Obama - Among The Most Economically Progressive Presidents In History

[TomCADem]

There is a lot of criticism from the left that President Obama's stimulus plan was too small. While this may be correct in an absolute sense, in a relative sense compared to other federal efforts to stimulate the economy, it is among the largest in our Nation's history, and an impressive achievement in light of the willingness of Republicans to actively work to damage our Nation's economy for political benefit.

In other words, just because the stimulus plan could have been larger does not mean that it was small or that it was not progressive.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/02/13/us-usa-stimulus-rank-sb-idUSTRE51C5LG20090213

President Barack Obama is pressing a $787 billion economic recovery package to restore growth and end a year-long U.S. recession despite Republican reservations about the balance of new spending and tax cuts.

* * *
A $787 billion stimulus plan would represent about 5.5 percent of the $14.3 trillion U.S. economy, which was the size of U.S. gross domestic product last year, measured in current, not inflation-adjusted, dollars.

It is about 1.7 times the size of the largest U.S. budget deficit in history -- $455 billion -- recorded in fiscal 2008.

It also represents about 27 percent of the $2.979 trillion in total outlays by the federal government in fiscal 2008, or about 32 percent of total federal receipts.

* * *
MARSHALL PLAN

Obama's package is also slightly larger in relative terms than the 1947 Marshall Plan to rebuild post-war Germany, which back then cost about $13 billion over four years. The total amount disbursed under the Marshall Plan was equivalent to roughly 5.4 percent of U.S. gross national product in 1947, Harvard historian Niall Ferguson wrote in The New Yorker magazine last year.

ROOSEVELT'S NEW DEAL

The Obama stimulus package compares in size as a percentage of GDP to the First New Deal of President Franklin Roosevelt but is significantly smaller as a reflection of the government budget at the time.

[mmonk]

1. Can I have some of what you're smoking?

[Horse with no Name]

2. Obama does nothing "progressive" but the media whores will do everything they can

to blame "liberal" "progressives" etc so they can keep the stank off their own handlers conservative policies.

[MannyGoldstein]

3. Unlike the New Deal, Obama's stimulus was trickle-down

And we know how efficient and effective that is...

[TomCADem]

11. In 1936, Roosevelt Ran On A Platform That He Would Try To Reduce, If Not Eliminate, the Deficit!

Roosevelt won the election by a landslide —and true to his promise, government spending was cut significantly in 1937 and 1938, and taxes were raised to 'fund' the new Social Security program even as the U.S. clawed its way out of the Great Depression. Yet, when we look back in history, we hail Roosevelt as this amazing progressive who never bowed to political pressure by trying show his credentials as a fiscal conservative. Also, consider that Roosevelt was embarking on his austerity plan when Democrats still controlled Congress and unemployment was still over 9 percent.

If DU were around back then, we would probably be calling Roosevelt a corporate sell out and closet Tea Bagger in 1936.

[MannyGoldstein]

12. That was a huge fuckup on his part, and sent the economy

crashing back down. He never again embraced rightest policies, to my knowledge.

In FDR's first term, unemployment dropped by 40% and GDP grew an average of 8% per year.

[TomCADem]

18. True, But It Shows That Even A Great President Like Roosevelt...

...Will bend to the political realities of his time by adopting conservative fiscal rhetoric, and even adopting austerity measures in the midst of the Great Depression. In Roosevelt's case, he did it with a Democratic Congress.

[MannyGoldstein]

20. But that was an aberration, not the norm

And FDR never, to my knowledge pushed further to the fringe right than the Republicans did, e.g. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1631283">Rep. Conyers: Obama Demanded Social Security Cuts--Not GOP

[TomCADem]

26. Aberration? That Was Two Straight Elections In A Row for Roosevelt!

Under that logic, I guess we should hold off on giving President Obama a hard time about adopting conservative fiscal rhetoric until he runs for his third term?

Again, in the midst of the Great Depression, and with Democrats holding large majorities of Congress, President Roosevelt twice ran on a balanced budget platform in response to political pressure.

If DU was around back in the 1930s, the left would be dismissing him as a right wing tool.

[EFerrari]

4. Going forward with a stimulus plan that the majority of credible economists tell you

is too small is not progressiveness but timidity.

[Tarheel_Dem]

5. K&R. And apparently 80%-85% of progressives agree.

:kick:

[EFerrari]

17. LOL. It's now 71% except on DU where it is 300%.

[Tarheel_Dem]

23. Take it up with Gallup. Not interested in dueling polls with you.

August 1, 2011

Obama Weekly Approval at 42%; Liberal Support Remains High
Liberal Democrats give Obama 83% approval rating

"Obama's support among Americans who identify themselves as both liberal and Democratic was 83% last week, little changed from previous weeks and slightly higher relative to Obama's overall approval rating than it has been historically".

http://www.gallup.com/poll/148760/obama-weekly-approval-liberal-support-remains-high.aspx

:hi:

[EFerrari]

33. This is Gallup:

Saturday, Aug. 6, 2011
10:14 a.m. PDT


Liberal approval of Obama stood at 72%, about 30 points above the general approval number and a touch higher than the 28-point advantage that Obama has averaged with liberals, according to the poll.

http://www.latimes.com/news/la-pn-obama-liberals-gallup-poll-20110803,0,2554797.story?track=rss

[Tarheel_Dem]

35. Thank You. From your link, I found this interesting.

The article's headline:....

"Liberals still in Obama's corner, latest Gallup poll shows"

snip....

