Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"Is Obamanomics a boon or a bane? A debate over the president's policies."

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 12:15 PM
Original message
"Is Obamanomics a boon or a bane? A debate over the president's policies."

The Road to Recovery

Is Obamanomics a boon or a bane? A debate over the president's policies.

NEWSWEEK
Published Nov 21, 2009
From the magazine issue dated Nov 30, 2009

Whatever else they may do in office, presidents are largely judgedby the voters, if not historianson their handling of the economy. So with unemployment edging into double digits, last week's Intelligence Squared US debate topic"Obama's Economic Policies Are Working Effectively"attracted the largest audience in the history of the series, and the closest margin of victory ever for one side. It also attracted some notable debaters, including New York's former governor Eliot Spitzer, who is reemerging into public life, 18 months after his resignation. Like many in the audience, Spitzer, who before his election as governor was known for investigating Wall Street banks as New York's attorney general, seemingly had a hard time making up his mind: just before the debate, he threw the organizers into turmoil by switching positionsto join, it turned out, the losing side.

The debaters for the motion were Lawrence Mishel, president of the Economic Policy Institute; Steve Rattner, former deputy chairman of Lazard Freres and the former head of the administration's auto-industry bailout; and Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody's Economy.com.

Speaking against the motion were Spitzer; James K. Galbraith, an economist and professor of government at the University of Texas at Austin; and Allan H. Meltzer, professor of political economy at Carnegie Mellon.

Edited excerpts from the debate:

Zandi: The most important things (the government did) to shore up the financial system were the bank stress tests, early this year. They were the modern-day equivalent of what FDR did when he closed all the banks, on a Friday, and he said on Monday to his Treasury secretary, "Open all of 'em except a couple of hundred." And the Treasury secretary said, "Which ones should I open?" And FDR said, "It really doesn't matter, because the ones you open, everyone will think are safe." In fact it worked, it restored confidence, and the stress test did that, too.

The second response was to shore up the two weakest parts of our economy, the housing market and the auto market: the first-time homebuyer tax credit, which was very important in stabilizing housing values, the loan modification plan to help homeowners facing foreclosure, and efforts to provide more credit to the residential mortgage market. Ninety percent of all residential mortgage loans today are being made by the federal government.

And the third response, the fiscal stimulus, much maligned but ultimately very successful. In the last three months we lost 200,000 jobs a month. That's a lot, but the trend lines are moving in the right direction, and my view is by early next year we will have a stable job market.

Galbraith: The stimulus did some good, it helped forestall the complete collapse of state and local government budgets, it created some construction jobs. The question is, was it enough? And I think it's pretty clear that it was not. It was based on a forecast that unemployment would not rise past about 8 percent by the middle of this year and would decline after, which was wildly optimistic. We think the housing crisis is important, the collapse of small business is important, we think 10 percent unemployment as far as the eye can see is a disaster. Better than nothing is not good enough.

What would a working program look like? It would dissolve rather than coddle the toxic banks. It would stop the displacement of people from their homes, not just slow it and it would fund a lot of new green jobs all across the country, providing every American who wants it a chance to work.

Mishel: The question is, are you going to judge the Obama policy ineffective because it hasn't corrected 30 years of generating inequality, of silly deregulation and worshiping of markets, that got us into this darn mess? We calculate that the Recovery Act has actually created 1.1 to 1.5 million jobs by the end of September. I'm very worried that unemployment is going to be high for years to come, but I don't blame that on President Obama, I blame that on the bums that put us in this mess.

I think they got the policy right. Has it solved all our problems? (No, but) I'm not sure how much could have been done economically. I can darn well tell you that politically, there was not much more they could have gotten.

more



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
1. Smoke and mirrors
Obama represents the investor class, not the working class.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I can guarantee you that the investor class doesn't think so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. GOP represents the most reactionary faction of ruling class
while Obama represents the rest of the ruling class.

His deeds, not his words, speak volumes of whose side he is on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Considering what percent of the stimulus bill goes to programs that help the poor, I think
that you are a little misinformed here. It is the largest amount of direct spending to help the disadvantaged since Lyndon Johnson. I shudder to think what would have happened in absence of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. The country needed a New Deal, we got a Raw Deal
Very little money went for long term investment in infrastructure and public works.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. That's Really Unfair.
Edited on Sat Nov-21-09 01:11 PM by MannyGoldstein
By us giving your tax dollars to the hyperwealthy, they'll give some back to you.

