President Bush and President Obama approach to solving economic crisis?

1. What is the basic difference in approach between President Bush and President Obama's administrations to solving the economic crisis in the US?



2. Which do you think would be most effective? Why?President Bush and President Obama approach to solving economic crisis?Like one answerer has already said, presidents can't do a whole lot to solve economic problems. The Federal Reserve is largely to blame for our current economic predicament, the housing bubble, and the stock market bubble based on the skewed housing stats. The Federal Reserve controls our currency, which means our future is basically in their hands. If we have deficits, they just print more money, and when they print more money, so what if the value decreases? They'll just raise interest rates. Of course right now, they are printing more money, keeping interest rates low, and therefore minimizing inflation. But this is only sustainable so long. We have massive debt and stagflation-sluggish economic recovery coupled with high inflation- will be a reality soon. When the rich bankers that run the Federal Reserve screw up, they just have presidents sign bailouts into law to cover their butts. What if they don't? Then the Fed can just threaten to let the economy collapse, so what choice does a president really have other than to be the Fed's b*tch? To put it bluntly. The way we've been doing things for decades, with printing more money, and the cycle of growth and recession, and compounding debt on top of debt, its really unsustainable. We were so much better off before the creation of the Federal Reserve system in 1913 when we were fully on a commodity based currency. Our money supply was fixed.|||they both suck!President Bush and President Obama approach to solving economic crisis?Bush used Supply Side Economics



Obama's using Keynesian Economics



I think Obama's so far|||Let's see, 0bama thinks we can spend our way out of debt while crippling business. I'm pretty sure that's about the stupidest approach possible.President Bush and President Obama approach to solving economic crisis?Bush(8 years) economic errors:



The Return to Deficits



Iraq



Tax Cuts for the Rich



Financial Regulation



Telling Us to Go Shopping



Energy Policy



A State of Denial



The Muddled Bailout



Obama(1 year):



Stimulus to help all those who have fallen from the last 8 years|||bush IS the economic crisis Obama is trying to solve.|||I can't see any they are both tools!|||Both of these presidents have little to say about the economic crisis, it's our federal banks that do all the talking. And then you have the Congress.|||When Bush took office we were heading into a recession and his tax cuts were helping business keep people employed. Businesses either pay Uncle Sam or employees they can't do both when taxes are high.

Katrina and 9-11 put us back economically. So we had the war in Afghanistan where we totally freed the people but other Arab countries joined in to fight American Christians--it is a religious war--because they say it is not what we say. A Jihad is religious to them. But Afghanistan was freed and Bin ladden was pushed back into the hills. Iraq was also freed but neither country was free of corrupt politicians.

Those same type of corrupt politician in the US congress let Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ruin out economy even though Pres. Bush asked about 13 times to repeal the law and all the Barny Frank, types would do is accuse Bush of hating poor people.

The AIG, banks and Auto motive bailouts were a mistake--let them fail--The private sector would have taken the assets regrouped and made them more secure--they have already paid back their loans.

Obama stimulus package has done nothing to help our economy and has done a lot to hurt our economy. It appears Obama is using the stimulus money to pay off his supporters like the unions, ACORN, GE and Al Gore.

The Auto unions members made some sacrifices (not the union leaders) yet the Auto union leaders made no noise about 50 billion going overseas to Finland to help Al Gore build "Green cars".

So to answer your question:

Tax cuts and less regulations help business employ more people which means more money to spend on more "things"

More taxes and more regulations means less employees, more money spent on regulations and less money to spend.