Obama and the economy

[Run To State]

Do me favor and either add something intelligent to the conversation or stay out of the thread.

Amen! It's been a long time. But it's like being in 8th grade again sometimes. :lol:

[woodsrider]

Unless I'm having a problem with my screen I saw one question:

 

What has the POTUS done to help us avoid $140 a barrel oil?

 

So you are either asking directly how policy impacts the price of a barrel OR you're asking are there other factors that indirectly lead to a different price of a barrel.

If you think we are stuck with oil and oil only then I guess we better figure out a way to fix the price per barrel or live with it. If you believe we can explore other energy options that would lead to supplement our needs which would lead to current oil reserves lasting long therefore lowering the price of oil then what would that be. What about expanding drilling in the US? While it wouldn't be "cheap" oil it would add to the world supply and at the very least keep us from seeing $140 again. When it comes to oil I don't think anything can be off the table. However Obama has done just that. He has ensured options are off the table. When it comes to alternative energy he hasn't done enough. What he has done seems to be nothing more then payoffs to supporters.

[woodsrider]

THIS we agree on.

 

Amen! It's been a long time. But it's like being in 8th grade again sometimes. :lol:

I've never used the ignore feature and told myself I never would. He's about to make me lie to myself.

[Run To State]

I've never used the ignore feature and told myself I never would. He's about to make me lie to myself.

I feel ya, I may join you.

[Michael Corleone]

I'm not real sure what indicators that you are looking for but we all know what was going on when Obama took office. The Dow has doubled since he took office and there have been job gains every month for over 2 years. Unemployment while not under 8% as he promised is trending that direction. If you are hoping he's going to turn into a trickle down guy you shouldn't hold your breath. He believes in Keynesian economics and about every effort he's made has been blocked by the most uncooperative congress ever. Your talking points don't hold any weight unless you can come up with something that President Obama has accomplished that has not improved the economy. What economic indicators have gotten worse the last 3 years. Is it the economy that was shedding jobs at a rate of about 200k a month when he took office that is now adding jobs? The Dow that has doubled? Which one?

 

I want to make sure I understand you. You want to give him credit for the DOW doubling and not blame him for gas doubling. Let's see gas dipped right before he took office, well here's a news flash the Dow took a pretty good beating right before he took office and actually the Dow has doubled since March 9, 2008 2 months after he took office.

[Clyde]

If you think we are stuck with oil and oil only then I guess we better figure out a way to fix the price per barrel or live with it. If you believe we can explore other energy options that would lead to supplement our needs which would lead to current oil reserves lasting long therefore lowering the price of oil then what would that be. What about expanding drilling in the US? While it wouldn't be "cheap" oil it would add to the world supply and at the very least keep us from seeing $140 again. When it comes to oil I don't think anything can be off the table. However Obama has done just that. He has ensured options are off the table. When it comes to alternative energy he hasn't done enough. What he has done seems to be nothing more then payoffs to supporters.

 

I think the POTUS has tried to figure out alternatives. I am guessing it's not a quick solution.

 

I'm not sure if "expensive oil" being added to the supply is going to have much of an impact. As I've said numerous times WHEN the economy gets going the price is really going to go up.

 

None of the "options" that you mention are going to have an impact that has any teeth to it.

 

Have we had any other presidents who have made an effort at alternative? It's not like we just found out in 2008 that oil supply was going to be a problem.

 

Give me some real details that we can debate.

[woodsrider]

I think the POTUS has tried to figure out alternatives. I am guessing it's not a quick solution.

 

I'm not sure if "expensive oil" being added to the supply is going to have much of an impact. As I've said numerous times WHEN the economy gets going the price is really going to go up.

 

None of the "options" that you mention are going to have an impact that has any teeth to it.

 

Have we had any other presidents who have made an effort at alternative? It's not like we just found out in 2008 that oil supply was going to be a problem.

 

Give me some real details that we can debate.

While you say real expensive, what do you mean. What I've read estimates that oil shale could be profitable at $90ish a barrel with current technology and with future developments possible getting down to $70ish. With oil shale how much could you add to the world reserves?

 

As far as other options I agree that it isn't a quick fix but what has he done other then thrown some money at failing companies that are now bankrupt?

 

If you want to disguss what other presidents have done I'm not interested. Other presidents aren't in office now and not asking me to give them 4 more years.

[Clyde]

While you say real expensive, what do you mean. What I've read estimates that oil shale could be profitable at $90ish a barrel with current technology and with future developments possible getting down to $70ish. With oil shale how much could you add to the world reserves?

 

As far as other options I agree that it isn't a quick fix but what has he done other then thrown some money at failing companies that are now bankrupt?

 

If you want to disguss what other presidents have done I'm not interested. Other presidents aren't in office now and not asking me to give them 4 more years.

 

Shale is interesting but what does that have to do with the POTUS?

 

Secondly, most reports I read say that in order to meet the growing demand of world oil consumption the price of a barrel needs to stay up around $100 or $110 or it's not profitable for the oil companies to extract and produce. If the price gets down to $60 or so there is no financial incentive for the oil companies.

 

It's a double-edged sword.

 

As to previous POTUS it's a bit disingenuous to harp on one POTUS when the problem has been out there for quite a while.

[Michael Corleone]

MC, here's the problem with the above. The economy issue is a perfect debate to have and a perfect weapon against the President. It is what Mr Romney should hammer.

 

The problem with your post is it's filled with gibberish and no real facts. What are we supposed to debate from what you've posted?

 

You seriously believe the POTUS does not care about the economy? You seriously believe his sole goal is to make everyone dependent on the govt? Come on. That's crap and incapable of being supported.

 

Give us something to debate here.

 

I'm not looking for a debate or an argument. It is my impression that he shows very little concern about the economy. His campaign ads seem to focus strickly on why Romney is a bad guy and not on the biggest issue he faces. To be fair I don't think Romney has an ads that concentrate on the economy either. Maybe Obama is doing the right thing not bringing attention to it and I'm really not trying to be a smart--- when I say that.

 

Outside of the campaign I really haven't seen any policies that anyone would consider economic friendly. Outside of the stimulus what attempts has he made to make the economy better? Add to that he wants to raise taxes and shackle business owners with his healthcare bill and I just don't get it. The only explaination I have is he really doesn't care about the economy. I honestly believe that 8% unemployment and 2% GDP growth is ok with him.

 

So there you go Clyde, no real facts other that the economy isn't growing and unemployment isn't coming down and he continues to spend money he doesn't have. Of course I thought all of those things were common knowledge. The rest is my opinion, just like it's my opinion that Joker Phillips is a bad football coach. In both cases the only proof I have is their records.

 

And no I don't think the economy is a major concern of his outside of it being a major re-election issue. If he is re-elected all of his proposed policies are anti economic growth, Period. If he wants to growth the economy he would lower taxes, stop spending, and ecourage that idiot Bernanke to raise interest rates to their real level and for heaven sake tell him to drop QE3.

[Clyde]

I'm not looking for a debate or an argument. It is my impression that he shows very little concern about the economy. His campaign ads seem to focus strickly on why Romney is a bad guy and not on the biggest issue he faces. To be fair I don't think Romney has an ads that concentrate on the economy either. Maybe Obama is doing the right thing not bringing attention to it and I'm really not trying to be a smart--- when I say that.

 

Outside of the campaign I really haven't seen any policies that anyone would consider economic friendly. Outside of the stimulus what attempts has he made to make the economy better? Add to that he wants to raise taxes and shackle business owners with his healthcare bill and I just don't get it. The only explaination I have is he really doesn't care about the economy. I honestly believe that 8% unemployment and 2% GDP growth is ok with him.

 

So there you go Clyde, no real facts other that the economy isn't growing and unemployment isn't coming down and he continues to spend money he doesn't have. Of course I thought all of those things were common knowledge. The rest is my opinion, just like it's my opinion that Joker Phillips is a bad football coach. In both cases the only proof I have is their records.

 

And no I don't think the economy is a major concern of his outside of it being a major re-election issue. If he is re-elected all of his proposed policies are anti economic growth, Period. If he wants to growth the economy he would lower taxes, stop spending, and ecourage that idiot Bernanke to raise interest rates to their real level and for heaven sake tell him to drop QE3.

 

 

MC, that's fine if your point is just to throw out guesses as to what's important. I would never think ANY POTUS is not concerned about the economy but that's me.

 

Lowering taxes has not shown to spur the economy. Why do it now?

[Michael Corleone]

I think the POTUS has tried to figure out alternatives. I am guessing it's not a quick solution.

 

I hope you are not referring to windmills because these and other alternatives have proven to be a huge waste of green money.

 

I'll give you an example of how the windmill farms work. Do you realize that enviromentalist have mangaged to get the windmill farms in WV shutdown between the hours of 8pm and 4am due to the danger to bats? On top of that it is my impression that the peak wind hours are between 8pm and 5 am. Makes sense doesn't it?

[woodsrider]

Shale is interesting but what does that have to do with the POTUS?

 

Secondly, most reports I read say that in order to meet the growing demand of world oil consumption the price of a barrel needs to stay up around $100 or $110 or it's not profitable for the oil companies to extract and produce. If the price gets down to $60 or so there is no financial incentive for the oil companies.

 

It's a double-edged sword.

 

As to previous POTUS it's a bit disingenuous to harp on one POTUS when the problem has been out there for quite a while.

As far as shale goes, and correct me if I am wrong, but the feds own most of the land it is on. If so isn't it up to them if anyone gets a crack at it? If not nevermind and forget I brought up shale.

 

I will go on to the limited drilling Obama has put in place. While it is a long term fix it definitely hurts short term. As to previous POTUS's it goes back to your guy does so my can argument. Mistakes by past administration don't give this one a pass. If you want to rail on Bush or Clinton let's start a new thread.

[woodsrider]

MC, that's fine if your point is just to throw out guesses as to what's important. I would never think ANY POTUS is not concerned about the economy but that's me.

Lowering taxes has not shown to spur the economy. Why do it now?

That is not entirely true. You could maybe argue it to be coincidence but there is data to support it. The Bush cuts are one example.

[woodsrider]

For the record I'm not saying we need to cut taxes.

[Clyde]

That is not entirely true. You could maybe argue it to be coincidence but there is data to support it. The Bush cuts are one example.

 

Clarify, please. Are you saying the Bush tax cuts did spur the economy?