Marcus
Dedicated LVC Member
That's the point. :gr_devil:
Subprime lending disaster Clinton admin's fault
- Thread starter fossten
- Start date
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Actually, that only applies to you. Marcus does it, he sounds gay. If the shoe fits...
Marcus, you cannot blame market failure when government has interference. Period.
Very true. If the government has it's hand in the pot, the negates the possibility of it being a purely "market" failure. In fact, when we see any type of economic bubble like this pop, it is usually due to the market trying to correct for some artificial (non-market) influence and interference.
Yeah, but it wasnt too long ago that some of you were touting Bush for the great economy.... You cant have it both ways.
And please, dont make me go digging into past posts to find the evidence.
And please, dont make me go digging into past posts to find the evidence.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Go ahead. While you're at it, dig up all the posts about who won the election in 2006 and has been writing all the Bills.
Go ahead. While you're at it, dig up all the posts about who won the election in 2006 and has been writing all the Bills.
Who's been signing those billes into law again???
TheDude
Dedicated LVC Member
Bill Clinton?
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Who said anything about signing them? How about refusing to extend the tax cuts? How about millions of tax dollars wasted on frivolous, politically motivated investigations into supposed Bush war crimes? How about refusing to drill for more oil or relieve restrictions on shale oil? How about refusing to curb the gas tax? There's a reason this is the most unpopular Congress in history, and it ain't Bush - his approval rating is higher.
Bob Hubbard
Dedicated LVC Member
his approval rating is higher.
Higher than what, a snail?
Bob.
Higher than what, a snail?
Bob.
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Marcus
Dedicated LVC Member
The Democrats went into the 2006 election with promises of putting the skids on Bush's abuses of power and holding him and his administration accountable. Instead they laid down and capitulated on nearly every thing Bush has demanded.
Now tell me why their approval ratings are so low.
Now tell me why their approval ratings are so low.
From the Republican Dictionary...
http://www.republicandictionary.com/
Clinton, William "Bill"
1. Liberal president of the United States preceding George W. Bush whose administration's policies are directly responsible for the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, economic recession, rise in unemployment, corporate accounting scandals, torture of prisoners in U.S. custody, the record national debt, and all other unfortunate events that have occurred during the presidency of George W. Bush.
http://www.republicandictionary.com/
Clinton, William "Bill"
1. Liberal president of the United States preceding George W. Bush whose administration's policies are directly responsible for the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, economic recession, rise in unemployment, corporate accounting scandals, torture of prisoners in U.S. custody, the record national debt, and all other unfortunate events that have occurred during the presidency of George W. Bush.
Well, how about the massive debt Bush has got us into? We had a surplus budget when Clinton left office and were reducing debt. We've had nothing but deficits and increased debt while Bush has been in office.
Think that massive debt has anything to do with the dollar being so weak? Think that weak dollar has anything to do with the price of oil?
You talk about drilling.... How many refineries have been built in the last 7.5 years? Any? That isnt in congress' hands, its in the executive branch. Refineries are at capacity now, so where would new oil be refined at?
Marcus
Dedicated LVC Member
Before anybody parrots the talking point about the surplus only being a projection, those are the real numbers, not projections. The projections were much higher and were estimates of 2000 and beyond.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Nobody's disputing the government's out of control spending, Joey. Spending has been increasing for 50 years because we're still living in FDR's New Deal, which is outdated and a proven failure. But you just tried to absolve Congress from any responsibility again. Congress passes spending bills, not the President. Congress controls the purse strings. Clinton had a surplus due to his massive middle class tax increase and the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS' control over spending.
Your BDS is ridiculously high.
Refineries? No refinery has been built in over 30 years, not just 7.5. Nice try though. And refineries aren't the problem. They're not at capacity. They typically run at 87% capacity. Nice try again. And it's the high cost of environmental regulation, which was put in place by Democrats, that has prevented refineries from being built. It simply isn't fiscally feasible to do so.
As far as a weak dollar, how do you tie this to Bush? The dollar has been declining ever since we were taken off the gold standard.
Please dont talk to me about BDS until you adress Bryan's ODS.
The economy has been crap since GW took over. At first, I gave him leeway since 9-11 wasnt his fault and that triggered the start of the economy going bad. That was 7 years ago and things are much worse today.
Why is the dollar weak? Debt. Clinton had debt and spending under control. The numbers do not lie. The dollar was strong when GW took over. Debt was being reduced year by year when bush took over.
Oh, and Congress passes tax bills - so if you dont want to credit bush for the out of control spending, then dont blame Clinton for the middle class tax you refer to, it was a republican congress. But regardless, the economy was alot better when that tax was in place.
Well, how about the massive debt Bush has got us into? We had a surplus budget when Clinton left office and were reducing debt. We've had nothing but deficits and increased debt while Bush has been in office.
Think that massive debt has anything to do with the dollar being so weak? Think that weak dollar has anything to do with the price of oil?
You talk about drilling.... How many refineries have been built in the last 7.5 years? Any? That isnt in congress' hands, its in the executive branch. Refineries are at capacity now, so where would new oil be refined at?
And who controls spending? Not the president... oh, that's right, it's Congress. Who controlled Congress under Reagan? The Domocrats. Who controlled in under Clinton? For all but two year, The Republicans. No one is debating that spending went out of control during Bush's years...
Once again, you are reaching to blame Bush, when the blame lies with someone else...
And Marcus, the Surplus was all smoke and mirrors. It was only on paper in cooked books. It was never real.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
INCORRECT.
Clinton tax increase - prior to 1994. Republican Congress - after 1994.
You're fact-deficient again Joey.
Who controlled congress the first 6 years of Bush's term? Republicans.
Who engaged us in 2 wars that at least partially caused higher oil prices and the crazy budget deficit levels? Bush.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Oh really? So you're a truther now? I thought Al Qaeda attacked us.
Fair enough. So the demcrats increased taxes and the economy ran well, deficits went away and national debt reduced.
So what your saying is that the democrats had the right idea and ran things well. Thank's for proving my points.
And that had nothing to do with Iraq. How many billions later and what do we have? We are on the cusp of war with Iran now. Who will pay for that?
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
What was your point? Are you trying to argue that increasing taxes helps the economy?
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
You said TWO wars. Al Qaeda had nothing to do with Afghanistan and the Taliban?
Wait a minute. Are we actually at war with Iran? Now you're blaming Bush for a war that hasn't even started yet?
BDS indeed.
No, im blaming spending on Bush -
Afghanastan, I believe, would be over now had we not gone into Iraq. Instead, they are both costing us money, tons of it. Bush got us into Iraq and then bungled it. In the process, Afghanastan suffered as a result.
ODS - lets not forget that fossten..... If you are going to call one, call the other. Dont be a hypocrite.
Afghanastan, I believe, would be over now had we not gone into Iraq. Instead, they are both costing us money, tons of it. Bush got us into Iraq and then bungled it. In the process, Afghanastan suffered as a result.
ODS - lets not forget that fossten..... If you are going to call one, call the other. Dont be a hypocrite.