Can any President of any country fix the economy or is it a cyclical expectation?

[GSeybold]

Can any President of any country fix this world economy or is it a cyclical expectation?

My vote... Always a cyclical expectation. The sum reality of greed, growth and materialist gluttony and I'm sure as hell guilty of this as well.

Thoughts?

The free market naturally has its ups and downs - I think that this recession we're seeing is the result of that natural flow but also has been exacerbated due to greedy practices.

I don't think the bail out was the optimal solution, especially because Congress has absolutely no idea what the bail out money was used for so far...it's very unsettling.

Sometimes I feel like no one has any idea about to handle this thing, I know I don't.

I just hope the new Obama admistration has the skills and foresight to regulate where necessary and not risk ruining the foundations of our economy.

there is only one solution... No More Profits... the Star Trek era is coming anyway, people have to stop lurking for money...

anyway, i'm working for free, people know i'm not into money... ROFL!

[KevinL]

Originally Posted by nexialys

anyway, i'm working for free, people know i'm not into money... ROFL!

I need some work done

[iogames]

nonono!
life is like 'Jenga' you fix something but break the equilibrium in another part...

p.s. may not be cyclical, but cynical

[Magnumutz]

I guess it can. Look at Bush, he spent so much with the wars in the Middle East that it brought the whole world down to a financial crisis.

[GSeybold]

Hi Mag,
Well I'm sure Irag/Afghanistan expenditure had something to do with it but this doesn't explain at all, the bust of the real estate market leading to the financial collapse of several lenders (WaMu-Countrywide...). That is pure greed at it's worst.

Additionally, the fall of many markets have nothing to do with Bush and everything to do with excess, quality and poor management (Union based benefits is one example). That an exporting so many jobs... (another topic)

I guess one could see the middle east expenditure as cyclical in a sense since that region seems to be in a never-ending war for thousands of years. So yes, a cyclical expectation argument could be made regardless of which president was in office, just by the history of that region alone.

However, if you look back in time, times likes these are preceded by an enormous growth period spurred by unfortunately, a world war. A good example of this would be the growth of suburbia in the 1950's.

IMO-The cycle of the economy is based on the history of greed and catastrophic events.( 9-11, Pearl Harbor, Dust Bowl,... and so on...) Whatever President in office at the time of these catastrophic events has the immediate economic burden; whatever president follows the outcome of these catastorphic events then has the long term burden of economic recovery. Economic circumstances have nothing to do with political ideology and everything to do with the timing of unfortunate circumstances(events) and the wasteful and wanting traits of human beings.

P.S. Political Diplomacy often very much fails for both major U.S. parties and allied leaders, this is why there is no basis for any political ideology when discussing economic issues.

Originally Posted by Magnumutz

I guess it can. Look at Bush, he spent so much with the wars in the Middle East that it brought the whole world down to a financial crisis.

[Magnumutz]

Okay, but you can't deny that the whole world is suffering cuz of the US.
It all started there and affected countries that barely had anything to do with the US.
Look at my country for example, our currency devalued since the crisis began, more than ever before. It never was so bad. Most prices went up by about 30%.
Gas? A "gallon" of gas is $4 here. Diesel is even more expensive.
It all revolves around one patch of land now...

Originally Posted by Magnumutz

Okay, but you can't deny that the whole world is suffering cuz of the US.

Ok, this again, is pathetic... always putting the fault on someone else, hey...

Are the inhabitants of other countries humans, or sheep ?!... they can decide on their own, they can change things on their own. if they are not happy of their situation, why wouldn't they change?! because of the USA?... where in the constitution of France is it written that they have to follow orders from America?!... where in the constitution of Germany is it written that they are owned by the USA?!

nowhere is written of made that the other countries have to suffer because of the USA. people are free to change their own status, they are not bond to the USA... this pathetic way of thinking that all and everything is because of the USA is just a denial of responsabilities.

actually, the world is watching to see if the USA will be able to break the crisis, not because they are responsable of it, but because they are the ones with the bigger means. in Canada, they invested 50 Billions to help the economy. the USA invested 800 Billions... the balance of power is different, and that is the element to take care of, not the responsability...

[Magnumutz]

Umm dude... Romania would've been independent of any kind of crisis the world would have to throw at it, if we were to still be in communism.
But about 20 years ago, some bastards decided that having a country where nobody starves and everybody has a home and a place to work wasn't good enough anymore... so they started a revolution. Tens of thousands of people died in a couple of days until they shot the "president".

Since then we've been so eager to follow the USA, that it didn't even matter who was in the chair, they all kissed ass on the americans and right now, we're screwed.

No, i might not make sense enough for you to get the picture but it's the damn government that sucks up to the US, that brought us here. No, it doesn't matter who's in the chair, they're all the same and on it together. The few that were different were pushed away.
Not trying to blame the US, but our governments that look up to the US.

My final opinion? A DIRTY president could do that, with the right help.