Obama: Too much debt could fuel double-dip recession

joeydb · #1 11-18-2009, 07:30 AM

So I guess he'll be retracting his support for a $1,000,000,000,000 healthcare plan now, right?

http://www.reuters.com/articlePrint?...88108620091118

Obama: Too much debt could fuel double-dip recession

BEIJING, Nov 18 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama gave his sternest warning yet about the need to contain rising U.S. deficits, saying on Wednesday that if government debt were to pile up too much, it could lead to a double-dip recession.

With the U.S. unemployment rate at 10.2 percent, Obama told Fox News his administration faces a delicate balance of trying to boost the economy and spur job creation while putting the economy on a path toward long-term deficit reduction.

His administration was considering ways to accelerate economic growth, with tax measures among the options to give companies incentives to hire, Obama said in the interview with Fox conducted in Beijing during his nine-day trip to Asia.

"It is important though to recognize if we keep on adding to the debt, even in the midst of this recovery, that at some point, people could lose confidence in the U.S. economy in a way that could actually lead to a double-dip recession," he said.

Danzig · #2 11-18-2009, 07:37 AM

now, after the stimulus that he called for hasn't worked, he's worried about debt? how much debt did that add? what about his proposed health care that will add to the deficit?

oh...i know...this is the lead-up to tax hikes. wonder what he'll add on once the bush tax cuts expire?

Riot · #3 11-18-2009, 10:40 PM

Geesh - majority of stimulus funds haven't even been disbursed yet (planned for over two years), that was planned from when Bush gave out the first part.

SOREHOOF · #4 11-19-2009, 05:34 AM

Bush is responsible for the TARP bailout not the stimulus. He bequethed half of it to Obama as part of the great inheritance that the Prez keeps bringing up. Stimulus is all Obama and the Dems.

Danzig · #5 11-19-2009, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot

Geesh - majority of stimulus funds haven't even been disbursed yet (planned for over two years), that was planned from when Bush gave out the first part.

the stimulus this spring was billed as absolutely necessary to keep unemployment from reaching 10%. it's reached and passed that. as far as jobs saved/created, even obama said that figuring those figures is an inexact science.

gales0678 · #6 11-19-2009, 08:11 AM

all great empire's fall from within , look at Rome, if anyone here has any young kid's i would suggest sending them for chinese lessson , the jobs are gone and they are not coming back in the manufacturing sector and financial sector

GBBob · #7 11-19-2009, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gales0678

all great empire's fall from within , look at Rome, if anyone here has any young kid's i would suggest sending them for chinese lessson , the jobs are gone and they are not coming back in the manufacturing sector and financial sector

I agree with you on the manufacturing sector, but that's been gone for a long time and the country still prospered. I disagree with you on the financial though...most things financial are cyclical. I'm sure those who lived through 18% Interest rates in the late 70s never would have believed the real estate market would have bounced back either.

Riot · #8 11-19-2009, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig

the stimulus this spring was billed as absolutely necessary to keep unemployment from reaching 10%. it's reached and passed that. as far as jobs saved/created, even obama said that figuring those figures is an inexact science.

That's right. Would you have preferred doing nothing and we right now being in a deep depression? Unemployment 18-20%? It's obviously not black and white. There's not an economist I've seen that has said the stimulus hasn't helped, nor that it won't continue to help.

GBBob · #9 11-19-2009, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot

That's right. Would you have preferred doing nothing and we right now being in a deep depression? Unemployment 18-20%? It's obviously not black and white. There's not an economist I've seen that has said the stimulus hasn't helped, nor that it won't continue to help.

Yeah but the DT economists say it's not working so who cares what Buffet thinks

Danzig · #10 11-19-2009, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot

That's right. Would you have preferred doing nothing and we right now being in a deep depression? Unemployment 18-20%? It's obviously not black and white. There's not an economist I've seen that has said the stimulus hasn't helped, nor that it won't continue to help.

i would prefer they did something helpful, such as the jobs bill they're working on now. i'd also prefer something that was not incredibly expensive, without real success.

Cannon Shell · #11 11-19-2009, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot

That's right. Would you have preferred doing nothing and we right now being in a deep depression? Unemployment 18-20%? It's obviously not black and white. There's not an economist I've seen that has said the stimulus hasn't helped, nor that it won't continue to help.

You arent looking very hard

wiphan · #12 11-19-2009, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot

That's right. Would you have preferred doing nothing and we right now being in a deep depression? Unemployment 18-20%? It's obviously not black and white. There's not an economist I've seen that has said the stimulus hasn't helped, nor that it won't continue to help.

The actual real unemployment rate right now is closer to 17-18% right now, since unemployment numbers do not count people that are unemployed that are not eligible for any more benefits. There is a way to create jobs and GOVT Spending has never been a good solution for this.