President Obama is the HOPE of the future.

Bradley R Schiller....an economic professor at the University of Nevada is of the opinion that President Obama's choice of message, ie. fearmongering is good politics but bad economics.

His opinion piece from Feb 13 WSJ below....

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123457303244386495.html

Originally Posted by Bucco

President Obama is the HOPE of the future.

Bradley R Schiller....an economic professor at the University of Nevada is of the opinion that President Obama's choice of message, ie. fearmongering is good politics but bad economics.

His opinion piece from Feb 13 WSJ below....

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123457303244386495.html

He makes sense. Who in his right mind will buy stock in companies if there is fear of a depression which can make the purchased stock instantly valueless? When nobody buys stocks at a higher value, the stock market goes down.

Who in TV-Cyberland really has confidence that things are now better because of the passage of the stimulus package, and is willing to back that confidence statement with stock purchases next week?

Until there is individual confidence displayed by increased purchases beyond necessities - in merchandise, investment instruments, non-critical services, etc. - we will be remain in economic neutral while stopped on an incline. Doom and gloom has never been a motivator for anything.....except votes.

...and I'm not even running for office. Notwithstanding the opinion of various pundits, there is room I think for pragmatism and truthful discussion of the issues and problems facing the country. Without such information, how can the electorate of a democracy make their most fundamental decisions--choosing who they will vote for to represent them?

If all we had were political leaders or candidates for office who fed us half truths and only the good news, I can't imagine that we'd be better off. We've had political leaders that have done that, and others that have been more open and pragmatic with the public. It seems to me that history has identified those that were more open and honest as among our better political leaders.

Of course, they had to be both right and effective in explaining the issues to the country and successful in gaining public support for his decisions. At this point, President Obama has done none of those things, so necessary if history is to record his administration as the hope he has claimed, or governance during a period when the country slides precipitously from its position of wealth, leadership and power. The answers to those questions all remain to be seen. All we can hope for, very selfishly, is that Obama is right and is the hope he has promised. The alternative is neither avoidable or pretty.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

...

Of course, they had to be both right and effective in explaining the issues to the country and successful in gaining public support for his decisions. At this point, President Obama has done none of those things, so necessary if history is to record his administration as the hope he has claimed, or governance during a period when the country slides precipitously from its position of wealth, leadership and power.

I don't know that your desire that POTUS or anybody explain the issues of the economic situation to the American people is at all possible. I don't think even Uncle Jay could do so. I've been accused of being overly cynical at times, but I've not had much faith in the attention span nor the intelligence of the American people. If it cannot be explained in real small words in under 10 minutes, Obama or anyone else would lose 80-90% of the public --- oh, they might be adamantly for or against whatever he said, but they wouldn't know what that was. And many of the so-called educated wouldn't know how they felt about it until it was explained by their favorite talking head.

Because the national and international economic situation is so convoluted, no one will even attempt to explain all the issues. They will only cherry-pick certain high vis items that fit their agenda and justify their overall actions based on those items.

One thing is patently obvious to the most casual observer. The actions of the US Congress in the passages of this "stimulation bill" have been nothing short of embarrassing and disgraceful. And as much as I would like to point all the fingers at the "it's so important we don't have time to actually read the bill, just pass it or you're a partisan obstructionist" Democrats, the GOP members didn't exactly shine.


QUESTION: Don't know if this is true. Did the House or Senate very very recently unanimously pass a resolution that the final bill would be put on the House/Senate web site for public perusal for 48 hours before it was to be voted upon? I heard that and found it hard to swallow that they would/could totally ignore a unanimous resolution they had just passed. Truth or fiction?




`

Okay, forget about the economic situation and all that craft --- just look at the afterthought question. Is it true or false? I just want to know.

Originally Posted by Muncle

I don't know that your desire that POTUS or anybody explain the issues of the economic situation to the American people is at all possible. I don't think even Uncle Jay could do so. I've been accused of being overly cynical at times, but I've not had much faith in the attention span nor the intelligence of the American people. If it cannot be explained in real small words in under 10 minutes, Obama or anyone else would lose 80-90% of the public --- oh, they might be adamantly for or against whatever he said, but they wouldn't know what that was. And many of the so-called educated wouldn't know how they felt about it until it was explained by their favorite talking head.

Because the national and international economic situation is so convoluted, no one will even attempt to explain all the issues. They will only cherry-pick certain high vis items that fit their agenda and justify their overall actions based on those items.

One thing is patently obvious to the most casual observer. The actions of the US Congress in the passages of this "stimulation bill" have been nothing short of embarrassing and disgraceful. And as much as I would like to point all the fingers at the "it's so important we don't have time to actually read the bill, just pass it or you're a partisan obstructionist" Democrats, the GOP members didn't exactly shine.


QUESTION: Don't know if this is true. Did the House or Senate very very recently unanimously pass a resolution that the final bill would be put on the House/Senate web site for public perusal for 48 hours before it was to be voted upon? I heard that and found it hard to swallow that they would/could totally ignore a unanimous resolution they had just passed. Truth or fiction?

`