View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:33 pm Post subject: Will Bush become the new Hoover? |
|
|
President Bush has long assumed the outcome of the Iraq war would define his legacy. But the catastrophic collapse of the housing bubble on his watch provides a new, perhaps more ominous, threat to how his stewardship will be ranked in history...
But, like the final outcome of the Iraq war, that won�t be evident by the time Bush leaves office and not, perhaps, for years to come.
In that sense, says historian Gage, Bush�s management of the war and the economic may ultimately be linked �in spirit, with each showing a certain recklessness, a lack of caution, and a rejection of the cautionary voices both within the administration and outside of it.�
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13632.html
I estimate the chances of Bush going down in history as the next Hoover to be about 96.74%. Before this debacle, 80% thought the country was on the wrong track. A good share of the 20% still backing Bush are anti-government types who are not going to be happy with the steps taken to prevent the complete collapse of the US economy.
I suspect 'revile' will be the most common verb used in his biographical thumbsketches in the history books. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007 Location: retired
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:36 pm Post subject: Re: Will Bush become the new Hoover? |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
I estimate the chances of Bush going down in history as the next Hoover to be about 96.74%. |
Seems low.. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It shouldn't.
I believe that Hoover refused to respond to the economic crisis. Whereas Bush is advocating a bailout, what some call corporate welfare. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Hyeon Een

Joined: 24 Jun 2005
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kuros wrote: |
It shouldn't.
I believe that Hoover refused to respond to the economic crisis. Whereas Bush is advocating a bailout, what some call corporate welfare. |
COMMUNISM. THE REDS WON.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 1:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm generous by nature. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 1:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
Whereas Bush is advocating a bailout, what some call corporate welfare. |
I call it that when I'm in a bad mood. More to the point, some of our conservative friends are going to be downright livid at the administration plan. Frothing at the mouth livid. Clutching their hearts and seeing spots before their eyes livid. Rolling on the floor, kicking their heels and gnashing their teeth livid.
It may be 20 years before he'll be able to leave his ranch and show his face in Crawford. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Crawford's congressional rep is a Democrat actually. Nancy Pelosi hinted he might be Obama's VP pick. Thankfully she was wrong. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
PBRstreetgang21

Joined: 19 Feb 2007 Location: Orlando, FL--- serving as man's paean to medocrity since 1971!
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 3:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I find it terribly ironic that when Korea had a meltdown in 97, one of the first conditions the IMF gave them for the loan was that if a bank fails you have to let it fail-- now the show is one the other foot and along comes hypocrisy-- Im sorry I meant to say "American Exceptionalism".
Its like the S&L scandal writ large. Reagan let the Savings and Loan industry do whatever they damn well pleased and then passed the plate when they all went belly up.
All these assholes on Wall Street knew a bail out was gonna happen. They hedged their bets it would. They took the risk because like Fannie and Freddie they have paid off too many of our leaders to think they would actually have to own that risk.
ownership society my ass |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kuros wrote: |
It shouldn't.
I believe that Hoover refused to respond to the economic crisis. Whereas Bush is advocating a bailout, what some call corporate welfare. |
Hoover responded to the crisis with the largest government intervention in the American economy to that point in history. It wasn't enough, and the stupid slashing and then raising of taxes was, well, really stupid, but the New Deal grew out of Hoover programs.
Bush will ultimately go down as Bush, which is bad enough. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
All these assholes on Wall Street knew a bail out was gonna happen. They hedged their bets it would. |
I've seen two articles so far that mention confiscatory taxes on those guys who got huge bonuses from companies that have gone bankrupt. There is justice in the idea. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007 Location: retired
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The base salary of an analyst (fresh out of undergrad) would be 70k plus 3-5x salary bonus. For an associate out of MBA it would be 140 plus 3-5x bonus. A lady I know who is a trader received a 33 month bonus on a 200k salary. She is 27. A MD would likely touch 7 figures in a 'good' year. The higher up they go, the more absurd it gets. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Julius and Ethel Rosenberg got the gas chamber for selling out the country. I don't know if the Feds should go after all the analysts since they were just following orders, but an example should be made of some of the CEOs. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Gatsby
Joined: 09 Feb 2007
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
Will Bush become the new Hoover? |
I think you are being unfair to Herbert Hoover.
Hoover only presided over the collapse of the American economy. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
VanIslander

Joined: 18 Aug 2003 Location: Geoje, Hadong, Tongyeong,... now in a small coastal island town outside Gyeongsangnamdo!
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 10:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bush the next Hoover, Cheney the next Filter Queen
They both suck big time. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Adventurer

Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2008 6:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hyeon Een wrote: |
Kuros wrote: |
It shouldn't.
I believe that Hoover refused to respond to the economic crisis. Whereas Bush is advocating a bailout, what some call corporate welfare. |
COMMUNISM. THE REDS WON.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
Well, the republicans have helped so many fat cats, but people who are middle class will expect aid otherwise there will be hell to pay for the GOP in the election. Now, during the Great Depression it is argued that some socialist type measures help stave off communism spreading in Europe and North America and from the collapse of communism. At one time, an appreciable percentage of Americans were communist. The communists once won 12% of the vote. You would be hard-pressed to find even 1% of Americans supporting a communist. They would support someone with some socialist ideas. People like are for corporate welfare which helps less people. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|