http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100201/ap_on_bi_ge/us_budgetAP wrote:By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer Martin Crutsinger, Ap Economics Writer – 15 mins ago
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama unveiled a multitrillion-dollar spending plan Monday, pledging an intensified effort to combat high unemployment and asking Congress to quickly approve new job-creation efforts that would boost the deficit to a record-breaking $1.56 trillion.
Obama's new budget blueprint preaches the need to make tough choices to restrain run-away deficits, but not before attacking what the administration sees as the more immediate challenge of lifting the country out of a deep recession that has cost 7.2 million jobs over the past two years.
The result is a budget plan that would give the country trillion-dollar-plus deficits for three consecutive years. Obama's new budget projects a spending increase of 5.7 percent for the current budget year and forecasts that spending would rise another 3 percent in 2011 to $3.83 trillion.
"Until America is back at work, my administration will not rest and this recovery will not be finished," Obama declared in his budget message.
Obama's budget offers tax cuts for businesses, including a $5,000 tax credit for hiring new workers this year, help for the unemployed and $25 billion more for cash-strapped state governments. All the temporary measures would boost the deficit over the next two years by $245 billion.
The deficit for this year would surge to a record-breaking $1.56 trillion, topping last year's then-unprecedented $1.41 trillion gap, a number which had dwarfed the previous record of $454.8 billion set in 2008 under former President George W. Bush.
The administration is forecasting that deficits over the next decade will add an additional $8.5 trillion to the national debt, even if Congress adopts the administration's package of proposals to trim future deficits starting in 2011. Those include a three-year freeze on spending for government programs, an effort which does not touch popular benefit programs such as Social Security and Medicare and which also exempts defense and homeland security. It also proposes a boost in taxes on the wealthiest Americans, families making more than $250,000 annually, by allowing the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 to expire.
Republicans were not impressed with Obama's deficit cutting, saying that it fell far short of the bold steps needed in light of the fiscal challenges the country is facing.
"This country is sinking into a fiscal quagmire," said Sen. Judd Gregg, the top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee. "These circumstances call for a bold, game-changing budget that will turn things around."
The administration argued that Obama inherited a deficit that was already topping $1 trillion when he took office and, given the severity of the downturn, the president had to spend billions stabilizing the financial system and jump-starting economic growth.
Obama's new budget carries forward the pledge he made in his State of the Union address: To put full attention on reviving the moribund U.S. economy, an effort to convince recession-battered voters that Democrats are in tune with the issues that affect their lives.
Obama's new budget assumes enactment of a comprehensive health care program, the issue that dominated the president's first year in office. Passage of that proposal is currently stalled with Democrats trying to figure out how to cope with the loss of a key Democratic seat that gave them the 60 votes they needed to overcome a Republican filibuster.
Obama's job proposals would push government spending in 2010 to $3.72 trillion and increase that amount to $3.83 trillion in the 2011 budget year, which begins on Oct. 1.
The deficit in 2011 would total $1.27 trillion, the third straight trillion-dollar-plus imbalance. The deficit would fall to $828 billion in 2012 but would remain at levels surpassing any previous deficits through 2020.
The deficit for this year would be 10.6 percent of the total economy, a figure unmatched since the country was emerging from World War II. The administration does not trim the deficit below 3.6 percent of GDP for any year in the next decade, failing to meet its goal of lowering the deficit to 3 percent of GDP by 2015.
White House Budget Director Peter Orszag said the administration will rely on a deficit commission which the president will create by executive order to recommend ways to further reduce the deficit plus cope with deficits projected to soar further in the next decade with the retirement of millions of baby boomers.
Much of the spending surge starting in 2008 reflects the cost of massive economic stimulus measures passed by Congress to deal with the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. The surge in the deficits reflects not only the increased spending but also a big drop in tax revenues, reflecting the 7.2 million people who have lost jobs since the recession began and weaker corporate tax receipts.
Obama's new budget attempts to navigate between the opposing goals of pulling the country out of a deep recession and getting control of runaway deficits. The administration insists that once the recession is history, the government will turn its attention to attacking the deficits.
On the anti-recession front, Obama's new budget proposed extending the popular Making Work Pay middle-class tax breaks of $400 per individual and $800 per couple through 2011. They were due to expire after this year. The budget also proposes making $250 payments to Social Security recipients to bolster their finances in a year when they are not receiving the normal cost-of-living boost to their benefit checks because of low inflation. Obama will also seek a $25 billion increase in payments to help recession-battered states.
In a bow to worries over the soaring deficits, the administration proposed a three-year freeze on spending beginning in 2011 for many domestic government agencies. It would save $250 billion over the next decade by following the spending freeze with caps that would keep increases after 2013 from rising faster than inflation.
Military, veterans, homeland security and big benefit programs such as Social Security and Medicare would not feel the pinch. Federal support for elementary and high school education would get what the administration termed the biggest increase in history. The Pell Grant college tuition program which would see an increase of $17 billion to just under $35 billion, helping an additional 1 million students.
The New York Times reported Monday the administration was seeking a sweeping overhaul of the No Child Left Behind law that will call for broad changes in how schools are judged to be succeeding or failing.
In Obama's new budget, there would be substantial increases for homeland security and veterans programs — exempt from Obama's partial freeze — with a 3.4 percent increase in the Pentagon's core budget to $549 billion for next year.
The administration would kill $175 billion worth of Environmental Protection Agency clean water accounts used as a pork-barrel kitty by Congress.
Obama also kills his predecessor's signature space program to return astronauts to the moon. NASA had already spent $9.1 billion on the program, which was projected to cost $100 billion by 2020. Obama's new budget said NASA will be "launching a bold new effort" with an extra $1.2 billion annually for five years, money expected to be used to encourage private companies to build, launch and operate their own spacecraft for the benefit of NASA and others. NASA would pay the private companies to carry U.S. astronauts.
The new Obama budget will also include a proposal to levy a fee on the country's biggest banks to raise an estimated $90 billion to recover losses from the government's $700 billion financial rescue fund.
___
AP writers Andrew Taylor, Stephen Ohlemacher, Seth Borenstein and Darlene Superville contributed to this report.
Obama unveils 2011 budget with $3.83T in spending
Kyouri Kai- Founder
- Knowledge :
Watari- roku'dan
- Knowledge :
Well I can say that in times like these he's killing a lot of unnecessary spending but also creating some unnecessary spending. I can see that he's trying to make this about the American people and his focus is on creating jobs and getting jobs to the American people which is what we need right now but he also needs to come up with a way to reduce corporate greed that is just so rampant in corporte America right now, with the millions being given as a bonus don't you think a company would be better off spending that money on its lower class employees who could use the money more?
But with that then you run into the issue of a potential government run society, but I'm of a firm belief that in some cases the government should step in, depending on the case of course, like with these investing firms and banks, without the governement stepping in we could have seen a huge crash in the banking industry, which is maybe what we need to teach us a lesson but I think the ripple effect would have been much more serious on the lower class front.
I guess the end result is we wait and see if we made a good choice in our president or not.
But with that then you run into the issue of a potential government run society, but I'm of a firm belief that in some cases the government should step in, depending on the case of course, like with these investing firms and banks, without the governement stepping in we could have seen a huge crash in the banking industry, which is maybe what we need to teach us a lesson but I think the ripple effect would have been much more serious on the lower class front.
I guess the end result is we wait and see if we made a good choice in our president or not.
Lrules364- go'dan
- Post n°3
Re: Obama unveils 2011 budget with $3.83T in spending
by Lrules364 Mon 01 Feb 2010, 3:20 pm
Obama is already a traitor to America and has commited countles crimes against America as everyone continues about their days without even noticing. Bob Marley predicted this, and so did many others as soon as Obama made his first presidential speech. I thought he would bring in a new era, change the way America has been since 2003. But the only thing he did was make it worse. He killed off jobs, rendered steel plants useless, shut down small bussinesses, and took control of America one bussiness ata time. Now the government owns us and everything we do. We pend trillions of dollars on bailing banks out, yet we cannot even help the working class blue collar man. I have lost all faith in the Obama administration. From now on, America will become a communist country. From government run health care, to banks, to GM and Chrysler, and even choosing specific people for jobs. (they never consider the working class man who has real world experience. Its always going to be the guy who went to yale.) America is now run by it's government. We all tried to change it, and it blew up in our faces. It is not right, nor is it fair that all this spending is not going to any of our normal people. Even the middle class will become poor. And even though you all think im full of bologna, look at the facts and think again. Sure, some of it is still in the making. But that does not mean the laws and everything else suggested will change. "one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for only a select few"
Kyouri Kai- Founder
- Knowledge :
- Post n°4
Re: Obama unveils 2011 budget with $3.83T in spending
by Kyouri Kai Mon 01 Feb 2010, 5:10 pm
Indeed! I can personally vouch for this when it comes to any sort of job that is outside the home and inside most businesses - secretary, office manager, personnel relations, paralegal, etc. as far as the base jobs go are also requiring degrees of some sort. It is a shame that someone with over 20 years experience in a given field is turned down for a job because it is given to someone that has a college loan debt to pay back that has absolutely no real job experience and more often than not doesn't think outside the textbook. As Obama said in his State of the Union Address last week, no longer are high school diplomas good enough to get a job.Lrules364 wrote:(they never consider the working class man who has real world experience. Its always going to be the guy who went to yale.)
I realize Obama has been in office for a year, but at the same time, it has only been a year. It's quite mind-boggling how a President whose party controls both the Senate and the House has accomplished nothing more than spending, tho. Now he has set his sights on spending even more money while talking about how the money we've (and I've say 'we' because it isn't coming out of their pockets) already spent is going to help but we need to give it time. I've always been amazed at how quickly the prices at the pump jump within minutes of news on the increase in oil per barrel, yet it takes forever and a decade for the prices to lower when the price per barrel decreases, and the pump price never lowers back down to what it was before. I miss last year's gas prices being down below $2/gal.
Anyway, I just can't bring myself to say that anything Obama has preached about is worthwhile, nor is the huge spending limits... that apparently actually have no limit. Nothing has been done about our immigration problem or Guantanamo (which I still disagree with housing military suspects in civilian prisons that are amongst the civilian populous). He even 'forgot' to mention the two police officers that were at the national address, that were the heroes at Ft. Hood. That's kind of a huge oversight given the dude that started the troubles was Muslim. It doesn't bode well for Obama in the face of the nay-sayers. Again, I'm sorry, but I have yet to see anything productive out of this guy other than he is one hell of a great spokesman... as is the used car dealer down the street. We don't need more spending until we get our real issues taken care of. We don't need the government pouring fake dollars into society to build jobs... we need to get our jobs back from overseas, hire authentic American workers, and the Americans need to stop buying products from companies that bilk money to pay their CEO's hugeass bonuses while hiring child labor from other countries to build parts for their goods. And the government needs to stop telling the people what to do when the people should be telling their government what to do by electing those that listen instead of saying things like, "I promised I wouldn't do what was popular - I would do what was necessary." In whose opinion??? Apparently not the 'popular' one being stated by the 'populous' - Stop Spending Our Money!
Watari- roku'dan
- Knowledge :
Did you know that the "Under God" portion of that was never meant to be in there due to the seperation of church and state? The church added that and pretty much threw it down everyones throats, I'm more afraid of America becoming a church nation over a communist nation, because I can say it won't happen, our system won't allow it to be a communist nation and in fact the governemnt control over the banks ends when they pay back the loan. Obama is trying to do his best to clean up the mess left by Dubya, that's one hell of a hard job, while so many people are focused on his current and past religions and the religions of other criminals we have people who are losing their jobs, NOT because of the government but because of coroporate greed, I blame corporate America for the current down turn in our economy, not the government.Lrules364 wrote:"one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for only a select few"
I'm amazed at how many people consider Obama to be a traitor to America but yet G. Dubya lied to our faces about WMD's in Iraq, I feel that to be more traitorous than anything Obama is currently doing, plus it's Obama's first year in office, he's getting his feet wet and we have 3 more years to see what he can pull off. I will be the first to admit I don't expect huge results from the mess that he was given, but he may be heading in a direction to fix this mess, then again he might not only time will tell. He has 2 major problems to fix as I see it, lower the deficit that's ranging in the Trillions and second is get America into a more stable economy at all income levels.
Time will tell us if what he's doing is right, right now I think it's too early to pick apart what he is looking to do, though I think the Healthcare Reform is the right direction to helping America's poor I don't know if it's THE answer to our Healthcare problem, he has some good ideas but implimenting them is the key and doing so in a way that will improve life across all of America and not just a certain section.
Kyouri Kai- Founder
- Knowledge :
- Post n°6
Re: Obama unveils 2011 budget with $3.83T in spending
by Kyouri Kai Mon 01 Feb 2010, 8:02 pm
You know, and I mean no personal offense to you, Watari, but I am really tired of hearing about how Bush ran this country into the ground while at the same time hearing about how Obama's endless well of spending just might be the fix.
Here are some facts about the Bush years:
Economy:
According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, the economy suffered from a recession that lasted from March 2001 to November 2001. During the Bush Administration, Real GDP has grown at an average annual rate of 2.5%.
Inflation under Bush has remained near historic lows at about 2-3% per year. The recession and a drop in some prices led to concern about deflation from mid-2001 to late-2003.
Long-term problems include inadequate investment in economic infrastructure, rapidly rising medical and pension costs of an aging population, sizable trade and budget deficits. Under the Bush administration, productivity has grown by an average of 3.76% per year, the highest such average in ten years.
President Bush implemented three tax cuts during his term in office: The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA) costing $1.6 Trillion Dollars, the Job Creation and Worker Assistance Act of 2002 (JCWA) costing an additional $1.8 Trillion Dollars, and Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (JGTRRA) costing $70 billion.
During his first term, Bush sought and obtained Congressional approval for three major tax cuts. These temporary cuts, scheduled to expire a decade after passage, increased the standard income tax deduction for married couples, eliminated the estate tax, and reduced marginal tax rates. The cuts are currently scheduled to expire a decade after passage. Bush has asked Congress to make the tax cuts permanent, but others want the cuts to be wholly or partially repealed even before their scheduled expiration, seeing the decrease in revenue while increasing spending as fiscally irresponsible.
Bush's supporters claim that the tax cuts increase the pace of economic recovery and job creation. They also claim that total benefits to wealthier individuals are a reflection of higher taxes paid. Individual income tax rate provisions in the 2001 law, for instance, created larger marginal tax rate decreases for people earning less than US$12,000 than any other earners.
His opponents contest job prediction claims, primarily noting that the increase in job creation predicted by Bush's plan failed to materialize. They instead allege that the purpose of the tax cuts was intended to favor the wealthy and special interests, as the majority of benefit from the tax cut, in absolute terms, went to earners in the higher tax brackets. Bush's opponents additionally claim that the tax cuts are a major reason Bush reversed a national surplus into a historic deficit.
In an open letter to Bush in 2004, more than 100 professors of business and economics at U.S. business schools ascribed this "fiscal reversal" to Bush's "policy of slashing taxes - primarily for those at the upper reaches of the income distribution."
By 2004, these cuts had reduced federal tax revenues, as a percentage of the Gross Domestic Product, to the lowest level since 1959. The effect of simultaneous record increases in spending and tax reductions was to create record budget deficits in absolute terms, though as recently as 1993, the deficit was slightly larger than the current 3.6% of the GDP. In the last year of the Clinton administration, the federal budget showed an annual surplus of more than US$230 billion. Under Bush, the government returned to deficit spending. The annual deficit reached an absolute record of US$374 billion in 2003 and then a further record of $413 billion in 2004.
(What kills me here is that there are no differences between what Bush tried and failed at, and what Obama is doing now... my father actually got more back on his taxes this year, thanks to the Obama administration tax breaks, than he did under Bush when he made more money. And here we are spending even more money in one year's time than Bush did in 8)
According to the "baseline" forecast of federal revenue and spending by the Congressional Budget Office (in its January 2005 Baseline Budget Projections, the budget deficits will decrease over the next several years. In this projection the deficit will fall to US$368 billion in 2005, US$261 billion in 2007, and US$207 billion in 2009, with a small surplus by 2012. The CBO noted, however, that this projection "omits a significant amount of spending that will occur...
(The Outstanding Public Debt as of 01 Feb 2010 at 11:43:08 PM GMT is: $12,290,400,888,908.62 - 16 Oct 09 - Obama team makes it official: Budget Deficit hits record. By a lot. (USA Today))
Unemployment:
During Bush's presidency, unemployment climbed from 4.2% in January 2001 to 7.2% in December 2008. Considering population growth, that still represents a 4.6% decrease in employment since Bush took office.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the number of unemployed was nearly 6.0 million in January 2001 and 6.9 million in September 2006. The unemployment rate was 4.2% in January 2001, 4.6% in September 2006, and 7.2% in December 2008. Employment peaked in late 1999 and declined through 2008.
(Current unemployment rate: 10.0% in Dec 2009 according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics)
Environmental:
In December 2003, Bush signed legislation implementing key provisions of his Healthy Forests Initiative. Another subject of controversy is Bush's Clear Skies Initiative, which seeks to reduce air pollution through expansion of emissions trading.
Bush signed the Great Lakes Legacy Act of 2002 authorizing the federal government to begin cleaning up pollution and contaminated sediment in the Great Lakes, as well as the Brownfields Legislation in 2002, accelerating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites, or brownfields, to better protect public health, create jobs, and revitalize communities.
Bush stated his reason for not supporting the Kyoto Protocol was that it unfairly targeted the United States while being deliberately lenient with certain developing countries, especially China and India. Bush stated, "The world's second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases is China. Yet, China was entirely exempted from the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol."
Bush also questioned the science behind the global warming phenomenon, insisting that more research be done to determine its validity.
In 2005-06, Bush emphasized the need for comprehensive energy reform and proposed increased funding for research and development of renewable sources of energy such as hydrogen power, nuclear power, ethanol, and clean coal technologies. Bush proposed the American Competitiveness Initiative which seeks to support increasing competitiveness of the U.S. economy, with greater development of advanced technologies, as well as greater education and support for American students. In the 2007 State of the Union speech, President Bush proposed a 20:10 policy, where, as a nation, the United States would be working to reduce 20% of the national energy usage in next 10 years by converting to ethanol. (Obama's preaching sounds vaguely familiar, eh?)
Other:
Bush signed the Amber Alert legislation into law on April 30, 2003...
On June 15, 2006, Bush created the seventy-fifth, and largest, National Monument in U.S. history and the largest Marine Protected Area in the world with the formation of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands National Monument.
In 2002, President Bush signed the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act...
In January 2002, Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act, with Democratic Senator Ted Kennedy as chief sponsor... (Which Obama has sworn to continue.)
On January 14, 2004, Bush announced a Vision for Space Exploration, calling for the completion of the International Space Station by 2010 and the retirement of the space shuttle while developing a new spacecraft called the Crew Exploration Vehicle under the title Project Constellation.
Bush supported adult stem cell research and umbilical cord blood stem cell research. However, Bush opposed any new embryonic stem cell research, and had limited the federal funding of existing research.
In 2006, Bush urged Congress to allow more than twelve million illegal immigrants to work in the United States with the creation of a "temporary guest-worker program".
------------------
Now don't get me wrong, outside of the fact that no one can dispute that we had no more terrorist attacks on U.S. soil during the remainder of his time in office, Bush botched the war on Iraq. But all this talk about how Bush messed everything up is just too much when in light of the current status of the U.S., which is now on Obama's shoulders and no longer can be blamed on Bush, is just doing nothing more than rehashing misinformation, or at least exclusion of some good points, and it serves no purpose. We are now under a new administration and what they have done, including their lack thereof, has worsened what was already a bad situation, topped with .... lies (must be a prerequisite for the office of the presidency).
Here are some facts about the Bush years:
Economy:
According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, the economy suffered from a recession that lasted from March 2001 to November 2001. During the Bush Administration, Real GDP has grown at an average annual rate of 2.5%.
Inflation under Bush has remained near historic lows at about 2-3% per year. The recession and a drop in some prices led to concern about deflation from mid-2001 to late-2003.
Long-term problems include inadequate investment in economic infrastructure, rapidly rising medical and pension costs of an aging population, sizable trade and budget deficits. Under the Bush administration, productivity has grown by an average of 3.76% per year, the highest such average in ten years.
President Bush implemented three tax cuts during his term in office: The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA) costing $1.6 Trillion Dollars, the Job Creation and Worker Assistance Act of 2002 (JCWA) costing an additional $1.8 Trillion Dollars, and Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (JGTRRA) costing $70 billion.
During his first term, Bush sought and obtained Congressional approval for three major tax cuts. These temporary cuts, scheduled to expire a decade after passage, increased the standard income tax deduction for married couples, eliminated the estate tax, and reduced marginal tax rates. The cuts are currently scheduled to expire a decade after passage. Bush has asked Congress to make the tax cuts permanent, but others want the cuts to be wholly or partially repealed even before their scheduled expiration, seeing the decrease in revenue while increasing spending as fiscally irresponsible.
Bush's supporters claim that the tax cuts increase the pace of economic recovery and job creation. They also claim that total benefits to wealthier individuals are a reflection of higher taxes paid. Individual income tax rate provisions in the 2001 law, for instance, created larger marginal tax rate decreases for people earning less than US$12,000 than any other earners.
His opponents contest job prediction claims, primarily noting that the increase in job creation predicted by Bush's plan failed to materialize. They instead allege that the purpose of the tax cuts was intended to favor the wealthy and special interests, as the majority of benefit from the tax cut, in absolute terms, went to earners in the higher tax brackets. Bush's opponents additionally claim that the tax cuts are a major reason Bush reversed a national surplus into a historic deficit.
In an open letter to Bush in 2004, more than 100 professors of business and economics at U.S. business schools ascribed this "fiscal reversal" to Bush's "policy of slashing taxes - primarily for those at the upper reaches of the income distribution."
By 2004, these cuts had reduced federal tax revenues, as a percentage of the Gross Domestic Product, to the lowest level since 1959. The effect of simultaneous record increases in spending and tax reductions was to create record budget deficits in absolute terms, though as recently as 1993, the deficit was slightly larger than the current 3.6% of the GDP. In the last year of the Clinton administration, the federal budget showed an annual surplus of more than US$230 billion. Under Bush, the government returned to deficit spending. The annual deficit reached an absolute record of US$374 billion in 2003 and then a further record of $413 billion in 2004.
(What kills me here is that there are no differences between what Bush tried and failed at, and what Obama is doing now... my father actually got more back on his taxes this year, thanks to the Obama administration tax breaks, than he did under Bush when he made more money. And here we are spending even more money in one year's time than Bush did in 8)
According to the "baseline" forecast of federal revenue and spending by the Congressional Budget Office (in its January 2005 Baseline Budget Projections, the budget deficits will decrease over the next several years. In this projection the deficit will fall to US$368 billion in 2005, US$261 billion in 2007, and US$207 billion in 2009, with a small surplus by 2012. The CBO noted, however, that this projection "omits a significant amount of spending that will occur...
(The Outstanding Public Debt as of 01 Feb 2010 at 11:43:08 PM GMT is: $12,290,400,888,908.62 - 16 Oct 09 - Obama team makes it official: Budget Deficit hits record. By a lot. (USA Today))
Unemployment:
During Bush's presidency, unemployment climbed from 4.2% in January 2001 to 7.2% in December 2008. Considering population growth, that still represents a 4.6% decrease in employment since Bush took office.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the number of unemployed was nearly 6.0 million in January 2001 and 6.9 million in September 2006. The unemployment rate was 4.2% in January 2001, 4.6% in September 2006, and 7.2% in December 2008. Employment peaked in late 1999 and declined through 2008.
(Current unemployment rate: 10.0% in Dec 2009 according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics)
Environmental:
In December 2003, Bush signed legislation implementing key provisions of his Healthy Forests Initiative. Another subject of controversy is Bush's Clear Skies Initiative, which seeks to reduce air pollution through expansion of emissions trading.
Bush signed the Great Lakes Legacy Act of 2002 authorizing the federal government to begin cleaning up pollution and contaminated sediment in the Great Lakes, as well as the Brownfields Legislation in 2002, accelerating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites, or brownfields, to better protect public health, create jobs, and revitalize communities.
Bush stated his reason for not supporting the Kyoto Protocol was that it unfairly targeted the United States while being deliberately lenient with certain developing countries, especially China and India. Bush stated, "The world's second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases is China. Yet, China was entirely exempted from the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol."
Bush also questioned the science behind the global warming phenomenon, insisting that more research be done to determine its validity.
In 2005-06, Bush emphasized the need for comprehensive energy reform and proposed increased funding for research and development of renewable sources of energy such as hydrogen power, nuclear power, ethanol, and clean coal technologies. Bush proposed the American Competitiveness Initiative which seeks to support increasing competitiveness of the U.S. economy, with greater development of advanced technologies, as well as greater education and support for American students. In the 2007 State of the Union speech, President Bush proposed a 20:10 policy, where, as a nation, the United States would be working to reduce 20% of the national energy usage in next 10 years by converting to ethanol. (Obama's preaching sounds vaguely familiar, eh?)
Other:
Bush signed the Amber Alert legislation into law on April 30, 2003...
On June 15, 2006, Bush created the seventy-fifth, and largest, National Monument in U.S. history and the largest Marine Protected Area in the world with the formation of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands National Monument.
In 2002, President Bush signed the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act...
In January 2002, Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act, with Democratic Senator Ted Kennedy as chief sponsor... (Which Obama has sworn to continue.)
On January 14, 2004, Bush announced a Vision for Space Exploration, calling for the completion of the International Space Station by 2010 and the retirement of the space shuttle while developing a new spacecraft called the Crew Exploration Vehicle under the title Project Constellation.
Bush supported adult stem cell research and umbilical cord blood stem cell research. However, Bush opposed any new embryonic stem cell research, and had limited the federal funding of existing research.
In 2006, Bush urged Congress to allow more than twelve million illegal immigrants to work in the United States with the creation of a "temporary guest-worker program".
------------------
Now don't get me wrong, outside of the fact that no one can dispute that we had no more terrorist attacks on U.S. soil during the remainder of his time in office, Bush botched the war on Iraq. But all this talk about how Bush messed everything up is just too much when in light of the current status of the U.S., which is now on Obama's shoulders and no longer can be blamed on Bush, is just doing nothing more than rehashing misinformation, or at least exclusion of some good points, and it serves no purpose. We are now under a new administration and what they have done, including their lack thereof, has worsened what was already a bad situation, topped with .... lies (must be a prerequisite for the office of the presidency).
Watari- roku'dan
- Knowledge :
Oh come Kyo, you mean plenty of offense, in fact debating about politics is meant to offend whether you intentionally mean to do it or not, saying that phrase has become a pleasantry. I mean I can understand where you're coming from though, just not on the same subject, I get tired of hearing people constantly bringing up Obama's Affiliation with the Muslims, I mean to me that's a so what deal, but to others it's a big deal, to each his own.
With Bush's tax cuts and Obama's tax cuts, you're right they are the same, there is no difference, what is the difference is that Obama has 3 years to prove to the American public that he can restore our economy and lower our deficit at the same time, that is the underlying difference, whether it happens or not remains to be seen.
My directives at Bush were at a financial stand point, I also admitted that I could be wrong on Obama's plan saying only time will tell if his plan will work, I haven't brought out the noose just yet only because I
want to see if he'll improve what Bush trashed. It's true, I don't like Bush, I didn't like Bush from the beginning and I remain very critical on what Bush did in office, true he did some good things, but does the good outweigh the bad? Depends on your stand point, some people can't look past Obama's name and past religious affiliation with the Muslims, I see Bush's war on Iraq as being a major reason our current economic crisis happened, I mean there are just some things that some people grasp on to when they look at someone and for someone like me Bush's Cons outweigh his Pros, I feel he trashed America with the War in Iraq and do you think you can tell me I'm wrong for thinking that? I'm not 100% pro Obama, but nor am I against the guy, he's just had 1 year in office and it's his first term, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt because I want to believe he can do something and if I get let down well then so be it, on to the next president.
With Bush's tax cuts and Obama's tax cuts, you're right they are the same, there is no difference, what is the difference is that Obama has 3 years to prove to the American public that he can restore our economy and lower our deficit at the same time, that is the underlying difference, whether it happens or not remains to be seen.
My directives at Bush were at a financial stand point, I also admitted that I could be wrong on Obama's plan saying only time will tell if his plan will work, I haven't brought out the noose just yet only because I
want to see if he'll improve what Bush trashed. It's true, I don't like Bush, I didn't like Bush from the beginning and I remain very critical on what Bush did in office, true he did some good things, but does the good outweigh the bad? Depends on your stand point, some people can't look past Obama's name and past religious affiliation with the Muslims, I see Bush's war on Iraq as being a major reason our current economic crisis happened, I mean there are just some things that some people grasp on to when they look at someone and for someone like me Bush's Cons outweigh his Pros, I feel he trashed America with the War in Iraq and do you think you can tell me I'm wrong for thinking that? I'm not 100% pro Obama, but nor am I against the guy, he's just had 1 year in office and it's his first term, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt because I want to believe he can do something and if I get let down well then so be it, on to the next president.
Kyouri Kai- Founder
- Knowledge :
- Post n°8
Re: Obama unveils 2011 budget with $3.83T in spending
by Kyouri Kai Mon 01 Feb 2010, 11:21 pm
No, no... seriously, I meant no personal offense to you at all. On the contrary, I actually agree that Bush wasn't the greatest of all presidents. The problem lies in the fact that when you turn on the news, read the paper, read the news online, or heck, do a simple internet search, all one sees or hears is how bad Bush was and let's give this guy a chance. Obama lied within the first two weeks in office. He said he would never have a lobbyist on his staff yet he went and hired several former lobbyists and I don't know how many tax evaders. He said 'he' would have the troops out of Iraq by a certain time when in fact, Bush had already implemented that plan before he left office. The records speak for themselves that he's done nothing but almost doubled the national deficit within a year and now is calling for even more spending and hasn't done a single thing he said he would do. The problem isn't with who was or is in the president's office tho, the problem lies with the fact that we have a gang of clogs in the wheel and it's time to strip the bearings and replace 'em all, in my opinion. I hope that I am proven wrong about Obama and his fat wallet, but it didn't go unnoticed that he lied about the Supreme Court ruling and the law, right in front of them. Justice Alito even uttered "not true". I just can't trust anyone that stands there and lies in the face of the American people, no matter their skin color, national origin, or religion. He's not what I want representing me to the world as an American. I'm also tired of hearing how other countries who looked to us as being the strong nation now only see us strong in military might and even better off economically, yet weak when it comes to our morals. Unfortunately, I agree with them. One good thing about Obama taking office... it has brought politics to just about every household in America now. It's about time the people started speaking up. In the end, the voters really have no one to blame but themselves.
Watari- roku'dan
- Knowledge :
To be honest, I don't hang on promises of any politician, they all lie and break promises that is pretty much a given when you talk about politics. I didn't trust Bush when he talked about pulling the troops our of Iraq because we have all heard it before and seriously pulling out of a war is no easy task especially when you're leaving them on their own. I would love to be able to say I appreciate Bush for all he's done, but I can't because I can't appreciate almost anything he's done, he's made a few good choices and I'll give him a single pat but a kick to the nuts for everything else. If Obama makes that same mistake then I don't think he'll last his full term before people call for his head, the people have learned from Bush and if a president is going to be bad for America I don't think you'll see him in office for a second time unless he does something so damn good it makes up for any wrong doing.
I'll wait it out and see what happens I'm not quick to judge as people make mistakes I mean who knows maybe this time next year we'll be on the road to recovery and everything will be OK, but we all know that won't happen, everyone has to have something to complain about.
I'll wait it out and see what happens I'm not quick to judge as people make mistakes I mean who knows maybe this time next year we'll be on the road to recovery and everything will be OK, but we all know that won't happen, everyone has to have something to complain about.
Lrules364- go'dan
- Post n°10
Re: Obama unveils 2011 budget with $3.83T in spending
by Lrules364 Tue 02 Feb 2010, 7:49 pm
Kyouri Kai wrote:No, no... seriously, I meant no personal offense to you at all. On the contrary, I actually agree that Bush wasn't the greatest of all presidents. The problem lies in the fact that when you turn on the news, read the paper, read the news online, or heck, do a simple internet search, all one sees or hears is how bad Bush was and let's give this guy a chance. Obama lied within the first two weeks in office. He said he would never have a lobbyist on his staff yet he went and hired several former lobbyists and I don't know how many tax evaders. He said 'he' would have the troops out of Iraq by a certain time when in fact, Bush had already implemented that plan before he left office. The records speak for themselves that he's done nothing but almost doubled the national deficit within a year and now is calling for even more spending and hasn't done a single thing he said he would do. The problem isn't with who was or is in the president's office tho, the problem lies with the fact that we have a gang of clogs in the wheel and it's time to strip the bearings and replace 'em all, in my opinion. I hope that I am proven wrong about Obama and his fat wallet, but it didn't go unnoticed that he lied about the Supreme Court ruling and the law, right in front of them. Justice Alito even uttered "not true". I just can't trust anyone that stands there and lies in the face of the American people, no matter their skin color, national origin, or religion. He's not what I want representing me to the world as an American. I'm also tired of hearing how other countries who looked to us as being the strong nation now only see us strong in military might and even better off economically, yet weak when it comes to our morals. Unfortunately, I agree with them. One good thing about Obama taking office... it has brought politics to just about every household in America now. It's about time the people started speaking up. In the end, the voters really have no one to blame but themselves.
Hey Kyo, I agree with you 100%. I wanted to vote for Obama because he promisd us change in our local economies, and less spending. Instead, He bought out GM, killed millions of jobs, killed Pontiac, Saturn, SAAB, and Hummer. (the govt needs Hummer for military support) Then they go ahead and say that they want to spend $8 billion of our tax money building high speed bullet trains. This was tried in the 1960's, and it failed misarably. Half the railroads in Youngstown that once existed a just a bunch of wood, gravel, and steel. The y are no longer used by anyone in the area. Railroads may have been a good system back in the early 1900's, but this is now 2010 and we use cars to get around.
