.


Like I said, I've voted mostly democrats my whole life. But this democratic party is not the democratic party of old. I fear he will destroy this country before he is out of there.


I'm more of an Independent myself. I'm surprised you are worried about the health care mess since a lot of people with health issues or who have someone close with health issues seems to approve of him so highly because of his "health care reforms". I'm not sold on that either.

I completely agree with what you said about him passing stuff without working through all the issues. I worry about presidents who don't think through major issues and only worry about the here and now and don't consider about immediate or into the future effects.

With more time, I'm more and more worried about worse consequences from his actions that will have to be fixed on top of issues that needs to be fixed now. Obviously, with the financial crisis, you can't have quick fixes. It will take many, many years but at the rate he's going, he's setting us further and further back.

I don't care about political parties. I only care about Presidents who does a good job taking care of our economy, safety, etc... It really bugs me when people talk, argue, or debate about political parties and not the actual job and problems itself.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tee



Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 4225
Location: Detroit Metro

PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 6:19 pm    Post subject: Re: How would you rate Obama's performance so far? Reply with quote

maryskl wrote:
The economy was so far in the tank that doing nothing was not possible unless we wanted the entire infrastructure to collapse.

I'm with you on this statement, maryskl. No matter who would have been in office (Repub or Dem), their hands would have been tied. There was an economic crisis to deal with and Obama did it his way at the suggestions of his advisors. If it were McCain, he would have had to make some decisions too. Unfortunately, there's no hindsight here to refer to because we really don't know what those choices would have been and what results would have occurred with them.

In this case, doing nothing was not an option. Trying to decide what to do were the challenges. Time will tell how successful they were. We may need to wait several years to evaluate accurately. After all, this economic mess took a long time to develop before the inflated balloon finally burst--and burst it had to. We cannot expect overnight results; and a couple of years is practically overnight considering the magnitude of these issues.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
maryskl



Joined: 25 Apr 2009
Posts: 354
Location: Alabama

PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 11:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am having a very difficult time posting. I keep getting error messages, so if nine million of the same post turn up...it is not my fault <g>.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dick



Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 2508

PostPosted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 9:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm neutral with some dissatisfaction. But I agree that the bailout had to occur or we would ALL have sunk much lower than we have. And, you know, I thought the bailout originated with Bush.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Vol Fan



Joined: 30 Dec 2008
Posts: 308
Location: Tennessee

PostPosted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 9:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

maryskl wrote:
I am having a very difficult time posting. I keep getting error messages, so if nine million of the same post turn up...it is not my fault <g>.


When I try to post at home, it's acting weird too. Keeps coming up & asking for my password again, even though I'm already logged in.

Dick,
I'm not really happy with either party truth to tell. But what I really don't understand is all this spending. Were we not taught from childhood that if you don't have the money, you don't spend it. When your credit cards are maxed out, you stop using them. We have to cut here and there, live on a budget, so why can't they learn this? They all seem to have totally lost connection to what it is like to have to live like regular people. Maybe because the majority of them are so rich, they've never had to, who knows. All I know is that they seem to have totally lost any common sense IMO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dick



Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 2508

PostPosted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 12:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@VolFan:
I'm not sure it's possible to compare family finances to government finances, but, in a way, the bailout was much like fixing a leaky roof on one's home. One may not have the money at the moment to repair it, but if it isn't repaired, the entire house will be damaged more and the value and everything else the house represents will be diminished greatly. I would, I think, borrow the money I didn't have in order to keep that from happening, thinking that it's better to be in debt than for the house to be further damaged. Even though I might not get out of that debt for a long time, the house will retain its value and, if circumstances are right,
grow in value. And it serves as collateral for the debt, even if the debt continues. Had I not borrowed to repair the roof, the house would deteriorate and eventually fall and I would lose it and thus lose the potential for collateral as well.

In the case of the bailout, as long as the US exists, its huge wealth and productive power serves as collateral for its debt in the same way the house does for you or me. But that wealth and productive power would have been diminished greatly had the bailout--the debt--not occurred.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bookmark



Joined: 06 Nov 2007
Posts: 323

PostPosted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The problem I had with the bailout, Dick, is that it all happened in a blink of an eye. I know governments are notorious for being slow with a lot of things and having a lot of hoops you have to jump through, but it was handed out with a snap of the fingers with bailouts. That's how you had AIG getting the bailout yet still managing to have extravagant parties immediately after. I don't feel that there were conditions and requirements that were made clear who would qualify, when they had to pay it back, checks and balances in place for responsible bailouts, etc... The same way the problem came up with the housing fiasco, when you don't have clear, responsible policies in place. Instead of making sure people did actually qualify and the probability them being able to make payments in the future, the banks, with the endorsement of government that makes owning a house possible for everyday people and not just very well off or rich folks, they just willy-nilly gave out loans or signed off on documents thinking only of the short-term gains and not long term.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
maryskl



Joined: 25 Apr 2009
Posts: 354
Location: Alabama

PostPosted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 3:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I'm more of an Independent myself. I'm surprised you are worried about the health care mess since a lot of people with health issues or who have someone close with health issues seems to approve of him so highly because of his "health care reforms". I'm not sold on that either.

I completely agree with what you said about him passing stuff without working through all the issues. I worry about presidents who don't think through major issues and only worry about the here and now and don't consider about immediate or into the future effects.

With more time, I'm more and more worried about worse consequences from his actions that will have to be fixed on top of issues that needs to be fixed now. Obviously, with the financial crisis, you can't have quick fixes. It will take many, many years but at the rate he's going, he's setting us further and further back.

I don't care about political parties. I only care about Presidents who does a good job taking care of our economy, safety, etc... It really bugs me when people talk, argue, or debate about political parties and not the actual job and problems itself.


I was disappointed with the health care legislation for a different reason. This issue has been studied since Clinton first tried to get something passed his first term. If we truly set up a national health care system instead of that poor excuse of a compromise, then Vol would not have to worry about her husband's health issues. Are the UK, Ireland, Japan, Canada, France, etc. that much more intelligent than we are that they can provide their citizens with health care, but somehow we cannot? Do you know why they originally set up national health care in the UK? Winston Churchill discovered that military recruits were not in good enough shape to fight. It was in his country's best interest to have healthy soldiers. Just as it is in our country's best interest to have healthy soldiers AND healthy workers. Think of all of the productivity that is lost due to illness. Those without insurance go to work sick or finally call in sick when they get so ill they have to use the emergency room as a primary care doctor. Think of the insurance companies as the "middle men." If we cut out the middle men, then there will be a cost savings. Ask anyone who is now eligible for Medicare if they want to give it up and go back to private insurance. They would cut you first. The reason we do not have national health insurance is simply greed. Too many people are making money off the misery of our population and controlling our choices with the restrictions placed on policy holders by private insurance. I believe true health care reform will cost us less in the long run.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
maryskl



Joined: 25 Apr 2009
Posts: 354
Location: Alabama

PostPosted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
And on the social side, he has split this nation like no one before, causing race relations to actually fall steps backward, making us into welfare states by making more & more dependent on the government and making people not just depend on the government, but actually expect to be taken care of.


I just have to respond to this comment. I agree with you that this country is divided racially, but I do not think we can lay that at Obama’s feet. The attacks on his race began well before he was inaugurated. I have NEVER heard such racial vitriol coming from the right since the 60's. It is like they kept it in the closet for 40 years and then it just exploded with a bang. I lived through the Civil Rights movement in Alabama. I went to segregated schools until the 4th grade. I remember bomb threats called in by PARENTS when integration took place. I do not know how many times I have been in the company of conservative acquaintances who assumed that as a white southern woman they could speak "freely" in my presence and what they would state as opinion was very disheartening. Now they do not even bother to speak in whispers. The gloves have been taken off and the real resentment is bleeding through. So many people who were against national health care took that stance because they were afraid those "lazy, shiftless, welfare blacks" would get something for nothing. Not even facts could sway them. The poorest among us already have national health care. It is called Medicaid. It is the WORKING poor that are getting the shaft and that is rapidly creeping into the middle class. My husband and I are self-employed. We pay our own health insurance and have for many years. In ten years, our premiums went from less than $3000 per year to nearly $11,000 per year with LESS coverage. That kind of exponential inflation cannot be sustained. Even now we see such professions as teaching shifting more and more of the cost of insurance to employees and in my state they have typically had the best insurance plans around. Do not think for even one minute that this could not happen to you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bookmark



Joined: 06 Nov 2007
Posts: 323

PostPosted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 5:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't know how to explain it succinctly but I feel like he keeps, or wants to keep spending money without setting up plans in place to get those money back. For example, if I don't have money and keep spending by borrowing, and I get options to not have to pay that money back or have a way of making that money to pay, then I'm just being enabled. What I need help would be a productive way to make money and save, as opposed to just being bailed out. I'm sorry if I'm doing a botched up job of explaining my point. I feel like he's enabling people who need help to rely on the government instead of helping them find ways to be more independently proactive. It's kind of like letting people be on welfare all their lives instead of encouraging them to work at some point and pay back for all the free governmental help that others are taxed on to pay for them. How is that fair for someone to work hard to support someone else who can also work but prefer not to because they're getting easy money indefinitely or as long as their kids are a certain age?

He's taxing big companies or placing all these restrictions or putting the burden on them when they're the ones that he should want to succeed because they're the ones providing the jobs and contributing to the economy. Unless you're a very small business and not doing that well, then he leaves you alone otherwise if he thinks you're making a certain amount that he deems is large enough, he'll tax you and make you pay for being successful.

Also, of course, I think everyone should have health care. What I'm concerned about is how much it's going to cost and who's going to be paying for them. America is all about free enterprise and money or success is a big motivator. Imagine if all doctors know they're only going to be compensated for a certain amount of money, how many are going to want to go into that career field. Also, it cost a lot of money for technological advances in medicine, equipment, care , etc... Where's the money or the motivation going to come from? I don't think it's going to work in America if everyone's playing field is level, meaning that no one is rich or poor. Capitalism is how America works at its best.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark



Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 1391

PostPosted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) (AKA "the bailout") was rushed in during the closing months of the Bush administration. This is the one that the financial firms took gross advantage of for little return to the public.
The stimulus bill under Obama was badly watered down between the original proposal and what could get past Senate Republican obstructionism. I've seen mention that the stimulus that got passed wasn't as effective as needed because IT WAS TOO SMALL.
A large number of other efforts to further help the economy have ALL DIED due to Republican Senators in NO mode.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
maryskl



Joined: 25 Apr 2009
Posts: 354
Location: Alabama

PostPosted: Fri Sep 24, 2010 12:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

bookmark wrote:
I don't know how to explain it succinctly but I feel like he keeps, or wants to keep spending money without setting up plans in place to get those money back. For example, if I don't have money and keep spending by borrowing, and I get options to not have to pay that money back or have a way of making that money to pay, then I'm just being enabled. What I need help would be a productive way to make money and save, as opposed to just being bailed out. I'm sorry if I'm doing a botched up job of explaining my point. I feel like he's enabling people who need help to rely on the government instead of helping them find ways to be more independently proactive. It's kind of like letting people be on welfare all their lives instead of encouraging them to work at some point and pay back for all the free governmental help that others are taxed on to pay for them. How is that fair for someone to work hard to support someone else who can also work but prefer not to because they're getting easy money indefinitely or as long as their kids are a certain age?

He's taxing big companies or placing all these restrictions or putting the burden on them when they're the ones that he should want to succeed because they're the ones providing the jobs and contributing to the economy. Unless you're a very small business and not doing that well, then he leaves you alone otherwise if he thinks you're making a certain amount that he deems is large enough, he'll tax you and make you pay for being successful.

Also, of course, I think everyone should have health care. What I'm concerned about is how much it's going to cost and who's going to be paying for them. America is all about free enterprise and money or success is a big motivator. Imagine if all doctors know they're only going to be compensated for a certain amount of money, how many are going to want to go into that career field. Also, it cost a lot of money for technological advances in medicine, equipment, care , etc... Where's the money or the motivation going to come from? I don't think it's going to work in America if everyone's playing field is level, meaning that no one is rich or poor. Capitalism is how America works at its best.


I am not sure that it is fair to state that Obama is taxing big corporations when the only real tax change to date is letting the tax cuts passed during the Bush era expire at the end of this year. Expiration of a temporary tax cut is not raising taxes. In fact one stimulus bill decreased taxes on middle class workers (although I think that expires at the end of this year). As far as the Bush tax cuts, there appears to be some discussion of compromise on extending the lower rates to those making $250,000 or less and hitting a middle ground with the estate and gift tax. A small business tax package was just passed to help these businesses in getting capital to expand and hire new workers. Big corporations are sitting on $1.8 trillion in capital waiting for one of the herd to break free and start expanding again. So they are not hurting as bad as one might think. Also, very few large corporations actually pay taxes at the highest rate. By the time they have figured in expenses, credits and exemptions their marginal rates are much lower.

The debt situation is not as simple as it appears. Our annual GDP (income) exceeds our debt by over a trillion dollars. This may not be a perfect analogy, but I will attempt it. Let's say I make $85,000 per year. I owe $150,000 on my house, $10,000 on automobiles and $2,000 in credit card debt. While my cumulative debt is $162,000 (which is twice my income), I am still able to meet my bills easily. My monthly income after taxes is close to $6000. My monthly house payment is $1000, car payment $150 and I am paying down the credit card at $100 per month. That leaves me $4850 to pay the rest of my bills. No one expects us to pay off our entire mortgage with one year's worth of income. Having said all of that, it would be BETTER to get the percentage of debt vs. GDP down, but the situation is not as dire as some would have us believe.

Nearly half our our public debt is in treasury bills and bonds. People and foreign countries invest in our bonds because they are considered a good risk. If there were ever a problem with us paying out the bonds, then we could just theoretically print more money (not the way we would want to go as that would drive inflation up, but the option is there).

Eventually the country will get back on the economic track and that in turn will result in increased tax revenues to both state and federal governments. As state revenues increase, there will be less need for federal intervention to keep state programs going. As the economy improves, unemployment will go down and there will be less unemployment insurance being paid out. When in a crisis if we DON'T spend on basic necessities, then everything spirals downward. Right now there are 5 candidates for every job opening in the USA. People want to work but cannot find jobs that are not there. We just have to wait it out and hope that relief comes soon.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    AAR Forum Index -> The Wild Wild West Forum All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 1 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group