Why Haven't Obama's Policies Helped The Economy?

[Dragon]

Better still, how about we just look at Bush and Obama's contrasting tax/regulatory policies along with their dramatically diverging resultant impacts on the labor market.

The difference between the tax and regulatory policies under Bush and Obama are quite trivial. In fact, the differences among the tax and regulatory policies of all U.S. presidents since and including Ronald Reagan are quite trivial. We have been heading in the same disastrous direction for thirty years.

Essentially, Obama is going in the same direction Bush was going. He talks a good game and makes a great speech, but he doesn't govern differently, or not so as you'd notice if you didn't look with a microscope.

As such, it really shouldn't surprise us that the economy, which sputtered along in lackluster fashion throughout Bush's two terms and spectacularly crashed at the end of his second, continues to sputter along with a weak and limp recovery under Obama. We're still going in the same direction, and it's the wrong one.

 

[The Rabbi]

Better still, how about we just look at Bush and Obama's contrasting tax/regulatory policies along with their dramatically diverging resultant impacts on the labor market.

The difference between the tax and regulatory policies under Bush and Obama are quite trivial. In fact, the differences among the tax and regulatory policies of all U.S. presidents since and including Ronald Reagan are quite trivial. We have been heading in the same disastrous direction for thirty years.

Essentially, Obama is going in the same direction Bush was going. He talks a good game and makes a great speech, but he doesn't govern differently, or not so as you'd notice if you didn't look with a microscope.

As such, it really shouldn't surprise us that the economy, which sputtered along in lackluster fashion throughout Bush's two terms and spectacularly crashed at the end of his second, continues to sputter along with a weak and limp recovery under Obama. We're still going in the same direction, and it's the wrong one.

Where do you get these fantasies?
Bush and Obama have diametrically opposed views. Their policies were very different. The list of differences would be quite long indeed. You are confusing his response to the 2008 crisis with the rest of his presidency.
Under Bush we had an unemployment rate that was about 6% at most, and more typically about 5. There was excellent job creation, and GDP grew at a respectable 3+% a year.
Under Obama we have had 9+% unemployment and records in all areas of poverty. The economy is growing at less than 1% a year, despite the largest fiscal stimulus ever.

Where do they teach this stuff?

 

[Dragon]

Where do you get these fantasies?
Bush and Obama have diametrically opposed views. Their policies were very different. The list of differences would be quite long indeed.

In that case, perhaps you'd care to give us at least a partial list of those differences. So far, you haven't described any differences at all, only differences in economic outcome, and of course the economy is impacted by much more than government policy and may differ from one administration to another for reasons having nothing to do with the administration's actions.

What is Obama actually doing that's so different from what Bush did? Take your eyes off the economic stats now and look only at government policies. Where did he make changes?

 

[expat_panama]

...Bush and Obama have diametrically opposed views. Their policies were very different. The list of differences would be quite long...

...What is Obama actually doing that's so different from what Bush did?

LOL! we already have and you're hiding from it:

...GW Bush, unemployment averaged 5.3% and annualized gdp growth was 3.5%. With Obama unemployment's been 9.3% and gdp growth is 1.6%...

 

[The Rabbi]

Where do you get these fantasies?
Bush and Obama have diametrically opposed views. Their policies were very different. The list of differences would be quite long indeed.

In that case, perhaps you'd care to give us at least a partial list of those differences. So far, you haven't described any differences at all, only differences in economic outcome, and of course the economy is impacted by much more than government policy and may differ from one administration to another for reasons having nothing to do with the administration's actions.

What is Obama actually doing that's so different from what Bush did? Take your eyes off the economic stats now and look only at government policies. Where did he make changes?

Geez, where to begin:
1) Chrysler and GM bankruptcies, overturned rule of law
2) Pushed health care bill that re-makes the entire health care system in this country
3) Cash for __________ programs that rob demand from the future
4) Targeted temporary tax breaks like the payroll tax cut
5) Giant stimulus bill with focus on "shovel ready jobs"
6) Moratorium on Gulf Drilling
7) EPA regulations run wild
8) Remake of the banking system under Dodd-Frank
9) New Comsumer Protection Bureau which is unaccountable to anyone.
etcetc

Is that enough?

 

[daveman]

