Proof "Obamanomics" is working

[Blake]

Obama made $5 million last year.

I'd say Obamanomics is working for him.

[Wild Cobra]

Funny how the board wing-nuts enjoy setting up straw-men so that they can knock em down...

Fact:

The Troubled Asset Relief Program, commonly referred to as TARP, is a program of the United States government to purchase assets and equity from financial ins utions to strengthen its financial sector. It is the largest component of the government's measures in 2008 to address the subprime mortgage crisis.

Originally expected to cost the U.S. Government — and, by extension, the U.S. taxpayer — $356 billion, the most recent estimates of the cost, as of April 12, 2010, is down to $89 billion, which is 42% less than the taxpayers' cost of the Savings and loan crisis of the late 1980s.[1] The cost of that crisis amounted to 3.2% of GDP during the Reagan/Bush era, while the the GDP percentage of the current crisis' cost is estimated at less than 1%.[2] While it was once feared the government would be holding companies like GM, AIG and Citigroup for several years, those companies are preparing to buy back the Treasury's stake and emerge from TARP within a year.[3] Of the $245 billion invested in U.S. banks, over $169 billion has been paid back, including $13.7 billion in dividends, interest and other income, along with $4 billion in warrant proceeds as of April 2010. AIG is considered "on track" to pay back $51 billion from dives ures of two units and another $32 billion in securities.[4]

Wiki

The horror! Reagan was a socialists!

Thank-you Dan.

It would have never passed without limited republican/blue dog democrat support.

In hindsight, I will say it's good it passed then, instead of waiting till the democrats had a solid majority. Getting it passed then required the amendment that any money not used and all money paid back, you go back to paying down the debt. Now if they do the accounting right on this, it is lowering president Bush's deficit. Not Obama's. At least the unused money. However, the repaid money should go to reducing Bush's deficit. Not Obama's. I suspect they will offset Obama's budget however.

[Wild Cobra]

In the final 9 months of the Bush administration, my 401K lost 29.3% of its value. Since Obama took office, it has gained 34.4%.

Since Obama was sworn in, my 401K account has swelled by over $38,000.... . basically restoring all of the losses Bush's last year cost me.

I'm a middle-class guy in a middle-class neighborhood with a middle-class house. I've worked for 20 years to build up my savings. Nearly 50% of the population has a 401K or Roth IRA.

Middle-class families are invested in the stock market through 401ks, pension funds and IRAs....

The Dow was 7,900 the day Obama was sworn in. It's over 11,000 today.

This stuff matters....

You have to remember, the changes for short sells and the democrats gaining control of congress in January 2007 were the triggers of the losses starting in August 2007. Takes time for corporations to become profitable again under new rules. The increase back to 11,000+ is not a sign the democrats are doing anything right. Business is. Still not good considering it was 14,000+ before.

It was nice buying stock at 3 shares for the price of two wasn't it? Isn't it possible it's all in the big players game plan?

[Wild Cobra]

You think we're out of the woods?

They just pumped up the bubble again...

There's a disconnect with the real economy. U-6 is still over 16%. How long til it reaches the status quo ante (5.5%)?

And how much will oil cost then?

I agree. Unless we get good jobs back our way that have been outsources, I see no bright future, except fort the real wealthy.

[Nbadan]

You have to remember, the changes for short sells and the democrats gaining control of congress in January 2007 were the triggers of the losses starting in August 2007. Takes time for corporations to become profitable again under new rules. The increase back to 11,000+ is not a sign the democrats are doing anything right. Business is. Still not good considering it was 14,000+ before.

It was nice buying stock at 3 shares for the price of two wasn't it? Isn't it possible it's all in the big players game plan?

I don't think the Dems taking congress had anything to do with it....more like a natural economic cycle that washes out the excesses from the last economic expansion, of course, the wash, or losses, can be made worse by trying to delay this natural cycle as Duyba did for the last two years of his term...the signs don't lie, despite some continued bullishness by some business investors because of mixed economic signals, economic expansion is happening at a good pace...

[word]

Obama hasn't been in office long enough to affect the economy. We'll have Obamas economy around 2014 forward, when the health care bill kicks in. The idea that Presidents can have any immediate impact on the economy is a fallacy. The short term affect of any president, is nominal, at best. In 10 years, whatever that holds, we'll be solidly in the Obamaconomy. These are drastic changes. We'll see what they hold. We're still dealing with FDR's economy in some ways. We just doubled down on that. Trippled, quadrupled down on that and the 'great society' of Johnson. We're in uncharted waters here. We have fundamentally changed our country.

Good night, and good luck, as Edward R Murrow used to say.