Hoover's policies = Hoover's results (re: economy re-plummeting)

[MannyGoldstein]

GDP growth is again dropping, jobs are again dropping, confidence is again dropping, housing prices are plummeting...

As soon as President Obama was inaugurated, he by-and-large adopted the failed policies of Herbert Hoover - ferocious bail outs for bankers, some scraps to working Americans. For a great article reviewing the parallels between Hoover and Obama, you might want to read the prescient:

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/07/0082562?redirect=1982284879">Barack Hoover Obama: The best and the brightest blow it again (Harpers Magazine, July 2009)

Hoover's policies have begat Hoover's results. No surprise there.

Over the past few months, Obama and his Very Serious People have finally changed blueprints, from Hoover to FDR. Unfortunately, they've moved to 1937 FDR, not 1933 FDR. From 1933 through 1936, FDR mostly followed Liberal policies, and working Americans won big: unemployment dropped almost in half, and the economy grew at 8% per year. In 1937, FDR thought it was time to turn to budget-cutting, and the economy started tanking again: this is what we can now look forward to.

The future ain't looking good for us working folks. But the bankers are making staggering profits again, so I suppose all is well for the Very Serious People.

[provis99]

1. well, you could always vote Republican.

[MannyGoldstein]

2. Or candidates could stop lying about what they'll do in office

Which would be my preference, of course.

[hootinholler]

4. Ah the wearisome canard

At least I think it's canard I'm looking for.

-Hoot

[Vanje]

6. You know......

The argument that 'we don't suck as much as they do' , weakens at times like this.
These times are fucking bad for human beings!

It IS the economy, Stupid.

Most of us don't spend ,much time worrying about Obama's re-election. We're just trying to eat and keep our roof.

I'm doing just that. Its hard. Hardest time since 1929.
I dont expect the GOP to give a shit, but I'm very disappointed when the Democratic president dos'nt seem to give a shit.

[progressoid]

12. Ouch! What a incisive comment.

Or not.

[dflprincess]

21. Why bother?

We can get Republican policies by voting for the Democrat.

[MannyGoldstein]

3. Ah, the voracious and voiceless unrec-ers

http://www.dailykos.com/tv/w/000499/">I welcome their hatred.

[Vanje]

5. K and R nt

[BREMPRO]

7. sorry folks .. but this is NOT 1937,, or 1933... its 2011.

the world has changed..low skill jobs are not coming back..no matter what we do. we need a new strategy.. adoption of a pro-intellectual culture, better education, higher skilled manufacturing, best practices of the world..we are doomed if we continue with our parochial thinking about our future economy- either wishing for high paying union jobs, or giving elite bailouts and taxcuts.. neither are going to work. the world has changed and we are not going back...

good realistic appraisal and future vision by fareed Zakaria

http://www.fareedzakaria.com/home/Articles/Entries/2011/5/19_Are_Americas_Best_Days_Behind_Us_2_3.html

[MannyGoldstein]

14. "History Doesn't Repeat Itself, But It Rhymes"

-Attributed to Mark Twain

[dflprincess]

24. We have an infrastructure that is crumbling

spending money on that instead of endless war would create jobs. In fact, spending money on anything but war would create jobs and allow us to achieve the items mentioned in your post.

[Starry Messenger]

8. k&r

[Ramulux]

9. That article should be required reading

I read it a while back and it put so many things in perspective about Obama.

[OhioChick]

10. Rec n/t

[unkachuck]

11. K&R....n/t

[ProSense]

13. "Like Hoover, he is bound to fail."

<...>

Much like Herbert Hoover, Barack Obama is a man attempting to realize a stirring new vision of his society without cutting himself free from the dogmas of the past—without accepting the inevitable conflict. Like Hoover, he is bound to fail.

<...>

Obama should not deceive himself into thinking that such interest-group politics can be banished any more than can the cycles of Wall Street. It is not too late for him to change direction and seize the radical moment at hand. But for the moment, just like another very good man, Barack Obama is moving prudently, carefully, reasonably toward disaster.

What makes this nearly two-year-old article relevant now? Is it the fact that the economy was pulled back from the brink and job creation this year has averaged 200,000 per month?

