Sen. Kyl Says Bush Doesn't Run The Economy

[babylonsister]

Run time: 01:57 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOdB1vvx2ao   Posted on YouTube: October 26, 2008 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: October 27, 2008 By DU Member: babylonsister Views on DU: 805

 
Again, responsibility and rethugs, nary the twain shall meet. :eyes:

[whistle]

1. That is correct, the "Secret Government" does, what a schmuck!

[bulloney]

2. Repubs think the panacea to everything is a tax cut.

Then they ignore the massive record deficits that ensue. I realize that spending hasn't been curbed, but the Repubs are in there spending like there's no tomorrow, too. So, they really don't believe in their own ideology.

Kyl argues that tax cuts created the record economic expansion of the early Bush years. Well, as we have been seeing clearly for the past several weeks, that so-called economic expansion was a house of cards. Wall Street was creating billions of dollars out of thin air with no foundation. So, Kyl's statement is bogus.

Since when have Repubs led a push for MORE regulation on anything? I've heard this a number of times recently that the Repubs called for more regulation for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but the Democrats opposed. Either this is a classic example of repeating a lie until you get people to believe it's true, we were in an Alice in Wonderland world regarding regulating Freddie and Fannie, or Kyl is twisting something around.

[Turbineguy]

3. Thought for the season:

I am thankful Kyl is not a Democrat.

Repubs like idiots.

[BeatleBoot]

4. Their argument is

"Tax cuts are needed to create jobs!"


The reality that everyone gets except those that are running for office with an (R) after their name is:


Bush gave the tax breaks, and we are now in this mess.


Reaganomics is dead. It's just going to take a while for the brainwashed to catch up.


Also, a huge misconception is that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae offered mortagages to the public.

They didn't. They were in the secondary market of buying and selling mortgages.

They never gave mortgages to the public.


These cats will look you in the eye and tell you that water isn't wet.

[muntrv]

5. You're right Kyl. Bush just destroys the economy.

[Ka hrnt]

6. Gotta play devil's advocate here....

If you look at GDP versus time, it's been linear growth for 50+ years; the president is frankly, irrelevant to economic growth. Granted, there may be better means of judging "the economy", but I have to agree--the president (regardless of who it is) doesn't "run" the economy. (Are they the ultimate decision maker re: some economic policies that influence the economy? Yes.)

As for republicans trying to regulate Fannie & Freddie, there is at least SOME truth to it. Granted, it's hard to see what exactly when the videos are spliced, but again--there is some truth to it:
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=fannie%20mae%20republicans%20regulate&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv#

[babylonsister]

7. Interesting. I'd like a comparison between Dem presidents vs.

rethug ones, and the success rate. And then tell me the president has nothing to do with it. Thanks!

[Ka hrnt]

8. You can find all the GDP data online at the BEA

http://www.bea.gov/national/index.htm#gdp

Again, GDP is almost perfectly linear; a linear regression in Excel gives a correlation coefficient of .97 for 1960-2007. You can see the recessions in the data, but other than that, you'll have to really dig to see any significant changes in the data. So yes, it appears that the president has little-to-nothing to do with it.

I can't tell you the respective presidents' "success rates" because I have no idea what you mean by "success rate." But the data is there if you want to look at it.

Edit: Specifically, here's the link to the data (MS Excel format): http://www.bea.gov/national/xls/gdplev.xls

[babylonsister]

10. I don't know what a linear regression is. You are talking to the

wrong person here. I'm going with my heart and mind.

[Ka hrnt]

13. ...

"I'm going with my heart and mind."

I'm going with the what the historical data show.

(As to a linear regression: basically, if you plot the GDP versus time, you can draw a straight line through it. As for the correlation coefficient: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation )

[Narkos]

11. He may not run the economy, but he pushed the "Ownership Society"

and tolerated lax regulatory standards by his SEC chairman and Fed chairman. The housing bubble and the credit crisis have been talked about for years....Bush could have done something about it, but chose not to because he's another free market fundamentalist who refuses to believe in governmental oversight of the economy. And the idea that a President has no effect on the economy is not borne out by the facts.
http://rodrik.typepad.com/dani_rodriks_weblog/2008/03/american-politi.html

[babylonsister]

12. Thank you; that wasn't written in vain. Much appreciated. nt

[curiousdemo]

9. Why does anyone in their right mind...

choose to be a Repuke! These people are from another planet.....:silly: