This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

So... what exactly has Obama been doing 'wrong' or not right

jacketpotato

You entire argument falls down on the basis that the strongly Republican George Bush built up a much worse debt and deficit than Labour did. The U.S. national debt has been some way ahead of the U.K national debt for some years now, and it remains the case.

National debt in 1997 after 10 years of Thatcher and 8 years of Major? 53% of GDP
National debt in 2008 after 11 years of New Labour? 47% of GDP.
The facts don't square with your narrative.

US doesn't do public sector pension deficits like we do. Currently £1.177 TRILLION in this country. Add £881 billion in government debt and you've got a financial hole of £2.058 trillion pounds, over £33,000 of debt for every man woman and child.

If you want an idea of the chronic mismanagement of our public sector:

I don't predict cameron and his lot to do a brilliant job, but they can't do worse than the present bunch of dishonourable fraudsters.

Reply 41

jacketpotato

20

TShadow383

...

The US public debt is currently $12trillion, or 90% of GDP, or $40,000 for each American. That's way above the UK public debt and is predicted to continue rising at a faster rate. Source: http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ based on daily US treasury figures. Feel free to corroborate with other sources.

You say "public sector" pension deficits, but its not just a public sector problem. Did you know that the pension deficit of British Airways is 4x the value of all its listed shares?

The £33,000 figure is inaccurate because it misunderstands how National Insurance works. National pensions work on a through-put basis, they don't work on a contribution basis (i.e. where a saver puts money into a pension plan, and the money is used to buy a financial product called an anuity to give him an income during his retirement). Future pension costs will be off-set by future National Insurance, that is what NI is for. I don't deny there is still a big lack-of-money problem, but the whole figure doesn't translate into debt.

On your graph, the rise in MPs' salaries looks to be broadly in line with wage inflation.
I agree that public sector wages have risen too fast, but GPs are a very special case. GPs' base salary hasn't risen that much, it is between 50k and 83k, see http://www.nhscareers.nhs.uk/details/Default.aspx?Id=553. I'm not sure on what basis those figures were collected, but GPs earning big sums are self-employed and have to pay costs out of their earnings, so I doubt whether your figures are actual take-home pay. Changes in the way GPs operate have been driven by Thatcherite style reforms giving GPs a lot more control, so you have to bear that in mind given that you earlier insulted Labour for being socialist. You've also got to remember that the opening hours of GP surgeries have changed drastically. In 1997 most GPs were only open during business hours. Weekend and evening availability has increased enormously, and that comes with a premium.

Reply 42

Badrkahandaman

algérie_mon_amour

Do you think that a child would desobey his mother who is his only feeder? No.
We are told that America is the most powerful, but it's in fact Israel that has all the power and is controlling the world; US is only one of its servants; so Obama will never put any pressure on Netanyahu as he knows he country will be .....
But instead he will try and help the Israelis to kill as many Palestinian children as they want :smile:

Yeah that's what pisses me off, and that's why I didn't actually say he did anything wrong or disliked him because a big part of my brain (the realistic part) knew that this would happen anyway..

Reply 43

The Commonwealth

2

He is a socialist. He received a Nobel Prize for doing nothing. He has no taste in the choice of his clothes and doesn't know how to make a proper tie knot.

Reply 44

Komakino

14

Potally_Tissed

I wish we could swap Obama for Gordon Brown.

Or any British political party leaders, let's do a trade off, we get Obama they can have Cameron. Good all round.

Reply 45

Crimsonchilli

12

he hasnt really done much wrong, just also not much right either. He won the Nobel peace prize, and for what ? What's he done apart from talk about how he will bring world peace, talk about how he will end the economic downturn, talk about how he bring peace in the East. Oh, wait, was the before or after he committed another 40k troops to Afghanistan.

Now, as i said, i don't personally think hes done anything wrong , just nothing worth celebrating either.

Reply 46

Glee

8

lukejoshjedi

I really don't see the problem. And i want specific answers to what exactly he's been doing that's so terrible and awful, i'm so sick of the automatic internet responses to anything about Obama always being negative 'obama sucks, he's messed up everything etc etc'

I always wonder what exactly he's done to be SO dissapproved of only a full year into his presidency, he's really progressive thinking and forward thinking, pushing ideas of change, free healthcare for America.... and he's been getting turned on so much?

so what exactly is it? all the promises he's made that he hasn't necessarily all fulfilled... the fact that he's black and some people still don't like that?

cos Guantanamo bay isn't closed yet? well.......

seconds. I really dont know why either, kinda pathetic.

Reply 47

Glee

8

Komakino

Or any British political party leaders, let's do a trade off, we get Obama they can have Cameron. Good all round.

huh

Reply 48

Komakino

14

Glee

huh

Reply 49

lukejoshjedi

OP

10

Just give him more time? did people really expect him to have changed the world by now?

he's got 3 years to come to prove what he can do

Reply 50

Komakino

14

One could only ask the same of the American people, we can see now from the Republican victory in Massachusetts that they will have more influence to veto every bill he tries to pass that shows any inclination to 1/ welfare concern. 2/ climate change legislation. 3/ taking in prisoners from Guantanamo.

What a bunch of "£$%^ the GOP is.

Reply 51

Made in the USA

11

lukejoshjedi

I really don't see the problem. And i want specific answers to what exactly he's been doing that's so terrible and awful, i'm so sick of the automatic internet responses to anything about Obama always being negative 'obama sucks, he's messed up everything etc etc'

I always wonder what exactly he's done to be SO dissapproved of only a full year into his presidency, he's really progressive thinking and forward thinking, pushing ideas of change, free healthcare for America.... and he's been getting turned on so much?

so what exactly is it? all the promises he's made that he hasn't necessarily all fulfilled... the fact that he's black and some people still don't like that?

cos Guantanamo bay isn't closed yet? well.......

The problem is that the economy is really bad. No people in any country are going to tolerate double digit unemployment for very long. Instead of trying to pass a healthcare bill the majority of Americans don't want or blame Bush for everything, he should have devoted every second of his presidency on lowering unemployment. I understand there may be a second stimulus and this upcoming one is supposed to be "jobs-focused", but that begs the question of why the first stimulus wasn't?

Reply 52

Komakino

14

Made in the USA

The problem is that the economy is really bad. No people in any country are going to tolerate double digit unemployment for very long. Instead of trying to pass a healthcare bill the majority of Americans don't want or blame Bush for everything, he should have devoted every second of his presidency on lowering unemployment. I understand there may be a second stimulus and this upcoming one is supposed to be "jobs-focused", but that begs the question of why the first stimulus wasn't?

It's far too early to say what affect the first stimulus has had, I heard the notion of a second stimulus was put forward by an outside adviser but has been dismissed to allow more time for the first stimulus to take affect. The first one of course was to steady the economy with no specific focus but that, same as any government would and has done.

Reply 53

O-Ren

15

It's the economy, stupid.

/thread

Spoiler

Reply 54

Made in the USA

11

Komakino

It's far too early to say what affect the first stimulus has had, I heard the notion of a second stimulus was put forward by an outside adviser but has been dismissed to allow more time for the first stimulus to take affect. The first one of course was to steady the economy with no specific focus but that, same as any government would and has done.

We were told by Obama that the stimulus had to be passed immediately to keep unemployment under 8%. By any objective standard, the so-called stimulus has been a failure.

O-Ren

It's the economy, stupid.

/thread

Bingo

Reply 55

Komakino

14

Made in the USA

We were told by Obama that the stimulus had to be passed immediately to keep unemployment under 8%. By any objective standard, the so-called stimulus has been a failure.

Bingo

Even if this is the case, measuring the depth of the recession is no easy task, these things take time. I'm afraid like most governments you'll have to sit and wait.

So... what exactly has Obama been doing 'wrong' or not right

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you