Another thing: Global Warming does not exist. It is a big political scam to make money. Scientists proved that it wasn't real, and the government stepped in and bribed them to say it was. (there is a movie on this. I have to find it to put it up)
I may have been hard on George Bush, but even I have to say that he was better than Obama. At least he never supported killing jobs by spending billions. Sure, the WMD incident was a mistake at first. But when we pulled our men out, two years later they announced the development of nuclear weapons. (and you can look it up if you dont beleive me. It happened in 2006)
I may be a right wing nutjob that everyone doesn't want to hear, but one thing is clear: Obama will not bring any change to this nation until he is ousted and a new presidential order is elected in. To me, right now this country has fallen into a communist rule. Yet everyone refuses to acknowledge it. What Kyo said about the rest of the world is absolutly true. Under Bush, we were veiwed as the super power of the world. But under Obama, we are veiwed as a weak independent country that doesn't have anything to itself but its military power. It is really sad to think like that, but it is true. And the only way everyone can stop it from going any further is by protesting silently. Remember the sit ins? Well, I plan to do one soon up at the Lordstown plant if it is not shut down by then. If I get arrested, so be it. I will be proving a point that I am not going to take this anymore.
Watari- roku'dan
- Knowledge :
Lrules364 wrote:Under Bush, we were veiwed as the super power of the world. But under Obama, we are veiwed as a weak independent country that doesn't have anything to itself but its military power.
The world never viewed us as a Superpower under Bush, we were a freaking joke to the World, still are to this day, we haven't been a Superpower to the world since before 2000 rolled around. Those brands of cars you were talking about were going to be killed off before Obama took office, their was talk of that in the Bush era, blaming Obama for that is just ridiculous.
BTW L, as for the bullet trains, they're a big success in Japan and so they're making a push for them in America too, that's why they're investing so much into them, does it make it right, meh maybe not but you know in times like these cheap transportation are what people want and a Bullet Train is just that, cheap effective transportation. I'll be interested into seeing how this get implemented in America over the next 10 years.
Again I won't touch your views on global warming since you already know my views on that anyway, it's a moot point to bring up now b/c all it leads to is a big black hole of nothingness
Lrules364- go'dan
- Post n°12
Re: Obama unveils 2011 budget with $3.83T in spending
by Lrules364 Wed 03 Feb 2010, 3:18 pm
yea, yea. You can have your fun all you want, but there is more behind the scenes that you don't know of. 
Before Obama got elected, General Motors faked falling into bankruptcy by cancelling several of their upcoming cars. (one of them included the G8 ST which is now being made in Australia.) Then, they showed signs of killing buick and not killing Pontiac. But as soon as that happened, Obama got elected and made a very useless Auto Task Board made up of old men that have never even put awindshield washer fluid in their cars. They went on to buy GM. Rick Wagnor was fired from GM, because of political corruption in the Auto Task Board, and they pick the worst replacement in America to head the company: Fritz Henderson. (he dropped out of high school, never finished college, and only worked as an assembly line manager for a couple years. he had no experiance whatsoever.) As soon as that happened, The ATB ordered the immediate termination of the Hummer and SAAB lines. And then, because they are old men, they all liked the Buick line. Then they got this bright little idea in their heads to sever one of Americas bloodlines: Pontiac. They did this because it was veiwed as the American car. But because they were older and did not like the styling(obviously they never drove one either), they conversed with each other. Fritz got together with them, as well as Susan Docharty, and they all wanted to kill the company off. (even though it was, and still is, there third best selling line of cars.) I guarantee that if they would have elected an assembly line worker, this would have never happened.
Now, Pontiac is still here but has no new 2010 models. SAAB is gone, Hummer went Overseas, and Saturn is getting killed off too. (even though its the baby of the company having started in 1990.) Even Opel might not have a chance anymore. they have no more money, ran out of good cars to offer, and are selling almost half of what they sold last year. (even the sales records show it. You can look it up if you do not beleive me.)
It was Obama's fault, and Obama must fix it before it is too late. Corruption and greed have already overrun the place. (as we seen a couple weeks ago when the mass. senetor was elected.) When will it end? Never, thats when. The govt. will always be corrupt no matter which genre it may be. But the least we can do is to elect senetors that will do what they say, and not do the Obama to our country. Sure, they make take bribes to do things here and there, but that is always how our govt has always operated. As long as they fix all these wrong things, i dont care who they are, nor about there party.
(P.S. I know that this sounds like a load of crap spewed onto a post, but it is all true. Fritz did converse with the ATB and they all came to that conclusion without a vote by the company execs' approval. [they did a test later that showed that nobody wanted to kill Saturn nor Pontiac] Fritz surprised everyone, even the execs', when he announced the termination of these car companies. Many offers were made to buy them, but only Hummer was sold. Many deals were in the making with Opel, Satrun, Pontiac, and SAAB. But non of them were sold because of the ATB and the planted exec's within GM's board. And Obama is at the head of it all.)
Before Obama got elected, General Motors faked falling into bankruptcy by cancelling several of their upcoming cars. (one of them included the G8 ST which is now being made in Australia.) Then, they showed signs of killing buick and not killing Pontiac. But as soon as that happened, Obama got elected and made a very useless Auto Task Board made up of old men that have never even put awindshield washer fluid in their cars. They went on to buy GM. Rick Wagnor was fired from GM, because of political corruption in the Auto Task Board, and they pick the worst replacement in America to head the company: Fritz Henderson. (he dropped out of high school, never finished college, and only worked as an assembly line manager for a couple years. he had no experiance whatsoever.) As soon as that happened, The ATB ordered the immediate termination of the Hummer and SAAB lines. And then, because they are old men, they all liked the Buick line. Then they got this bright little idea in their heads to sever one of Americas bloodlines: Pontiac. They did this because it was veiwed as the American car. But because they were older and did not like the styling(obviously they never drove one either), they conversed with each other. Fritz got together with them, as well as Susan Docharty, and they all wanted to kill the company off. (even though it was, and still is, there third best selling line of cars.) I guarantee that if they would have elected an assembly line worker, this would have never happened. Now, Pontiac is still here but has no new 2010 models. SAAB is gone, Hummer went Overseas, and Saturn is getting killed off too. (even though its the baby of the company having started in 1990.) Even Opel might not have a chance anymore. they have no more money, ran out of good cars to offer, and are selling almost half of what they sold last year. (even the sales records show it. You can look it up if you do not beleive me.)
It was Obama's fault, and Obama must fix it before it is too late. Corruption and greed have already overrun the place. (as we seen a couple weeks ago when the mass. senetor was elected.) When will it end? Never, thats when. The govt. will always be corrupt no matter which genre it may be. But the least we can do is to elect senetors that will do what they say, and not do the Obama to our country. Sure, they make take bribes to do things here and there, but that is always how our govt has always operated. As long as they fix all these wrong things, i dont care who they are, nor about there party.
(P.S. I know that this sounds like a load of crap spewed onto a post, but it is all true. Fritz did converse with the ATB and they all came to that conclusion without a vote by the company execs' approval. [they did a test later that showed that nobody wanted to kill Saturn nor Pontiac] Fritz surprised everyone, even the execs', when he announced the termination of these car companies. Many offers were made to buy them, but only Hummer was sold. Many deals were in the making with Opel, Satrun, Pontiac, and SAAB. But non of them were sold because of the ATB and the planted exec's within GM's board. And Obama is at the head of it all.)
Watari- roku'dan
- Knowledge :
Umm faking bankruptcy, no they were preparing for the inevitable, I followed the GM downfall for a while because it was a big deal, I spent 5 years in the auto industry, not much time most would say but enough to follow the industries direction and what consumers wanted, GM's money troubles began WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYY before the Obama era and they did not fake anything, these money issues were beginning when the gas prices started to soar (wow look at that connection!) Hummer died because people couldn't afford to drive them, most of GM's lines were considered gas hogs and therefore were becoming more and more just show off cars rather than the middle class cars, Toyota and Honda took over as the Middle class peoples car due to their fuel efficiency. Obama's administration may have been the hand to finally kill off what needed to be killed off, but it all started in the Bush era, so if you're going to blame one, have to blame the other. Sorry to say but GM killed those lines of their own mishandlings, they have no one to blame but themselves for killing those lines of vehicle, but it's O.K. I never thought highly of Pontiac in the first place
Lrules364- go'dan
- Post n°14
Re: Obama unveils 2011 budget with $3.83T in spending
by Lrules364 Fri 05 Feb 2010, 11:49 am
There are a select few like yourself, Watari, that never thought very highly of it. Thats just fine with me, and I am not forcing any ideals your way nor anyone elses. However, it seems to me that the facts have led you wrong to the Obama adminastration. During the early 1970's the gas shortage created a havac in America. People were searching for smaller cars just like they are today. And when Datsun and Toyota came to the states, it was to sell only a few thousand cars. That turned into an explosion of these cars selling fast which caused Toyota and Datsun to rethink their time here. And when the gas shortage ended, guess who came right back to offer an even better car? Thats right, GM. They offered four cylinder cars and trucks to go along with their lineups. Even Ford offered a four cylinder Mustang/Mercury Caprie that everyone continued to buy. (of course that was a big mistake as the Ford four cylinder often broke down due to mechanical defects. And no, im not picking on Ford either. This was a problem.)
Now toyota, honda, nissan, Kia, and Subaru are in big trouble because of their faulty equiptment yet again. (the same thing happened years ago.) And as the sales continue to fall within these companies, they keep finding more problems and defects in their cars that lead to injury and even death. People are returning these cars even quiker than they bought them now. And it stems back to what I said a couple years ago about the foreign brands. they are garbage on wheels. They have never made a quality car. (same thing goes for the "new GM"[Government Motors])
As for GM's money troubles, they did begin a long time before the Obama administration took effect. You are right about that. However, the debt that they said they had was nowhere near what they claimed it was. They cut off all new 2009 models back in 2008 in order to show signs of breaking down. But they really were nowhere near going into bankruptcy. Somewhere near August, they cut all funding towards most programs when they heard that the government was giving our money. Then after January, their sales faltered and they began to slide down hill from there into bankruptcy protection. So yes, before they went into bankruptcy protection, they faked it to try to get free money from the government to recover from decades of corrupt spending.
Watari, I understand how you feel. But I have been following this stuff since I was a kid. I am not saying I know everything(because nobody does.) and I am not saying that I am better than you either. (because nobody is better than anyone.) I am just saying that I have been dealing with this for what seems like an eternity now and I should know what has been going on at the corprate office as well as the assembly line. I do know a lot about this company as it has been part of my family since the first GM car came off the line. But If there is something that you think would be important, let me know. I am always open to suggestions.
Now toyota, honda, nissan, Kia, and Subaru are in big trouble because of their faulty equiptment yet again. (the same thing happened years ago.) And as the sales continue to fall within these companies, they keep finding more problems and defects in their cars that lead to injury and even death. People are returning these cars even quiker than they bought them now. And it stems back to what I said a couple years ago about the foreign brands. they are garbage on wheels. They have never made a quality car. (same thing goes for the "new GM"[Government Motors])
As for GM's money troubles, they did begin a long time before the Obama administration took effect. You are right about that. However, the debt that they said they had was nowhere near what they claimed it was. They cut off all new 2009 models back in 2008 in order to show signs of breaking down. But they really were nowhere near going into bankruptcy. Somewhere near August, they cut all funding towards most programs when they heard that the government was giving our money. Then after January, their sales faltered and they began to slide down hill from there into bankruptcy protection. So yes, before they went into bankruptcy protection, they faked it to try to get free money from the government to recover from decades of corrupt spending.
Watari, I understand how you feel. But I have been following this stuff since I was a kid. I am not saying I know everything(because nobody does.) and I am not saying that I am better than you either. (because nobody is better than anyone.) I am just saying that I have been dealing with this for what seems like an eternity now and I should know what has been going on at the corprate office as well as the assembly line. I do know a lot about this company as it has been part of my family since the first GM car came off the line. But If there is something that you think would be important, let me know. I am always open to suggestions.
Watari- roku'dan
- Knowledge :
Well this went off topic for most of my response wouldn't be on what Obama did to the country so I will start another thread for this topic on the automotive industry and Obama's hand in it all.
Sponsored content