I guess the only things that work are the things in the past. No sense trying anything new....it's not been tried yet. :idunno:

 

What exactly hasn't been tried yet? Throwing money at the problem sure has.

I'm not sure that anyone is being scared by what the President says. Personally, I take comfort that someone in Washington really does see what many Americans are REALLY living. That is quite a change from the last several decades. I think that contrary to your assertion that people fear the truth, they take comfort in knowing that the truth isn't being trivialized.

 

 

Consumer Confidence is a very important part of our economy. When people are "scared" about the current economy, they spend less. That creates a contraction in the economy.

 

You and I really can't debate this any further because I can't get past your assertion that no one is being scared by the President's comments.

 

If you don't think that negative economic comments by the President can cause decreased Consumer Confidence, then nothing I can say will matter.

 

Consumer Confidence is at an all-time low according to Rasmussen Reports:

 

The Rasmussen Consumer Index, which measures consumer confidence on a daily basis, fell two points on Monday to 55.5. That’s the lowest level of confidence ever recorded in the seven-year history of the Consumer Index, and the fourth time a new low has been set this month.

 

Read the full article.

Consumer Confidence is a very important part of our economy. When people are "scared" about the current economy, they spend less. That creates a contraction in the economy.

 

You and I really can't debate this any further because I can't get past your assertion that no one is being scared by the President's comments.

 

If you don't think that negative economic comments by the President can cause decreased Consumer Confidence, then nothing I can say will matter.

 

Consumer Confidence is at an all-time low according to Rasmussen Reports:

 

The Rasmussen Consumer Index, which measures consumer confidence on a daily basis, fell two points on Monday to 55.5. That’s the lowest level of confidence ever recorded in the seven-year history of the Consumer Index, and the fourth time a new low has been set this month.

 

Read the full article.

 

 

 

Let me throw this out...people have less to spend. Of course they think the economy is getting worse! Prices haven't come down on anything, but jobs have been lost, many more teeter on elimination, credit is pretty much impossible to get unless your credit is already impeccable. Why would there be confidence on the consumer side?

My liberal professor in my Political Science class was discussing just this today. She said that if the government is telling everyone how terrible the economy is, it's only going to make this worse. They have to instill hope in the people, not create fear. The fact that a pretty extreme Obama supporter would say this, tells me all I need to know about the situation.

Let me throw this out...people have less to spend. Of course they think the economy is getting worse! Prices haven't come down on anything, but jobs have been lost, many more teeter on elimination, credit is pretty much impossible to get unless your credit is already impeccable. Why would there be confidence on the consumer side?

 

If you don't have good credit, you shouldn't be given any credit. That's part of the reason we're in this mess to begin with.

If you don't have good credit, you shouldn't be given any credit. That's part of the reason we're in this mess to begin with.

 

 

OK. What about the other issues I pointed out?

OK. What about the other issues I pointed out?

 

Honestly, I don't think it makes a difference. The market will work itself out if we let it. Some probably won't make it through the down turn, which is unfortunate, but that's life.

Honestly, I don't think it makes a difference. The market will work itself out if we let it. Some probably won't make it through the down turn, which is unfortunate, but that's life.

 

 

Well, be thankful you have your job. I'll pass along your comments to some of my coworkers who are struggling to feed their families because their hours have been cut from full time to 2 or 3 days a week for the last 3 months. I'm sure it will boost their confidence much more than anything the President could say. I'll also tell them that things aren't as bad as they seem. The President and media are just blowing it out of proportion.

Well, be thankful you have your job. I'll pass along your comments to some of my coworkers who are struggling to feed their families because their hours have been cut from full time to 2 or 3 days a week for the last 3 months. I'm sure it will boost their confidence much more than anything the President could say. I'll also tell them that things aren't as bad as they seem. The President and media are just blowing it out of proportion.

 

 

Like I said, it's unfortunate that some won't make it through it, but it is what it is. You may take that as me being heartless or whatever else, but I'm just being a realist. Not everyone will survive the current economic situation. Economics boils down to survival of the fittest.

Like I said, it's unfortunate that some won't make it through it, but it is what it is. You may take that as me being heartless or whatever else, but I'm just being a realist. Not everyone will survive the current economic situation. Economics boils down to survival of the fittest.

 

 

Easy to be a realist when your own situation doesn't leave you hungry.

I remember what happened and I remember who was leading our country at the time as well.

 

I also remember the words "terrorism" and "terrorist" being used to get many things done that the Bush administration wanted.

 

Well O is leading the country right now during the economic crisis. Should he get all of the blame for the current state of the economy? Call Bush a terrible President all you want, but the country is a safer place today than it was in 2001 when he took office. His spending was out of control, but the safety of the nation was good after Sept of his first year.

Well O is leading the country right now during the economic crisis. Should he get all of the blame for the current state of the economy? Call Bush a terrible President all you want, but the country is a safer place today than it was in 2001 when he took office. His spending was out of control, but the safety of the nation was good after Sept of his first year.

 

O was not in office when our economy started to get bad, was he?

 

I never called Bush a terrible President, at least not in this thread.

Consumer Confidence is a very important part of our economy. When people are "scared" about the current economy, they spend less. That creates a contraction in the economy.

This part is definitely true. Fear causes people to avoid spending or investing. All they do is hoard and hide. That's not good for the health of any economy. I saw a poll today wherein something like 79% of respondents said things were generally bad for the country. But in the same poll, an equal amount of people said things were generally good for them personally right now.

 

Yes, the president needs to take a realistic view of the situation and convey that to the people. But he has to counter-balance it with a healthy dose of optimism. He has to give the people a sense that the light, no matter how faint it may be, is at least visible in the distance.

 

History shows that, even if he has a plan that is certain to work, without the hope of getting anywhere, no one will want to follow. If Moses hadn't inspired hope in the midst of a dire circumstance, the Israelites would never have made it out of servitude.

 

So really, all Barrack has to do is burn some bushes, get a handwritten note from God, and maybe part the Atlantic -- or at least maybe a Great Lake or something.

Edited February 24, 200917 yr by Birdsfan

I wonder, instead of Obama being a realist about the situation, had he been very positive and cheery about the economic crisis, how many would accuse him of being a cheerleader and not serious about a solution? I think it's pretty much a lose/lose situation for him for some people. No matter what he does, it will be wrong.

If nothing else, at least FDR's "fireside chats" had the effect of calming the populace. What is to be gained at this point by having the President scare the populace?

 

The best way to deal with economic hard times is to let the market work itself out. Government intervention has proven to not work in the past.

2 Good Posts :thumb:

I guess the only things that work are the things in the past. No sense trying anything new....it's not been tried yet. :idunno:

It was tried- the New Deal- and it arguably led to an ~16 year period where the economy did not get back to where it was supposed to be.

I wonder, instead of Obama being a realist about the situation, had he been very positive and cheery about the economic crisis, how many would accuse him of being a cheerleader and not serious about a solution? I think it's pretty much a lose/lose situation for him for some people. No matter what he does, it will be wrong.

I started to type "good point", and in some respects you are right, but where is the message of Hope that we saw from his campaign? Now it seems that everything is dire- notice President Obama and Madame Pelosi both making definitive statements on how many people WOULD lose their jobs without a bill. Everything is so gloom and doom unless the government does something. Where is the message of hope? I guess RM sees it, and maybe you do too, I guess I don't.

 

Then again, I've been periodically buying stocks recently, so I guess I am hearing about the message of hope. :lol: