FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Is america better off under obama





jmraker
http://www.republican.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=dc2bbeeb-0016-46ee-b021-5bce6d4e9934
http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoodhill/2011/08/31/obama-a-bad-economic-president-consider-it-proved/

Anyone have the numbers that prove America is better off?

Isn't it crazy how the republicans try to use the facts and the truth?
coolclay
I don't think there is anyway anyone can accurately answer that question. Without having a time machine of course (or just being partisan as usual)

We don't know what choices McCain would have made #1 we also don't know how the choices that Obama made affected would could have happened if they weren't made.

My school of thought is that for all intensive purposes we would be in essentially the same place. People think our parties are so far different from one another when in reality that are pretty darn near the exact same, and neither any good. Anyone that would have been able to make any measurable difference got tossed out of the running because they didn't fit the status quo, and unfortunately that's exactly what we need!

In summation there is no way (above being an omnipotent God) to answer your question qualitatively or quantitatively. Its like trying to ask whether a car accident would have happened if I drove 5 more mph.

While I am certainly not defending Obama, I am anti-misleading data. While the graphs you show indicate things have gotten worse, what we don't know is how much worse they could have been in an alternate path where different choices were made. Maybe Obama saved us from the next big depression, who the heck knows?

It's not really worth discussing, we are where we are, and Obama, and Romney could just have well been running mates for all I am concerned.
jmraker
This isn't a science fiction/time machine/fuzzy logic/think tank/simulate every scenario type of question.

Please assume these facts:
. Obama is the president
. McCain lost the election
. Obama promised hope and he promised change
. Obama is trying to get 4 more years
. America had over 3 years of his changes
. Things from today can be compared against those things in the past
. Romney very well could have the same negative numbers in the future but he is not currently the president

Based on what we know about his changes is america today better than his 1st day of office.
For example, Is there anything he changed that has absolute proof is 1% or more better for america

Like did he pass the "Affordable Peanut Act" that made peanuts 25% cheaper than 3 years ago.

Anything like that which can outweigh the stats the republican thing bring up?
coolclay
Like I said before as an independent scientist there is no way to figuratively answer your question qualitatively or quantitatively. Without conjecturing and including personal opinions (which don't provide any data) one can not accurately answer the question.

Furthermore there ain't a damn politician out there who hasn't promised things that they haven't done.

Even if he had passed an "Affordable Peanut Act" that made peanuts 25% cheaper, that doesn't mean that would be a good thing for our country.

On a personal note I don't like Obama anymore than the next guy, I didn't vote for him the first time and I won't be voting for him the second time. His political campaign was the biggest joke ever. Of course Romney is currently giving a whole new meaning to biggest joke ever, but that's beside the point.

If you want to discuss politics discuss politics but don't try to include some pseudo-analysis of whether or not our country is better off now than it was before, that's just BS. Almost every country in the world is currently worse off economically speaking than we were 4 years, and that has nothing to do with politics.
handfleisch
coolclay wrote:
Like I said before as an independent scientist there is no way to figuratively answer your question qualitatively or quantitatively. Without conjecturing and including personal opinions (which don't provide any data) one can not accurately answer the question.

Furthermore there ain't a damn politician out there who hasn't promised things that they haven't done.

Even if he had passed an "Affordable Peanut Act" that made peanuts 25% cheaper, that doesn't mean that would be a good thing for our country.

On a personal note I don't like Obama anymore than the next guy, I didn't vote for him the first time and I won't be voting for him the second time. His political campaign was the biggest joke ever. Of course Romney is currently giving a whole new meaning to biggest joke ever, but that's beside the point.

If you want to discuss politics discuss politics but don't try to include some pseudo-analysis of whether or not our country is better off now than it was before, that's just BS. Almost every country in the world is currently worse off economically speaking than we were 4 years, and that has nothing to do with politics.

Pretty harsh, don't you think?
Maybe you mean that we are worse off than before the crisis-- well yes, of course. But you forget that Obama came on in the middle of the crisis. Compared to that there has been marked improvement, and there are many ways we are better off than we were four years ago.

Maybe you need a reminder of the economic crisis of 2008-2009, major American banks actually closing, and millions of jobs being lost in a short period of time, 760,000 jobs during January 2009 alone. Under Obama, the country and stabilized, recovered, and in some ways rebounded. Obviously the unemployment rate is stagnant at a moderately high level of 8% and that's not good, but it peaked at 10% during the worse of the crisis.

The USA is out of Iraq. Much better!
The USA is withdrawing from Afghanistan. Better!

The Affordable Care Act has given access to private health insurance for millions of American. They--we--are much better off with that.

Much of the world that was against the USA before is back to admiring us thanks to the positive diplomacy of the Obama administration, so that's better. The USA was led by the likes of Ashcroft, Cheney, Rumsfeld-- all dubious characters that are hardly defensible. We don't have anyone that terrible in higher office right now, no one trying to launch a massive land war based on lies, no kooky attorney general starting his meetings off with prayers and singing his song "let the eagle soar". God it was embarrassing before, we at least have some competent technocrats in there now.

There are important consumer protections, worker protections in place now. DADT was tossed out, so there's less discrimination in the USA than before. That's better.

I'm not saying everything is better. I've already mentioned stagnant unemployment, and the crisis and slow recovery is still affecting the US in various ways (deficit from low revenues due to slower economy, low taxes, and leftover war bills).

One conundrum is that we are not better off because the GOP is obstructing as much as they can because they don't want to give victories to Obama. In this way we are not better off, but it is as you say something hard to quantify. Is GOP obstructionism worse than having the GOP in the White House? Probably not, but it's apples and oranges.
ocalhoun
Coolclay is being very reasonable here.

It's meaningless to ask 'are we better off?' if you can't answer the question (and provide plenty of detail), 'better off than what?'

To say one thing is better than another, you need two things to compare... and the only thing we have to compare to is wild speculation.


It would be like asking, would the world be better off without the USA?
We have no way of knowing, because we really have no idea what the world would be like without the USA.
jmraker
I don't get why it's so hard to compare a statistic from today to that same statistic from the day Obama took office. Take for instance the +6 trillion dollars added to the national debt in the last 3 years. Nobody can say that's better or worse off than it was 3 years ago?

Does the same thing apply in sports? Like if a football team won 10 games in 2011 with one coach and in 2012 they won 7 games with a new coach, there wouldn't be way at the end of the season to tell that the team was doing better or worse than they were in 2011? (I guess because somebody might wonder what if they had another coach)

The affordable health care act will pressure every company to make things less affordable to pay for the insurance. So everyone has to pay more for thigs and as well as forced/mandated to pay for insurance. I don't see that as a good thing for anyone. I was once jobless for several years and could see doctors and get meds at no cost without insurance.

http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/08/papa-johns-obamacare-will-raise-pizza-prices-131331.html

Quote:
the health care law's changes set to go into effect in 2014 will result in higher costs for the company which they vowed to pass onto consumers.


http://bangordailynews.com/2012/07/23/opinion/obamacare-higher-taxes-expensive-premiums-and-added-burden-for-business/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2012/03/22/how-obamacare-dramatically-increases-the-cost-of-insurance-for-young-workers/
http://blog.heritage.org/2012/06/17/five-devastating-effects-obamacare-will-have-on-young-adults/

It's odd how googling for "obamacare lower premiums" shows so many links to how more it'll cost.


I'll see if there's any solid numbers on the "World's America favorability index", the number of "massive lie based land wars", "consumer protection index", "worker protection index", and the "amount of discrimination" in 2012 and around 2008 to compare.
jmraker
http://pewresearch.org/databank/dailynumber/?NumberID=1321

The "World's America favorability index" seems to be indeed better than 2008 except in the middle east, except for Palestine and maybe Israel,. Those middle east countries have always been unmistakably peaceful toward their sworn enemy countries like Israel so there's nothing to worry about with them.

Plus for some reason it seems like it says the favorability within the USA went from 84% in 2008 down to 79% but I guess we could exclude that number...
Afaceinthematrix
jmraker wrote:
I don't get why it's so hard to compare a statistic from today to that same statistic from the day Obama took office. Take for instance the +6 trillion dollars added to the national debt in the last 3 years. Nobody can say that's better or worse off than it was 3 years ago?


It's hard because it is not as easy as you think. It's not just about comparing statistics. There are further reasons behind it that are out of Obama's control. Furthermore, Coolclay does have a valid opinion that I was going to post myself but then saw that it was already posted.

The fact of the matter is that we do not have a time machine and can never go back to see what the alternative would have been like. Yes, the deficit raised 6 trillion dollars but you never know how much it could have raised if McCain or the third party candidate had been elected. Perhaps it would have been even worse. You do not know what the economy or job market would have been like. Perhaps the situation was so difficult to deal with that everyone else would have done worse than Obama. There is no way to know what would have happened.

Furthermore, there aren't statistics for everything. Yes, mean wages are down. However, what about the amount of hours being worked? Perhaps someone makes slightly less money than they did in 2008 however in 2008 work was busy and so they were putting in ten more hours a week than they are now.

Another issue is that these polls often ask people if they are better off now than back then. That is a piss-poor way to measure anything because your mind can make you feel how you want to feel. Furthermore, people may objectively be in a worse situation now than they were in 2008 yet it has nothing to do Obama but with their stage of life. Consider this: A family of four has two kids in high school during the year 2008. Obama takes office and four years later both children are in college. Those children have the type of parents that actually pay for their children's education instead of making them work for it. Now those two parents are struggling financially because of tuition bills. Those people would say that they are worse off now than they were in 2008 but it has nothing to do with Obama - it has to do with their stage of life.

You can look at statistics all you want but you cannot judge Obama strictly by the statistics because you have no knowledge of how anyone else would have done in his position during this time. Your sports analogy doesn't work because you can compare any athlete to thousands of others. If a running back has twice as many yards, three times the touchdowns, and half the fumbles as someone else against many different teams/defenses then you can easily say that the running back is superior to the other (assuming that they've played the same teams). You literally have absolutely no one to compare Obama to and so we have no idea if the situation was so difficult to fix that, despite the grim results, Obama might have been excellent. That is why you have to look at his policies and see what happened directly after he passed a new law or policy to see if his policies showed any improvement; you can't just look at those statistics. Consider you sports analogy again: what if there was a pitcher so good that he struck out Babe Ruth 1000 times in a row? Are you going to say that Babe Ruth sucks? His statistics would surely show that. Unfortunately, you cannot say that if you consider that every other amazing player also struck out against that pitcher because that pitcher was so good. We can do that because we have other people to compare the Babe to; we have no one else to compare Obama to. He is the man - the only man (in his position during this time).
busman
No we are NOT in a better posistion and I CAN assert this because of the NDAA and Iran Intiative that was recently passed. The less freedom we have and the more wars we get into under false pretenses are always the worst way we can go... NOW to clarify though, do I think McCain wouldve done ANY better at all? No... But there is one aspect of him that IS DUE MUCH RESPECT and that would be his insistance on campaign finance reform, but he also wanted to stay in Iraq for 100 years if that's what it took so once again still pretty friggin bad. Honestly the major parties in the USA (the d's and r's) will NEVER make this country truely better for those who are the working poor, or the middle class because they aren't beholden to us. Their true masters are the bankers and CEOs who bank roll billions while millions suffer and under that system no-one exceot the elite is winners. Let me reititerate for our republican friend here and our democrat friends here, that nothing you say or do will cause these politicians to give back the money that was rightfully ours or our freedoms that provided BY THE CONSTITUTION are rightfully ours as well.

To summerise: This two-party system will continuesly be worse for the american people, so to ask the question are we worse off is the worst kind of logical fallacy you can make, because sadly enough neither party will ever be truely for the american people so the answer is; until we can shed this two party dictatorship will we NEVER be better off than we were 4 years ago when you look at the big picture.
coolclay
Well stated Busman!
busman
coolclay wrote:
Well stated Busman!


Ty sir Very Happy
darthrevan
Also have you noticed that if there is a problem, the democrats and I think republicans blame the tea party for problems. I think that the democrats blame them the most though. It isn't the tea party running this country in the ground. The tea party barely has their feet into congress. There are very few tea party reps in Congress. I remember hearing about the green party wanting to run for president I do believe.

Of course the selection was always Raplf Nader, though it seems he kinda runs the green party so it kinda is expected.
Related topics
Does being pro-war contrast w/ religion (e.g. Christianity)?
Triple suicide at Guantanamo Bay
AMERICA NEEDS TO WAKE UP!
Dictatorships versus Democracy
The land of the free?
Americans, are you thankful?
McCain Compares Obama to Paris Hilton and Britney Spears
John McCain will really keep taxes low
Racism and scientific responsibility
Obama's First 100 days - a start on Gitmo BUT not enough
Employment situation improving under Obama
Personal Income Lower Under Obama
Coming out and the people that come with it
Would GB be better off without the EU?
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Politics

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.