"Liberals, the small but often important electoral group, seem to be holding fast in their support for President Obama, according to the latest Gallup poll being circulated by Democrats."

snip....

"According to most polls, about 20% of voters is a liberal, substantially less than the about 40% who identify themselves as conservative".

snip....

"Liberals are also notoriously diverse in ideology and are often seen as ineffective in governing — even by friends and allies. As H.L. Mencken noted last century: “The Liberals have many tails, and chase them all.”

:rofl:

Apparently, my numbers were for "ALL" Democrats, but who the hell knows what "progressive" means anymore? :shrug: I think H.L. Mencken's statement suits this situation perfectly. :hi:

[EFerrari]

38. Progressives know what the term means.

And Mencken himself, in addition to being a notorious anti-semite and racist, was no measure of liberalism.

:rofl:

[Tarheel_Dem]

39. Re: Mencken? You know what they say about a stopped clock.

;)

[Tarheel_Dem]

37. Hey! This is the same poll I cited. Liberal =72%; Liberal "Democrat"=83%.

This article was just written on Aug 5th, but the poll was posted on Aug 1st. Take another look. I thought this conversation was about progressive Democrats. I don't really count the other "parties" on the left, as they aren't reliable Democratic voters.

:http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Job-Approval-Center.aspx

[Inuca]

29. Actually it look slike on DU

it's closer to 10%

[Marr]

6. LMFAO. You must either be very young or very comfortable.

How absurd. His "stimulus" was not only too small, it was largely comprised of tax cuts.

C'mon-- Obama regularly uses the right-wing frame of the economy. He uses their vocabulary and their arguments. He pushes their policy (always under the guise of "compromise", of course).

[hfojvt]

10. okay I don't feel like looking it up

but I think it was only about 40% tax cuts. A good portion of those tax cuts was the AMT patch - the one that generally happens every year anyway. A good part of the rest of it was the "making work pay credit" which was $400 per person AND refundable and it phased out at higher incomes. Unfortunately it also came with its own paperwork - schedule M, and it was abandoned in favor of the much more regressive payroll tax cut.

[GOPBasher]

13. Umm, his tax cuts were not tax cuts for the rich, but tax cuts for the poor and middle

class. He also increased the earned income tax credit as part of the stimulus, which helps lower income people a great deal. Not all tax cuts are created equal. His tax cuts were good because they helped lower and middle income people; Bush's were bad because they unnecessarily subtracted revenue to help billionaires.

[TomCADem]

15. FDR Ran On A Balanced Budget Platform In 1932 and in 1936!

Can you imagine what would have happened if DU is around?

OMG! THAT RW'R ROOSEVELT IS NOT SETTING THE TERMS OF THE DEBATE! HE KEEPS TALKING ABOUT BALANCING THE BUDGET!

In comparison, President Obama sounds like a complete socialist, since you are not seeing the President saying that we are going to balance the budget any time soon.

[brentspeak]

7. Over $1 trillion in spending cuts that will decimate education and social programs = "progressive"

:rofl:

[TomCADem]

16. Why Did Roosevelt Let Them Set The Terms Of The Debate!

Why did Roosevelt twice run on a balanced budget platform even in the midst of the Great Depression?

[Ruby the Liberal]

8. Are they plagiarizing The Onion?

[MichiganVote]

9. Yep, a regular clear skies initiative,

[mmonk]

14. The problem with that is the New Deal wasn't a stimulus

but a series of work programs (which worked as a stimulus) and regulations plus the Wagner Act (Unions). The piece is talking about cost comparisons. It is true that in today's dollars, the New Deal was about $500 billion but it wasn't tax cut oriented to a total of 40% of the cost as was this stimulus and contained the above elements. Also, it added Social Security.

[OHdem10]

19. SS Medicare Medicaid are some of the most fiscally important

programs.

I never faulted Obama with Stimulus. The Deficit Hawks
in our party and Republicans cut some of the funds.

[babylonsister]

21. Tried to rec'd. Is Reuters lying? nt

[EFerrari]

34. Reuter's isn't making this ridiclous claim, the OP is. n/t

[Dad Infinitum]

22. As in neo-liberal

Yes

[grahamhgreen]

24. Stimulus without the 'buy American' provision meant that China got much of it.

[markpkessinger]

25. The folly of judging how "progressive" something is merely by the price tag

To look at the overall dollar value of the stimulus as a measure of how "progressive" it was is simplistic and absurd. Considering approximately 40% of it consisted of non-stimulative tax cuts, and considering it was by most economists' analyses too small in any case, claiming that it was "more progressive" than the New Deal is absurd on its face.

[Shandris]

27. February, 2009.

[woo me with science]

28. Good god.

[Lyric]

30. Handing out money is not progressive in and of itself.

Giving money to the LOWER class is progressive, like the New Deal did. The size is not as important as where the money GOES. In particular, creating secure working-class jobs that pay enough to support a family on, and increasing public assistance to offset the recession, with the understanding that poor people will spend that money and stimulate the economy more effectively than the well-off ever could--THOSE are progressive fiscal policies.

The Obama Doctrine is just a continuation of the same old failed "trickle down" policies of the 80's.

[Odin2005]

31. BULLSHIT!!!

[KG]

32. some days, DU is pure comedy gold...

[L0oniX]

36. 100% total horse shit.

[roamer65]

40. Sadly, I think I have found the reason why I probably will vote for him again.

Only one reason. He pisses off the RW freaks so damn much I want them to have 4 more years of him.