By the Administration’s own count, 219 major regulations are impending—meaning 219 efforts that EACH are estimated to cost the economy more than $100 million per year. But President Obama—responding to a letter from House Speaker John Boehner (R–OH)—has personally identified what could be called the “Big Seven” because each of them would impose annual burdens over $1 billion. Collectively, these seven surpass $100 billion per year. So let’s call them the “Maleficent Seven.”
Obama defended the Seven in his letter to Boehner, claiming that his Administration just finished an exhaustive review of unnecessary regulations and weeded out old ones that were costing $2 billion per year (which Obama tried to magnify by saying it was “$10 billion over five years&#8221. But his team has already issued 75 major new regulations last year and this year, which are an annual $40 billion drag on the economy. So he’s already made things 20 times worse than his “improvements”—and that’s even before the Maleficent Seven kick in.
What are the Seven? Here’s the official chart appended by the White House to Obama’s letter:
Agency/Subagency Title Primary Annual Cost Estimate
EPA/AR Reconsideration of the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards $19-$90 Billion
EPA/AR National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units $10 Billion
EPA/AR National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Major Source Industrial, Commercial & Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters $3 Billion
EPA/SWER Standards for the Management of Coal Combustion Residuals Generated by Commercial Electric Power Producers $0.6-$1.5 Billion
DOT/NHTSA Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 111, Rearview Mirrors $2 Billion
DOT/FMCSA Electronic On-Board Recorders and Hours of Service Supporting Documents $2 Billion
DOT/FMCSA Hours of Service $1 Billion
Thousands of pages of other pending job-killing regulations are not even on the list, including those from Obamacare and the Dodd–Frank financial regulation.
The picture is clear. Businesses in America can’t afford to expand AND pay for the new regulations about to hit them. Hurricane Irene—and even Katrina—didn’t pack nearly the wallop that Hurricane Obama is bringing ashore. Companies already are evacuating the area of job creation.​

The Flood of Regulations from the Obama Administration

 

[The Rabbi]

I have a feeling that's the last we'll hear from Dragon until he repeats the same nonsense in the next thread. Stuck on stupid.

 

[expat_panama]

...What is Obama actually doing that's so different from what Bush did?

Maybe this could help--

 

[Foxfyre]

By the Administration’s own count, 219 major regulations are impending—meaning 219 efforts that EACH are estimated to cost the economy more than $100 million per year. But President Obama—responding to a letter from House Speaker John Boehner (R–OH)—has personally identified what could be called the “Big Seven” because each of them would impose annual burdens over $1 billion. Collectively, these seven surpass $100 billion per year. So let’s call them the “Maleficent Seven.”
Obama defended the Seven in his letter to Boehner, claiming that his Administration just finished an exhaustive review of unnecessary regulations and weeded out old ones that were costing $2 billion per year (which Obama tried to magnify by saying it was “$10 billion over five years”). But his team has already issued 75 major new regulations last year and this year, which are an annual $40 billion drag on the economy. So he’s already made things 20 times worse than his “improvements”—and that’s even before the Maleficent Seven kick in.
What are the Seven? Here’s the official chart appended by the White House to Obama’s letter:
Agency/Subagency Title Primary Annual Cost Estimate
EPA/AR Reconsideration of the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards $19-$90 Billion
EPA/AR National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units $10 Billion
EPA/AR National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Major Source Industrial, Commercial & Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters $3 Billion
EPA/SWER Standards for the Management of Coal Combustion Residuals Generated by Commercial Electric Power Producers $0.6-$1.5 Billion
DOT/NHTSA Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 111, Rearview Mirrors $2 Billion
DOT/FMCSA Electronic On-Board Recorders and Hours of Service Supporting Documents $2 Billion
DOT/FMCSA Hours of Service $1 Billion
Thousands of pages of other pending job-killing regulations are not even on the list, including those from Obamacare and the Dodd–Frank financial regulation.
The picture is clear. Businesses in America can’t afford to expand AND pay for the new regulations about to hit them. Hurricane Irene—and even Katrina—didn’t pack nearly the wallop that Hurricane Obama is bringing ashore. Companies already are evacuating the area of job creation.​

The Flood of Regulations from the Obama Administration

Last night Ian Punnett on "Coast to Coast" (radio) had some trucking company guys on talking about the new and impending transportation regulations that is absolutely devastaging them. That blind squirrel somebody mentioned certainly knows that any extra expense via taxes or regulation or fuel costs piled onto the transportation industry affects the cost and/or availability of EVERYTHING we buy.

 

[uscitizen]

Why? My Opinion is that he hired a bunch of academics to get ideas from instead of listening to people who work in business. In theory (get it ) this is a fine idea and could work but in reality it didn't work.

On top of this, after these advisors' ideas have been showed to fail in other countries and are now failing in our country Obama, through his new jobs plan, wants to double down on the same "solutions" we have been using for over 2 years now with no success.

This video explains it so perfectly.

I Don't Understand with Obama - YouTube

The stimulus smoothed out the decline a bit.
but as to why Obama's policies are not working? They are continuation of Bush policies.

 

[daveman]

What is Obama actually doing that's so different from what Bush did? Take your eyes off the economic stats now and look only at government policies.

You don't get to decide what cards are in the deck, kid.

The stats show Obama has royally screwed the economy. There is no credible way to deny this.

But that won't stop you.

 

[daveman]

I have a feeling that's the last we'll hear from Dragon until he repeats the same nonsense in the next thread. Stuck on stupid.

No, he'll be back, insisting we're all stupid because we don't agree with him that Obama is the bestest President evar!!

 

[daveman]

By the Administration’s own count, 219 major regulations are impending—meaning 219 efforts that EACH are estimated to cost the economy more than $100 million per year. But President Obama—responding to a letter from House Speaker John Boehner (R–OH)—has personally identified what could be called the “Big Seven” because each of them would impose annual burdens over $1 billion. Collectively, these seven surpass $100 billion per year. So let’s call them the “Maleficent Seven.”
Obama defended the Seven in his letter to Boehner, claiming that his Administration just finished an exhaustive review of unnecessary regulations and weeded out old ones that were costing $2 billion per year (which Obama tried to magnify by saying it was “$10 billion over five years”). But his team has already issued 75 major new regulations last year and this year, which are an annual $40 billion drag on the economy. So he’s already made things 20 times worse than his “improvements”—and that’s even before the Maleficent Seven kick in.
What are the Seven? Here’s the official chart appended by the White House to Obama’s letter:
Agency/Subagency Title Primary Annual Cost Estimate
EPA/AR Reconsideration of the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards $19-$90 Billion
EPA/AR National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units $10 Billion
EPA/AR National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Major Source Industrial, Commercial & Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters $3 Billion
EPA/SWER Standards for the Management of Coal Combustion Residuals Generated by Commercial Electric Power Producers $0.6-$1.5 Billion
DOT/NHTSA Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 111, Rearview Mirrors $2 Billion
DOT/FMCSA Electronic On-Board Recorders and Hours of Service Supporting Documents $2 Billion
DOT/FMCSA Hours of Service $1 Billion
Thousands of pages of other pending job-killing regulations are not even on the list, including those from Obamacare and the Dodd–Frank financial regulation.
The picture is clear. Businesses in America can’t afford to expand AND pay for the new regulations about to hit them. Hurricane Irene—and even Katrina—didn’t pack nearly the wallop that Hurricane Obama is bringing ashore. Companies already are evacuating the area of job creation.​

The Flood of Regulations from the Obama Administration

Last night Ian Punnett on "Coast to Coast" (radio) had some trucking company guys on talking about the new and impending transportation regulations that is absolutely devastaging them. That blind squirrel somebody mentioned certainly knows that any extra expense via taxes or regulation or fuel costs piled onto the transportation industry affects the cost and/or availability of EVERYTHING we buy.

I keep waiting for some drooling idiot leftist to propose making it illegal for companies to pass on increased costs to their customers.

 

[uscitizen]

What is Obama actually doing that's so different from what Bush did? Take your eyes off the economic stats now and look only at government policies.

You don't get to decide what cards are in the deck, kid.

The stats show Obama has royally screwed the economy. There is no credible way to deny this.

But that won't stop you.

Yep Obama screwed the economy by continuing Bush policies.

 

[Dragon]

LOL! we already have and you're hiding from it:

You don't seem to know how to follow directions. We are talking about differences in POLICY. None of the statistics you quoted have anything to do with policies adopted by either president.

Now, once again: take your eyes off the economic stats and focus on policy. What has Obama done (hint: he hasn't "done" the economy) that is different from what Bush did (hint: he didn't "do" the economy either).

What taxes were set differently under the two presidents? What regulations on business? What trade policy? What labor policy? What changed at the Federal Reserve?

These are "policy." What happened in the economy is not.

 

[daveman]

What is Obama actually doing that's so different from what Bush did? Take your eyes off the economic stats now and look only at government policies.

You don't get to decide what cards are in the deck, kid.

The stats show Obama has royally screwed the economy. There is no credible way to deny this.

But that won't stop you.

Yep Obama screwed the economy by continuing Bush policies.

But you still refuse to hold Obama accountable.

Good sheep.

 

[Ropey]

The special interest groups screwed the economy, and the politicians allowed them to pay their way into the creation of bubble financing through massive financial lobbying.

 

[Dragon]

You don't get to decide what cards are in the deck, kid.

I do, however, get to insist on using words to mean what they mean, and employment and GDP growth are not "policies."

Hey, tell you what, Daveman. Unlike the guy you're defending (why you are I don't know), you're not a moron. Why don't YOU tell us what policies Obama has pursued that are so different from Bush's. Of course, if you want to say that you can't stand either one of them, I'm down with that, too.

 

[daveman]

You don't get to decide what cards are in the deck, kid.

I do, however, get to insist on using words to mean what they mean, and employment and GDP growth are not "policies."

Hey, tell you what, Daveman. Unlike the guy you're defending (why you are I don't know), you're not a moron. Why don't YOU tell us what policies Obama has pursued that are so different from Bush's. Of course, if you want to say that you can't stand either one of them, I'm down with that, too.

I guess you missed my post that shows Obama enacting regulations that will cost US businesses billions trying to obey.

I'm sure you think you have a point with your little tantrum, but the simple fact is this Administration is hostile to business and isn't even trying to hide it.

And idiot leftists wonder why the economy isn't improving.

 

[Dragon]

I guess you missed my post that shows Obama enacting regulations that will cost US businesses billions trying to obey.

Are you talking about the ACA? If so, those regulations aren't in effect yet and therefore can't be causing any difference of outcomes observed.

(Remainder of your post, consisting of empty rhetoric and ad homs, snipped as unworthy of a reply.)