PDA

View Full Version : Elections Mitt Outs Himself as Following Obama's Economics


BucEyedPea
05-27-2012, 09:45 AM
by openly repudiated the central argument his party has been making against President Obama for the last three years: that he spent too much money and therefore deepened the economic crisis. Indeed Romney himself had been making this very case as recently as a week ago (“he bailed out the public sector, gave billions of dollars to the companies of his friends, and added almost as much debt as all the prior presidents combined. The consequence is that we are enduring the most tepid recovery in modern history.”)

But in his Halperin interview, Romney frankly admits that reducing the budget deficit in the midst of an economic crisis would be a horrible idea:

Romney: Well because, if you take a trillion dollars for instance, out of the first year of the federal budget, that would shrink GDP over 5%. That is by definition throwing us into recession or depression. So I’m not going to do that, of course.


http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/05/romneys-big-fat-wet-kiss-to-keynesian-economics.html?mid=rss


Meanwhile, Romney has no stimulus plan. But he may well propose one if he wins, and it would pass, because plenty of Republicans would flip back to being Keynesians like they were under President Bush. What’s more, Democrats wouldn’t stop it, because Democrats don’t have any history of opportunistically abandoning Keynesian economics when the other party’s neck is on the economic line. So, yes, a President Romney would be more likely to sign strong stimulative legislation than Obama — not because he believes in it more strongly, but because, as David Frum says, we’re all Keynesians during Republican administrations.


Republicans = One Deluded Bunch following Liars

Ace Gunner
05-27-2012, 10:03 AM
americans = One Deluded Bunch following Liars

the only way gov't can positively effect the economy is to raise tariffs on imports and write a tax/trade code that ambitious americans can understand and follow.

Chocolate Hog
05-27-2012, 10:09 AM
We already knew this but most on here will still vote for him because he's not black.

BucEyedPea
05-27-2012, 10:11 AM
americans = One Deluded Bunch following Liars

the only way gov't can positively effect the economy is to raise tariffs on imports and write a tax/trade code that ambitious americans can understand and follow.

Yeah, that's true too. Neither side of the aisle, seems to know that GDP includes govt spending.
So if that goes up so does GDP. It's not a real measure of the real economy in the private sector.

BucEyedPea
05-27-2012, 10:12 AM
We already knew this but most on here will still vote for him because he's not black.

How 'bout just because he's not Obama?

"Anybody but Obama!" replaces "Anybody but Bush!" ( a big spending Keynesian stimulator if I ever saw one)

Ace Gunner
05-27-2012, 10:25 AM
I just want a win! /avg narcissistic neo socialist republican

Donger
05-27-2012, 10:30 AM
So, I see two statements:

1) Obama has spent too much.

2) Cutting $1 trillion from the budget is a bad idea during an already anemic recovery.

I don't disagree with either. #2 is like cutting off the head to cure the headache. But, that's a Paul idea, isn't it?

Chocolate Hog
05-27-2012, 10:31 AM
lol Donger is now just repeating talking points.

Saul Good
05-27-2012, 10:33 AM
lol Donger is now just repeating talking points.

Not everyone can post something as brilliant as:


We already knew this but most on here will still vote for him because he's not black.

Chocolate Hog
05-27-2012, 10:33 AM
Not everyone can post something as brilliant as:

It's true.

Donger
05-27-2012, 10:34 AM
lol Donger is now just repeating talking points.

Huh? I read the OP and wrote what I wrote.

Iz Zat Chew
05-27-2012, 10:40 AM
We already knew this but most on here will still vote for him because he's not black.

You've got that wrong, most her might vote for Romney because he isn't Obama - skin color has no place in the argument. Obama currently is pretty much beating the shit out of the record that Jimmy Carter had at the end of his ONE term.

Romney probably will not stop the crash that's coming. I doubt anyone will be able to do so. I feel that if people in rural areas of this country want to survive they will make their homes as self sustaining as they can. We can't count on the government for anything and shouldn't.

When did we lose America? Obama is not working to keep America strong. No telling where Romney will take us. We have two choices and both are bad, which one is the least to worry about? In my mind it's Romney but I believe that the free enterprise system is still viable - Obama does not.

BucEyedPea
05-27-2012, 11:11 AM
lol Donger is now just repeating talking points.

Donger is the replacement of jAZ. :thumb:

BucEyedPea
05-27-2012, 11:12 AM
You've got that wrong, most her might vote for Romney because he isn't Obama - skin color has no place in the argument. Obama currently is pretty much beating the shit out of the record that Jimmy Carter had at the end of his ONE term.

Romney probably will not stop the crash that's coming. I doubt anyone will be able to do so. I feel that if people in rural areas of this country want to survive they will make their homes as self sustaining as they can. We can't count on the government for anything and shouldn't.

When did we lose America? Obama is not working to keep America strong. No telling where Romney will take us. We have two choices and both are bad, which one is the least to worry about? In my mind it's Romney but I believe that the free enterprise system is still viable - Obama does not.

He may not stop it, but he's going to still implement Obama's economics to deal with it.

chiefzilla1501
05-27-2012, 11:20 AM
So, I see two statements:

1) Obama has spent too much.

2) Cutting $1 trillion from the budget is a bad idea during an already anemic recovery.

I don't disagree with either. #2 is like cutting off the head to cure the headache. But, that's a Paul idea, isn't it?

Agree whole heatedly with your analogy.

Going to tactic number two only assures that the GOP will get annihilated in the next 2 or 3 election cycles, and it's only going to lead to a massive pendulum swing where we keep moving from extreme left to extreme right, instead of consistently staying with middle ground. It's everything wrong with modern politics. The best option is reluctant compromise,but we instead resort to polarizing America.

Furthermore, I'm seeing more and more republicans advocating cutting for the sake of cutting, without thinking through the consequences. Cutting spending doesn't necessarily equate to cutting costs. A classic example is ripping on the public sector for public health initiatives and for wasting money on a census.

BucEyedPea
05-27-2012, 11:36 AM
Agree whole heatedly with your analogy.

Going to tactic number two only assures that the GOP will get annihilated in the next 2 or 3 election cycles, and it's only going to lead to a massive pendulum swing where we keep moving from extreme left to extreme right, instead of consistently staying with middle ground. It's everything wrong with modern politics. The best option is reluctant compromise,but we instead resort to polarizing America.

Furthermore, I'm seeing more and more republicans advocating cutting for the sake of cutting, without thinking through the consequences. Cutting spending doesn't necessarily equate to cutting costs. A classic example is ripping on the public sector for public health initiatives and for wasting money on a census.

:spock: Hello RINO!

BucEyedPea
05-27-2012, 11:45 AM
So now we know, Donger is actually a Democrat in Republican clothing since he's outed himself as following Obama's economics too.

La literatura
05-27-2012, 04:12 PM
So, I see two statements:

1) Obama has spent too much.

2) Cutting $1 trillion from the budget is a bad idea during an already anemic recovery.

I don't disagree with either. #2 is like cutting off the head to cure the headache. But, that's a Paul idea, isn't it?

You do disagree with cutting the federal budget?

chiefzilla1501
05-27-2012, 05:28 PM
:spock: Hello RINO!

Businesses typically slash cost based on Roi. They invest big bucks to stuff like wellness programs and employee perks because they feel the benefit is worth the cost.

I am a firm believer in roi as well. Too many conservatives I talk to care more about cost than roi.

chiefzilla1501
05-27-2012, 05:29 PM
You do disagree with cutting the federal budget?

I think he's saying even if it's for the greater good you can't just slash everything at once. That's nice in theory.

Donger
05-27-2012, 05:33 PM
You do disagree with cutting the federal budget?

Yes, I absolutely do. But not $1 trillion per year now. That's just too much. Once Romney is on office and the economy re-starts, I'd be happy to examine such a massive change.

Chocolate Hog
05-27-2012, 05:35 PM
Yes, I absolutely do. But not $1 trillion per year now. That's just too much. Once Romney is on office and the economy re-starts, I'd be happy to examine such a massive change.

Too much? ROFL

Donger
05-27-2012, 06:00 PM
Too much? ROFL

Yes, I think a 30% cut right is way too much.

Chocolate Hog
05-28-2012, 06:43 PM
Yes, I think a 30% cut right is way too much.

You realize we're about 15 trillion in debt right?

Donger
05-28-2012, 07:23 PM
You realize we're about 15 trillion in debt right?

Yes, horribly aware. But, like I wrote, that approach is like cutting off the head to cure the headache. IMO, you have to have a healthy economy before enacting such massive cuts. Once that happens under President Romney, I'll be all for 20% across the board cuts, as I have stated before.

Direckshun
05-29-2012, 12:31 AM
I'm obviously pretty sure that Obama will win a second term.

But I don't see enough talent on the DNP horizon to believe Democrats can keep the White House after that.

In which case, it will be incredibly amusing to see the Republican Party bend over backwards again to chase down centrist, Keynesian theory with plenty of redistributionof wealth. Which they could have done the past four years, and the next four years, if they weren't so partisan they simply decided to take the ball and go home.