Obama's Economic Policies Have Been Successful

In the final round, I would like to address bank lending issue before I move to my closing arguments. I would also urge our readers and voters to look beyond charts and numbers. Quote "As for banks, "If a banking collapse. .. past-war recessions. " Two points: First, Chart was cut off at 2008. As we all know, the recession was officially ended in June 2009. Given the fact that the economy is an ongoing trend, i. e. , The current performance would necessarily depend on the pervious performance, Con should therefore include the lending performance that from 2008 to 2010 as well. By ending the chart at 2008 could be very misleading. Second, it should not be surprised that bank lending behaviors similarly in this recession to other post-war recessions. The reason lies beneath the controversial government bailout efforts: Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). Here is what happened in 2008: Seven weeks before President Obama defeated John McCain in November 2008, Lehman Brothers collapsed. AIG was quickly followed and bailed out by the Federal Government. The rescues of Bank of America and Citigroup lay ahead. Capital market is nearly shut down. [1] In the middle of economic dismay, President Obama decided to back the unpopular Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). During this critical period, President Obama had displayed a mature leadership expected from all the americans: Choose the right path instead of the popular one. To avoid a full-scale meltdown, the Federal Reserve made massive investments about $1.2 trillion to stop the financial collapse. President Obama forced the small banks to raise capitals to cover their risky and irresponsible investments. Bank-capital ratio now exceed pre-crisis levels and most of their TARP money has been rapid at a profit to the government. [1] In other word, the financial meltdown and global economic collapse did not happen precisely because President Obama decided to act to save the financial system from collapse. Many americans felt angry about government" bailout of big banks. They feared that it would send a bad message to all the banks - "too big to fail. " Recently Ms. Gerri Wills ran a blog to criticize government"s handling of economic crisis. [2] What she failed to realize, however, is the fact that without government bailout, not only will the banking system collapse, but also will the entire U. S economy be dragged into a full-scale depression with unforeseeable consequences. Ordinary citizens would suffer the most. The recession was prevented from becoming a depression due to government interventions, and President Obama resisted the temper to punish the corrupted bankers on the expense of american people. Numbers and graphs are, undoubtedly, very power tools in presenting one"s argument. But these visual tools can be deceptive as well. Without explaining the underlying cause of the current bank lending behavior, the similarity that Con attempted to invoke would not undermine the strength of my contentions. Closing Argument Not since 1933 had an American president taken the oath of office in an economic climates as grim as it was when Barack Obama put his left hand on the Bible in January 2009. People were suffering, banking system was failing, and two big car manufactures were contemplating filing for bankruptcy. Many people believed that the Judgement Day had come and American had come to an end. President Obama was elected to save the country from the brink of collapse. The economy was losing 800,000 jobs a month when President Obama started, but he had digging the way out of polices that were misplaced and focused on the top doing very well and middle class folks not doing well. Job creations under President Bush eight year presidency is next to 0 percent. From 2001-2005, the economy lost 64,000 jobs; from 2005-2009, only 1,186 thousands of jobs were created. While middle class and ordinary citizens were suffering, the ultra-wealth Americans were doing extraordinarily well. Bush Tax cut ($1.8 trillion) and wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and other spending contributes over $ 6.1 trillion to the national debt. Bush administrations doubled the national debt even before the financial meltdown. [3] President Bush"s misguided and irresponsible economic policy is the true reason behind the sluggish recovery. President Obama understood the dynamics of the situations. He immediately proceeded to save the collapsed banking system therefore stabilized the economy and eased the investors" fears. President Obama then rescued the auto industry from the edge of collapse, saving over 1 million jobs around the country. Today, GM has returned to profits and U. S. Automakers have added nearly 250,000 jobs since June 2009, the best period of growth in more than a decade. To further stimulus economy, President Obama cut taxes 18 times for small business. More importantly, Congress, under the leadership of President Obama, passed the Affordable Care Act, putting in place comprehensive reforms that improve access to affordable health coverage for everyone and protect consumers from abusive insurance company practices. Now, the economy has seen 31 consecutive months of job growth; 5.2 million new jobs are created and 12 millions more are coming. The unemployment rate eventually fell to 7.8 percent in September*, the lowest rate since January 2009. [4] The nation has been well served by President Obama, and his economic policy has been very successful. Thank you. Current Unemployment Rate: 7.9 percent. References [1]. www. economist. com/node/21561909 [2]. . http://www.foxbusiness.com... [3]. Back to Work: Why We Need Smart Government for a Strong Economy, Bill Clinton (2010) [4]. . http://www.whitehouse.gov...