The article is predicting failure to pass a health care bill, and as we know, the bill passed.

Obama is "bound to fail" and is moving "toward disaster"? Does this mean his Presidency is a failure?

Really?

[MannyGoldstein]

15. Real unemployment is unchanged at almost 20%

20% of children live in poverty.

RomneyObamaCare is unaffordable, more people are without health insurance than ever before. And can you believe that the Administration told insurers they can hike another 10% this year without repercussions?

Endless wars with not point other than to no allow Republicans to say Democrats are wimps.

Are you thinking "Mission Accomplished"?

But the bankers... yes, they're doing great! The lowest tax burden on the wealthiest in more than 70 years, although taxes on the median American have doubled. And they'll keep doing great once we institute the 22% cut in Social Security benefits that Obama's hand-picked commission voted to recommend.

[ProSense]

16. "RomneyObamaCare"

Interesting!

"20% of children live in poverty. RomneyObamaCare is unaffordable, more people are without health insurance than ever before."

Obama's policies are responsible of the 20% of children living in poverty?

Just like Hoover?

Conflating doom!

[MannyGoldstein]

17. Obama bent over backwards for bankers, not for the poor and middle class

And here we are.

[ProSense]

18. "And here we are." And

facts:

Fewer 18- to- 26-Year-Olds in U.S. Uninsured in 2011

HHS to Reduce Premiums, Make it Easier for Americans with Pre-Existing Conditions to Get Health Insurance

Who's responsible for health-care fraud?

[MannyGoldstein]

19. I just love this stuff.

18-26 year olds are pretty healthy. Please provide the change in insured percentage in a group that has serious issues, say, 50-65. Or even everyone over 26. I'm guessing you won't provide those - you only provide seem to provide the Administration's version of "fair and balanced" numbers. but maybe you'll surprise us.

As to reducing premiums - that would be nice. Of course, Medicare for All or a public option would have cut costs by far, far more. Too bad Obama cut a secret back room deal with Pharma to eliminate those options before the fight had even begun.

$2.5 billion in health care fraud? I'm guessing that you realize that $2.5 billion is one-tenth of one percent of health care spending. We probably spend more on finger cots.

[ProSense]

20. Hmmmm?

18-26 year olds are pretty healthy. Please provide the change in insured percentage in a group that has serious issues, say, 50-65. Or even everyone over 26. I'm guessing you won't provide those - you only provide seem to provide the Administration's version of "fair and balanced" numbers. but maybe you'll surprise us.

As to reducing premiums - that would be nice. Of course, Medicare for All or a public option would have cut costs by far, far more. Too bad Obama cut a secret back room deal with Pharma to eliminate those options before the fight had even begun.

$2.5 billion in health care fraud? I'm guessing that you realize that $2.5 billion is one-tenth of one percent of health care spending. We probably spend more on finger cots.

So now you want to debate the degree to which things have change? The OP argument was that the health care bill would fail.

[dflprincess]

22. In reality, there was no health care bill - there was an insurance profit protection act

We needed a bill that would give us access to care; all we got was a mandate to hand money over to the very crooks who make their money by blocking access. Calling that scam the "Affordable Care Act" doesn't make it a health care bille - anymore than Bush's "Clear Skies Iniative" had anything to do with improving air quality.

[ProSense]

25. In reality,

there was a bill, see this video.

[slipslidingaway]

27. Exactly, the insurance companies knew their client base would shrink...

between the boomers who would begin to retire and the lack of affordability in the economic downturn. Guess nobody realized the boomers would begin to move to Medicare.

:crazy:

The insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies got what they wanted, a bill to mandate purchase of insurance (does not equal access to care) without any discussion of a national HC system favored by over two-thirds of citizens in various polls.

Bulk pricing for Medicare? Sold for ads by the pharmaceutical companies in support of a bill to mandate insurance.

It did have a few good items, to sell it to the people, while avoiding a discussions of a long term solution of HC for all. Now we need to tackle "entitlement spending" as Obama said in January 2009.

:(

[hifiguy]

34. +100

You are telling it like it IS, not as apologists wish it to be.

[MannyGoldstein]

30. You tell me if Obama's health insurance plan failed. 3 simple questions:

A few very simple questions that I seriously doubt you'll be able to answer - but perhaps you'll surprise me. These will tell us what we know of the overalll success or failure of the bill.

1. Obama said that he'd veto any health insurance reform bill that did not include a public option. Why didn't he stick to his word? Was it because, by his definition of health care reform, the bill failed to pass/
2. Are a higher or lower percentage of Americans covered by health insurance today compared to the day health insurance "reform" was passed?
3. Adjusting for standard inflation, are Americans paying more or less for health insurance compared to the day health insurance "reform" was passed?

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[slipslidingaway]

23. How's The Wealth Effect Workin' Out For Ya'?

charts at link
http://contraryinvestor.com/mo.htm

June 2011

"Although the numbers are not yet publicly available for 1Q of this year, the banks actually sold Treasuries very modestly in 4Q of 2010, so it was partial mission accomplished for the Fed in the period. But as we all know, bank lending has been anemic at best. This Fed intended outcome for the banks has not materialized. Although it’s just our perception, the banks used the money to trade the financial markets (remember that banking system excess reserves can be used as collateral for futures and derivatives contracts – how convenient). So in the absence of bank lending, just what else was QE2 supposed to have done to incite macro economic acceleration? Easy, it was to have sparked the fabled wealth effect among consumers.

...We have more than a fair amount of charts to come that we believe very much paint a picture of the character and reality of the wealth effect outcome so far into the current QE2 journey. Although we've covered retail sales many a time largely from a top down point of view, we'd like to drag you through a little chart driven bottom up look at the individual components of the retail space and just how they are contributing, or otherwise, to the so often glossed over top line numbers. If you ask us, they tell an important story of the character of the recovery of the consumer. Is the so-called wealth effect of higher equity prices translating into a greater level of discretionary spending as directly advocated by Bernanke? You'll remember the quote from the Washington Post op-ed piece by Bernanke the day after QE2 was officially announced:


And higher stock prices will boost consumer wealth and help increase confidence, which can also spur spending. Increased spending will lead to higher incomes and profits that, in a virtuous circle, will further support economic expansion.

Get it? In the master's own words boosting consumer wealth and spurring spending. Again, so how's that workin' out for ya Ben?

Let's start with a quick look at the current retail sales breakdown by sector..."

[JVS]

26. K&R

[girl gone mad]

28. k & r

it sucks being right all of the time, huh?

[inna]

31. K&R and see this:

http://www.zcommunications.org/the-coming-double-dip-recession-by-jack-rasmus

http://www.zcommunications.org/the-truth-about-the-american-economy-by-robert-reich

[dionysus]

32. unrec for posting a 2 year old article in your mission against obama.

[JoePhilly]

38. Obama's approval is up ... some one needs to try and knock it down.

So what if the article is 2 years old.

[MannyGoldstein]

40. Do you have a specific issue with the article?

Or do you not like things older than a certain date?

Thanks in advance for your concise and on-point response.

[MannyGoldstein]

39. Do you have an issue with any of the facts presented?

Or are you hoping to transcend facts?

[hifiguy]

33. The difference was that FDR quickly realized his error

and returned to more Keynsian policies - though it must be said FDR was never a fully committed Keynsian - and righted the ship. There is not one chance O will recognize the futility of playing nice with and basically caving in to the repukes.

[MannyGoldstein]

35. That was the genius of FDR

He tried things then adjusted as needed. Always with the 99% in mind, not the 1%.

[ProSense]

36. There was the

1937 slip up.

Krugman: 1937 in 2011?

Averting a crisis and keeping a recovery going requires cooperation by the WH and Congress. Even a WPA-style jobs bill requires Congressional approval.

No doubt if the Democrats still had a significant majority in the House, things would be running a bit more smoothly.

[hifiguy]

37. Indeed it was.

If X doesn't work, try Y. If Y doesn't work try Z. But for pete's sake DO something.

[abq e streeter]

41. I read this when it came out...Hoped for the best, but agreed with its premise

that this was a possible outcome, and haven't changed my mind.Better than a republican ? Of course; by light years, which is why I WILL vote to re-elect President Obama, and yes he's done some good things, but.... I agree with those who point out that "the other guys are even worse" is not a particularly inspirational campaign slogan.