Less the 70% that is their due, because they are smarter and better than you.

Best regards,

Larry & Timmy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chulanowa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Don't mind IndianaGreen
If it involves Obama, they'll never be happy with it. Ever. To these folks, Obama has two settings - "Shitty" and "not good enough."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. Then Why Did The Investor Class Back Obama?
Edited on Sat Nov-21-09 01:07 PM by MannyGoldstein
He got far more from Wall Street than did McCain.

And they got a lot for their money!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. Two wings from the same bird of prey
as a wise man said a long time ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whistler162 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. Yup.... I will always take advise from Pat Buchanan!
"It is time for the American people (especially Christian conservatives) to recognize that the two-party system in Washington, D.C., is beyond broke: it is a joke! Pat Buchanan was absolutely right when he said that the two major parties are two wings of the same bird of prey. "

http://buchanan.org/blog/gop-the-party-of-death-335

Okay!!!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phx_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. Most working class are investors if they have a 401(k).
But don't let me get in your way of pouting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Only fools think that a 401k makes them capitalists
401k was a gimmick to pump money into Wall Street. None of you with 401k have a say so on how companies are run, or where the jobs go.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #9
19. My god, I can't believe some people on this board
Your indiscriminate hatred for anyone who makes money makes it hard to argue with right wingers that we aren't unreasonable babies expecting the government to care for us on their dime.

No investors means no jobs at all. Somebody has to have capital or none of this would be going on.

If Obama helps Wall Street, it's because Wall Street has capital, invests it, and that results in jobs. People have jobs because somebody invested money in an enterprise. People who have 401ks are involved as investors. So are you going to indiscriminately hate them too? American work because there are investors in the U.S. If Wall Street did fall apart, a lot of people would be without jobs and the unemployment rate would go much higher.

There is that group that starts businesses. If not for them, we wouldn't have any jobs for the Americans not willing or able to start businesses.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. What % Of The Average Americans Lifetime Earnings Come From A 401k?
Maybe 5%? I think that not getting sodomized on the other 95% is the more important thing, don't you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kdillard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
2. Thanks : ).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 12:25 PM
Response to Original message
5. Obamanomics is neutral... neither boon nor bane.
Obamanomics is the barest minimum of sane policy... woefully short of the mark but not destructive in the other direction.... just vanilla.

But vanilla looks better when the alternative is cyanide.

Better than McCain... but that's like Bush's thing about how we employed less torture than Saddam Hussein.

Mad props to Obama for not torpedoing the economy outright, I guess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 03:08 PM
Response to Original message
15. Thanks..
Pro Sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeorgeGist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 03:57 PM
Response to Original message
16. The policy remains, by-and-large, trickle-down
(aka piss-on) economics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-21-09 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Nonsense.
Edited on Sat Nov-21-09 07:10 PM by ProSense
BIGGEST. TAX CUT. EVER...:

Chris Hayes had a similar observation.

On the politics side of the ledger, Ben Smith notes Obama's emphasis on the tax cuts in the bill. I'm not necessarily a fan, though politically it's true that every single Republican member of congress can now be accused of "Voting against the biggest tax cut in history" come next election." Clearly, this hasn't escaped the White House's notice.


The ARRA:

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, abbreviated ARRA (Pub.L. 111-5), is an economic stimulus package enacted by the 111th United States Congress in February 2009. The Act of Congress was based largely on proposals made by President Barack Obama and was intended to provide a stimulus to the U.S. economy in the wake of the economic downturn. The measures are nominally worth $787 billion. The Act includes federal tax cuts, expansion of unemployment benefits and other social welfare provisions, and domestic spending in education, health care, and infrastructure, including the energy sector. The Act also includes numerous non-economic recovery related items that were either part of longer-term plans (e.g. a study of the effectiveness of medical treatments) or desired by Congress (e.g. a limitation on executive compensation in federally aided banks added by Senator Dodd and Rep. Frank). The government action is much larger than the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, which consisted primarily of tax rebate checks.


Add to that the home buyers credit, cash for clunkers and student financial aid.






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Jul 21st 2019, 08:34 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC