Well the US economy grew by 2.5% in the last quarter (thats the 3rd in a row) so it looks like there is hope for one and all http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...-3rd-quarter/2011/10/27/gIQANfoyLM_story.html
Really. Can you point me to a link which explains exactly what they have done beside throw monkey wrenches into the government since then. I am not aware of anything they have done to actually build up the economy. Sure they have had time to pass things like H.R. 358 (the Protect Life Act) and H.R. 2273 (the Coal Residuals Reuse and Management Act), but I would sure like to see proof of an actual piece of legislation which builds up the economy.
First, what two years did the Democrats have control over the entire government. I missed that part. Second, I know who tanked the economy and it wasn't the Democrats. Third, that list of 290 bills is hilarious. I looked at them from the website: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/83057-290-bills Some of those bills have been waiting since 2008-2009. Finally, if you are going to suggest that EPA Regulatory Relief Act of 2011 was a boon to the economy I am gonna have to laugh at you. It was nothing more than a "here pollute all you want we don't care" bill. Sorry, but you are going to have to do better. Once again show me something that the Republican led house actually did that helped the economy.
I know that the Republicans like to call their anti-environment laws good for the economy, but they are not. All the do is allow the cost to be passed down to later generations. I live in an area where companies are blowing the tops off of entire mountains, stripping the coal away, and affecting entire communities with a future of polluted water, degraded land and other pollution. The Republicans aren't satisfied with stopping any more regulations on their activities. They want to go backwards to the point where there were no regulations at all. They want to give companies like Massey Energy complete run of the country and be damned with the consequences to the people that live there. They come in, strip the mountains for coal, and when they leave the economy of the area is trashed just like the environment. Do you know why companies use mountain top strip mining? It means they don't have to hire people and make sure their work conditions are safe. It means they can use gigantic earth moving equipment and explosives to remove the coal that they used to hire people to remove. Its a win-win for them and a lose-lose for the people who live there. The Republicans want to let them free to do whatever they want. The people in these areas are dirt poor which means the Republicans don't have any use for them.
I guess you missed 2008 and 2009. While I was here, the dips had control; of the House, filibuster control of the Senate, and it seems to me BO was president then. Funny you should say "Some of those bills have been waiting since 2008-2009". That seems very coincidentally to corespond to when the Democrats controlled the government. BTW, we are still waiting for them to pass their budget So you are telling me that Bush tanked the economy in 2007? I seem to remember the economy going along pretty well in 2004 and 2005. It was not too bad in 2006. So I guess Bush did it in 2007. One major problem. Bush did not write the legislation. The House and Senate do. Oh, and I believe it was the Democrats who won control of both in 2006.
In addition to everything DeeNeely has said, I don't think economies such as ours turn on a dime like that. I mean it's not like Mr Economy said, "Wow, the Republicans took back control of the House. I think starting tomorrow I'll kick it up some".
Sounds more like it had little to do with the politicians (surprise!)... "Growth was bolstered during the quarter by a rebound in some of the areas that had held the economy back in the first half of the year. Automobile supply chains that had been disrupted by the Japanese earthquake in the spring reopened, and oil prices moderated after spiking early in the year." This also bears noting: "But GDP was not strong enough to represent a “catch-up” effect that could bring the unemployment rate down substantially over time. Rather, 2.5 percent is somewhere around the treading-water rate of U.S. economic growth"
Oddly coincidental. We are celebrating some good news for the country, and where did it come from? Wall Street! And moen was the first one to jump on the bandwagon. Hmmmmm.....what are the protestors going to say about that? Their future prospects just got better because Wakk Street had a big day?
Really? Wall Street? The news was according to government data about the U.S. Economy. The only thing Wall Street did was react to the news and then only as a subtext to the news of the European bailout. Wall Street doesn't grow the economy, it only responses to the growth. You are clueless.
If you took the time to read the article the prevalent theme would be obvious to you....the news was being celebrated becuase of Wall Street's reaction, not despite it. You are cluelss.
All in all the growth is a good sign, but it's a tiny babystep towards recovery. Some here want to point to Obama and say it's his fault. My response is that there isn't anyone who could erase the troubles we've experienced. David likes to say Obama promised he could, to that I have to disagree... Obama said even under the best of circumstances the recovery would take years, possibly decades. IMO, it'll take a minimum of ten years from the crash to realize a true, healthy economy again. A minimum.
How about this? http://www.hyatt.jacksonville.com/forums/news/politics_forum/158748 Right now 8% unemployment would seem "fixed" to most of America.
