Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Is Obama worse then Herbert Hoover? Or is he Bipolar?

Recs

31

August 17, 2009 – Comments (10) | RELATED TICKERS: GS , JPM , C

George Washington Blogspot makes the case: Worse Than Herbert Hoover

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2009/08/obama-is-worse-than-herbert-hoover.html


When Obama was elected, many compared him to a modern day FDR. See this Time Magazine cover, for example.

On the other hand, financial writer Ed Harrison has called Obama a "black Herbert Hoover".

Who is right?

It is true that Hoover - like Obama - did not force any meaningful change or reform to the banking or financial system. See this, this and this.

It is true that Hoover - like Obama -appointed as his top economic advisers banking insiders.

It is true that Hoover - like Obama - is trying to paper over the crash with happy talk.

But - unlike Hoover - Team Obama has printed tens of trillions of dollars and - instead of giving the money to consumers or the real economy - is throwing the money at the biggest banks.

And - unlike Hoover - Team Obama is massively manipulating the markets in so many ways that it is impossible to keep track.

The Obama economic team is destroying the real economy in order to prop up the financial giants. They are indebting the country and burying us under a moutain of debt, manipulating the markets and using happy talk to try to prop up a corrupt and fraudulent system which has stolen all of the poker chips.

Obama's actions prove that he is not only not a new FDR, he is actually worse than Herbert Hoover.

Race has nothing to do with it.

The Onion breaks the story here:


White House Reveals Obama Is Bipolar, Has Entered Depressive Phase

10 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On August 17, 2009 at 10:34 PM, RootnToot (29.98) wrote:

That rumble you just heard was HH rolling over in his grave! ;-)

Rec

Report this comment
#2) On August 17, 2009 at 10:39 PM, abitare (35.58) wrote:

Happy Talk: 

Wall Street Crash of 1929. The market did not return to pre-1929 levels until late 1954,[3] and was lower at its July 8, 1932 level than it had been since the 1800s.[4 

"Anyone who bought stocks in mid-1929 and held onto them saw most of his adult life pass by before getting back to even" Richard M. Salsman "Stock prices have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau."
- Irving Fisher, Ph.D. in economics, Oct. 17, 1929

"There will be no interruption of our permanent prosperity."
- Myron E. Forbes, President, Pierce Arrow Motor Car Co., January 12, 1928

"In most of the cities and towns of this country, this Wall Street panic will have no effect."
- Paul Block (President of the Block newspaper chain), editorial, November 15, 1929



"This crash is not going to have much effect on business."
- Arthur Reynolds, Chairman of Continental Illinois Bank of Chicago, October 24, 1929



"For the immediate future, at least, the outlook (stocks) is bright."
- Irving Fisher, Ph.D. in Economics, in early 1930

"Gentleman, you have come sixty days too late. The depression is over."
- Herbert Hoover, responding to a delegation
requesting a public works program
to help speed the recovery, June 1930

"There may be a recession in stock prices, but not anything in the nature of a crash."
- Irving Fisher, leading U.S. economist , New York Times, Sept. 5, 1929

"There is nothing in the situation to be disturbed about."
- Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon, Feb 1930

"While the crash only took place six months ago, I am convinced we have now passed through the worst -- and with continued unity of effort we shall rapidly recover."
- Herbert Hoover, President of the United States, May 1, 1930

"[1930 will be] a splendid employment year."
- U.S. Dept. of Labor, New Year's Forecast, December 1929
"I am convinced that through these measures we have reestablished confidence."
- Herbert Hoover, December 1929

Report this comment
#3) On August 18, 2009 at 2:39 AM, uclayoda87 (29.24) wrote:

What me worry?

 

 

We The People Stimulus Package Report this comment
#4) On August 18, 2009 at 2:47 AM, uclayoda87 (29.24) wrote:

http://gawker.com/5138485/mad-magazine-going-quarterly

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeYscnFpEyA

 

 

Report this comment
#5) On August 18, 2009 at 9:31 AM, leohaas (31.56) wrote:

One big difference though: Hoover did not have the benefit of knowing Keynes' work. Obama does. That is what he has bet on.

Needless to say you and many of the vocal CAPS bloggers (as well as the financial writers you quote and/or hyperlink) do not believe that a Keynesian approach will work. I am not sure it will. We will find out over the next couple of years.

For now, we have avoided a new Great Depression which was priced in to the market back in early March. The 50% or so we are up since those lows can only be explained by the market makers (large banks, hedge fund managers, mutual fund managers, pension fund managers and the like--not ordinary investors like you and me) believing the chance of us getting into a depression is gone from 'significant' to 'almost zero'.

Report this comment
#6) On August 18, 2009 at 11:00 AM, madcowmonkey (< 20) wrote:

I vote bi-polar!

Report this comment
#7) On August 18, 2009 at 12:18 PM, ReadEmAnWeep (80.72) wrote:

I would appreciate having a blog written on facts or anything useful. I am glad to see you spend your time reading such useful information from reliable sources.

Report this comment
#8) On August 18, 2009 at 12:25 PM, whereaminow (20.23) wrote:

leohaas,

I am curious to know how many of Keynes' books and essays you have read.  I will tell you, it is straight witch craft.  But, I suggest you read General Theory for yourself and perharps Hazlitt's rebuttal The Failure of the New Economics as well to balance out the madness.

David in Qatar 

Report this comment
#9) On August 18, 2009 at 12:57 PM, StopLaughing (< 20) wrote:

Acutally Hoover did rely fairly heavily on Keynes and his theories.

 

For that matter Bush engaged in some Keynesian approaches but miscalled it supply side. He knew running deficits helped GDP in the short run.

Obama is Keynesian delusional or since he knows little about economics it might be more appropriate to say his advisors are Neo Keynesian.  Obama's biggest problem is that he is ultra liberal and can't or doesn't understand that most liberal policies are bad for the economy.

Report this comment
#10) On August 18, 2009 at 1:22 PM, leohaas (31.56) wrote:

Sure, Keynes and his followers are 'delusional' and practice 'witch craft'. I guess in the same way supply-side economics is 'voodoo'.

And Hoover and Bush were Keynesian. Really, I did not make this up.

Listen, I am not sure it will work. I don't claim to know. We will see a few years from now.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement