On August 09 2011 03:20 LaLLsc2 wrote: Obama just finished his speech. For any of you who would like it summed up.
Obama decided to ignore economic law and continue with the overall status quo spending as usual approach to the economy. He boasted about the cuts that were made with the debt deal, and told the people that we couldn't stop there.
Obamas next area of interest is going to be increasing taxes on incomes above $250,000 as well as what Obama only described as "modifying healthcare".
In essence, the markets and the dollar will continue to pay the piper until more sensible economic and foreign policy takes root.
Well the makets loved Obama's speech. DOW is down 550 and falling.
The DOW has been plummeting all day, our credit was just downgraded. I'm not defending Obama, but you're being ridiculous. In fact there's a small uptick at 3:30 EST, but I wouldn't necessarily attribute that to the speech either. Come on, political affiliations aside let's use a little common sense guys.
It doesn't take a genius to look at the charts and see that the DOW dropped sharply while Obama was speaking.
Look at the chart again. It goes from roughly 11000 at 2:00, dips and recovers, back to roughly 11000 at 2:45 and starts fluctuating more. I don't see proof of anything, so maybe it does take a genius, or maybe financial systems are much more complicated than that...
There's no question the trajectory is downwards, but if we're so hellbent on blaming our political enemies we won't solve a damn thing.
You're the only person guilty of partisan hackery here in your zeal to defend Obama. I merely commented that the markets were falling during Obama's speech right after he spoke. The DOW touched a low of about -550 during this time. There's nothing inaccurate about what I said.
Rofl almost the first thing I said was "I'm not defending Obama" and I haven't said a word in his defense or against the Republicans. In fact, I've criticized Obama AND complimented Ron Paul on the *previous* page. My zeal is in defending common sense, something that your zeal is blinding you from. All I said was that the chart didn't prove anything good or bad and the stock market is more complicated than you give it credit for.
It should be obvious but it seems people haven't figured it out... the US was downgraded by ONE ratings agency that shouldn't have credit to begin with. If you want to give it credit, it specifically blamed Republicans for being unwilling to raise revenue.
The second thing that should be obvious is the markets have already rejected S&P's rating. They downgraded Treasuries. Surprise! 10-year rates have fallen from 2.55% to below 2.4%. Obviously the markets don't share S&P's fear of US public debt.
On August 09 2011 03:45 RifleCow wrote: An increase in taxes is necessary at this point in order to quell the defect. Anyone that doesn't realize this is just fooling themselves. Entitlement programs will not be cut because Americans don't want them to be cut. Plus, lowering government injections will probably have a greater contraction effect than raising taxes due to multiplier theory. Right now what we are experienceing is pretty much the lack of confidence by enterprise because of lack of debt control and foreseen crowding out. What we see here is exactly the danger of stabilization policy, everyone is fine with spending to get out of recession no one is okay with increasing taxes and decreasing spending afterwards. Which is why a government system that is purely based on public opinion has massive flaws since public opinion isn't exactly the most informed.
And for those that are talking about Ron Paul, the guys an idiot. If you listen to anything he says about money, the fed, or government, he is pretty much wrong. He fails to realize that ALL money is FIAT money and that the Fed and the government are separate entities. That's not even getting started on his domestic sways of anti church-state separation as well as his pro-life stance.
On August 09 2011 04:44 Romantic wrote: It should be obvious but it seems people haven't figured it out... the US was downgraded by ONE ratings agency that shouldn't have credit to begin with. If you want to give it credit, it specifically blamed Republicans for being unwilling to raise revenue.
The second thing that should be obvious is the markets have already rejected S&P's rating. They downgraded Treasuries. Surprise! 10-year rates have fallen from 2.55% to below 2.4%. Obviously the markets don't share S&P's fear of US public debt.
They did blame Republicans for being unwilling to raise revenue and they changed their assumption that the Bush tax cuts would ever expire, BUT they also pointed out entitlement reform and rising deficits so there's plenty of blame to go around. I don't like it when people cite that statement to blame one side or the other. The biggest issue seemed to be the brinksmanship and lack of compromise in Washington, our broken system scared them the most because while we might be able to fix things, we won't be willing to work together to fix things.
I do agree that S&P has very little credibility in my eyes.
On August 09 2011 04:44 Romantic wrote: It should be obvious but it seems people haven't figured it out... the US was downgraded by ONE ratings agency that shouldn't have credit to begin with. If you want to give it credit, it specifically blamed Republicans for being unwilling to raise revenue.
The second thing that should be obvious is the markets have already rejected S&P's rating. They downgraded Treasuries. Surprise! 10-year rates have fallen from 2.55% to below 2.4%. Obviously the markets don't share S&P's fear of US public debt.
They did blame Republicans for being unwilling to raise revenue and they changed their assumption that the Bush tax cuts would ever expire, BUT they also pointed out entitlement reform and rising deficits so there's plenty of blame to go around. I don't like it when people cite that statement to blame one side or the other. The biggest issue seemed to be the brinksmanship and lack of compromise in Washington, our broken system scared them the most because while we might be able to fix things, we won't be willing to work together to fix things.
I don't care about S&P enough to place blame on anything. That statement is a response to the, "The economy is afraid of Obama" theory of economics adherents that didn't read the report.
The entire debate about raising the debt ceiling is childish and silly. I would consider myself a republican by ideologies alone, but what the republican controlled house did was nothing short of blackmail.
To demonstrate how ludicrous it is, I'll make an analogy. Imagine that you need to buy a car but you don't have the money to do so. So naturally you burrow money to buy that car, and now you have to pay back that loan over time. However, the loan for the car that you bought costs more than your current income, so you are going more and more into debt with each month's bill. But you have to still pay for the car, right?
The republicans are saying "why do we have a nicer car than we can afford?" which is a very valid point. But by refusing to raise the debt ceiling the republicans are basically saying "we don't need to pay for this car that we already own" which is fucking stupid. Of course we have to pay for the stuff that we already bought otherwise our credit rating gets fucked (which it did anyways). Neither side wanted the US to go into default, but the republicans were using it as a weapon to leverage their other agendas.
Regardless of if you are a democrat or a republican this behavior should disgust you
On August 09 2011 05:12 Jonas wrote: The entire debate about raising the debt ceiling is childish and silly. I would consider myself a republican by ideologies alone, but what the republican controlled house did was nothing short of blackmail.
To demonstrate how ludicrous it is, I'll make an analogy. Imagine that you need to buy a car but you don't have the money to do so. So naturally you burrow money to buy that car, and now you have to pay back that loan over time. However, the loan for the car that you bought costs more than your current income, so you are going more and more into debt with each month's bill. But you have to still pay for the car, right?
The republicans are saying "why do we have a nicer car than we can afford?" which is a very valid point. But by refusing to raise the debt ceiling the republicans are basically saying "we don't need to pay for this car that we already own" which is fucking stupid. Of course we have to pay for the stuff that we already bought otherwise our credit rating gets fucked (which it did anyways). Neither side wanted the US to go into default, but the republicans were using it as a weapon to leverage their other agendas.
Regardless of if you are a democrat or a republican this behavior should disgust you
On August 09 2011 04:44 Romantic wrote: It should be obvious but it seems people haven't figured it out... the US was downgraded by ONE ratings agency that shouldn't have credit to begin with. If you want to give it credit, it specifically blamed Republicans for being unwilling to raise revenue.
The second thing that should be obvious is the markets have already rejected S&P's rating. They downgraded Treasuries. Surprise! 10-year rates have fallen from 2.55% to below 2.4%. Obviously the markets don't share S&P's fear of US public debt.
On August 09 2011 04:44 Romantic wrote: It should be obvious but it seems people haven't figured it out... the US was downgraded by ONE ratings agency that shouldn't have credit to begin with. If you want to give it credit, it specifically blamed Republicans for being unwilling to raise revenue.
The second thing that should be obvious is the markets have already rejected S&P's rating. They downgraded Treasuries. Surprise! 10-year rates have fallen from 2.55% to below 2.4%. Obviously the markets don't share S&P's fear of US public debt.
On August 09 2011 04:44 Romantic wrote: It should be obvious but it seems people haven't figured it out... the US was downgraded by ONE ratings agency that shouldn't have credit to begin with. If you want to give it credit, it specifically blamed Republicans for being unwilling to raise revenue.
The second thing that should be obvious is the markets have already rejected S&P's rating. They downgraded Treasuries. Surprise! 10-year rates have fallen from 2.55% to below 2.4%. Obviously the markets don't share S&P's fear of US public debt.
Well I think the 630 point fall in the DJI and the fact that almost every market fell by at least 2% today means that the market is pretty scared.
Of what? When you downgrade treasuries, if people cared they would demand higher interest rates for "Riskier" treasuries. The opposite happened; people dropped stocks to buy treasuries.
They probably realized the Euro is doomed and the economy will suck for years to come.
On August 09 2011 03:45 RifleCow wrote: An increase in taxes is necessary at this point in order to quell the defect. Anyone that doesn't realize this is just fooling themselves. Entitlement programs will not be cut because Americans don't want them to be cut. Plus, lowering government injections will probably have a greater contraction effect than raising taxes due to multiplier theory. Right now what we are experienceing is pretty much the lack of confidence by enterprise because of lack of debt control and foreseen crowding out. What we see here is exactly the danger of stabilization policy, everyone is fine with spending to get out of recession no one is okay with increasing taxes and decreasing spending afterwards. Which is why a government system that is purely based on public opinion has massive flaws since public opinion isn't exactly the most informed.
And for those that are talking about Ron Paul, the guys an idiot. If you listen to anything he says about money, the fed, or government, he is pretty much wrong. He fails to realize that ALL money is FIAT money and that the Fed and the government are separate entities. That's not even getting started on his domestic sways of anti church-state separation as well as his pro-life stance.
On August 09 2011 03:45 RifleCow wrote: An increase in taxes is necessary at this point in order to quell the defect. Anyone that doesn't realize this is just fooling themselves. Entitlement programs will not be cut because Americans don't want them to be cut. Plus, lowering government injections will probably have a greater contraction effect than raising taxes due to multiplier theory. Right now what we are experienceing is pretty much the lack of confidence by enterprise because of lack of debt control and foreseen crowding out. What we see here is exactly the danger of stabilization policy, everyone is fine with spending to get out of recession no one is okay with increasing taxes and decreasing spending afterwards. Which is why a government system that is purely based on public opinion has massive flaws since public opinion isn't exactly the most informed.
And for those that are talking about Ron Paul, the guys an idiot. If you listen to anything he says about money, the fed, or government, he is pretty much wrong. He fails to realize that ALL money is FIAT money and that the Fed and the government are separate entities. That's not even getting started on his domestic sways of anti church-state separation as well as his pro-life stance.
he said the abortion issue is left to the states? i dont see how this is worthy of disdain
On August 09 2011 03:45 RifleCow wrote: An increase in taxes is necessary at this point in order to quell the defect. Anyone that doesn't realize this is just fooling themselves. Entitlement programs will not be cut because Americans don't want them to be cut. Plus, lowering government injections will probably have a greater contraction effect than raising taxes due to multiplier theory. Right now what we are experienceing is pretty much the lack of confidence by enterprise because of lack of debt control and foreseen crowding out. What we see here is exactly the danger of stabilization policy, everyone is fine with spending to get out of recession no one is okay with increasing taxes and decreasing spending afterwards. Which is why a government system that is purely based on public opinion has massive flaws since public opinion isn't exactly the most informed.
And for those that are talking about Ron Paul, the guys an idiot. If you listen to anything he says about money, the fed, or government, he is pretty much wrong. He fails to realize that ALL money is FIAT money and that the Fed and the government are separate entities. That's not even getting started on his domestic sways of anti church-state separation as well as his pro-life stance.
Hey man, why didn't you mention the wars in those paragraphs? Ron Paul supporters receive personal insults on a regular basis, they are not a very effective form of arguing FYI.
I agree with you when you say that tax increases are necessary on our current path. The actual problem itself is the path, our foreign policy, policing the world path. I also agree that raising the taxes won't devastate the economy per say.
On August 09 2011 03:41 Senorcuidado wrote:
On August 09 2011 03:27 xDaunt wrote:
On August 09 2011 03:20 LaLLsc2 wrote: Obama just finished his speech. For any of you who would like it summed up.
Obama decided to ignore economic law and continue with the overall status quo spending as usual approach to the economy. He boasted about the cuts that were made with the debt deal, and told the people that we couldn't stop there.
Obamas next area of interest is going to be increasing taxes on incomes above $250,000 as well as what Obama only described as "modifying healthcare".
In essence, the markets and the dollar will continue to pay the piper until more sensible economic and foreign policy takes root.
Well the makets loved Obama's speech. DOW is down 550 and falling.
The DOW has been plummeting all day, our credit was just downgraded. I'm not defending Obama, but you're being ridiculous. In fact there's a small uptick at 2:30 EST, but I wouldn't necessarily attribute that to the speech either. Come on, political affiliations aside let's use a little common sense guys.
edit: fixed typo. Also, that uptick grew to more than 50 points (?) in the last 15 minutes but seems to have levelled off.
You're right also, the markets will rally again. The point of ALL of this is that the recovery, and the well being of the United States fiscal situation in the future could be much better if we stopped spending, and the only viable option to cut spending right now is the wars. Which Obama has made clear he wont touch. Whats worse is that I believe the reason he is there is because he wooed the anti-war movement by lying in his on his presidential campaign.
He didn't lie though. We have pretty much ended our involvement in Iraq. We WERE in Afghanistan for a reason, and now we can't get out easily now that the "reason" is dead. We have to treat the situation delicately, otherwise we could face even more hostility in the coming decades. The scaling back of troops is already underway and we're ending the "occupation" in a responsible way.
I really don't get why Ron Paul is labeled an idiot. Most people that say this either give no reason or if they try to give "facts" to back the argument. It is usually taken out of context or completely false assumptions.
At first, I thought raising taxes on everyone would help. After doing a lot of reading. I believe lowering taxes would benefit a lot more. By lowering taxes on everyone. You provide business America a reason to create jobs and feel safe about doing so. Creating more jobs will create more revenue from income tax since more people are working. More people will spend money creating more tax revenue from profits of companies. It's a win win for everyone.
By raising taxes. Companies will spend less on creating jobs. People will spend less. This scenario only hurts the economy, but you get some more revenue. I don't think doing anything to hurt the economy at this moment is a great idea.
Now back to Ron Paul.
Seriously, what is wrong with ending the policing of the world, lowering taxes, and regaining civil liberties? I do not see how this makes someone an idiot. Even the legalization of drugs isn't stupid. This is another war we pay for that has completely failed and has hindered our civil liberties in the process. At first when I discovered Ron Paul 6 years ago. Yes, I was all for him because of pot. Now I'm 25, and might take 4 puffs a week if that. I don't drink and I do not use any other hard drugs. I do not condone the use of hard drugs either.
Give me one logical argument against Ron Paul, because the only argument I ever see is that he is an idiot, which is followed by some absurd assumption.
I voted for ralph Nader in 04, voted for Obama in 08. Was a registered independent up until this summer where I switched to republican to vote for Paul. I fear that the election will be Obama vs Romney which scares the he'll out of me. They are basically the same person. Kind of like bush vs Kerry, which Kerry is now on this super debt panel and scares me as well.
Any republican that votes for Romney needs to look into what this guy actually did as governor. Which was Romney care (used by Obama for obamacare) and his state finished 3rd to last in job creation every year. He couldn't even run his own state, but he's leading the GOP race? Wake up America!
I really don't get why Ron Paul is labeled an idiot. Most people that say this either give no reason or if they try to give "facts" to back the argument. It is usually taken out of context or completely false assumptions.
At first, I thought raising taxes on everyone would help. After doing a lot of reading. I believe lowering taxes would benefit a lot more. By lowering taxes on everyone. You provide business America a reason to create jobs and feel safe about doing so. Creating more jobs will create more revenue from income tax since more people are working. More people will spend money creating more tax revenue from profits of companies. It's a win win for everyone.
By raising taxes. Companies will spend less on creating jobs. People will spend less. This scenario only hurts the economy, but you get some more revenue. I don't think doing anything to hurt the economy at this moment is a great idea.
Now back to Ron Paul.
Seriously, what is wrong with ending the policing of the world, lowering taxes, and regaining civil liberties? I do not see how this makes someone an idiot. Even the legalization of drugs isn't stupid. This is another war we pay for that has completely failed and has hindered our civil liberties in the process. At first when I discovered Ron Paul 6 years ago. Yes, I was all for him because of pot. Now I'm 25, and might take 4 puffs a week if that. I don't drink and I do not use any other hard drugs. I do not condone the use of hard drugs either.
Give me one logical argument against Ron Paul, because the only argument I ever see is that he is an idiot, which is followed by some absurd assumption. + Show Spoiler +
I voted for ralph Nader in 04, voted for Obama in 08. Was a registered independent up until this summer where I switched to republican to vote for Paul. I fear that the election will be Obama vs Romney which scares the he'll out of me. They are basically the same person. Kind of like bush vs Kerry, which Kerry is now on this super debt panel and scares me as well.
Any republican that votes for Romney needs to look into what this guy actually did as governor. Which was Romney care (used by Obama for obamacare) and his state finished 3rd to last in job creation every year. He couldn't even run his own state, but he's leading the GOP race? Wake up America!
I won't agree with idiot part. I don't believe the idiots are in congress, it is the people that vote them in. It is the same here in Oz.
Anyway, my issue with Mr Paul is his "solution" to the medicare problem. I can't reconcile expecting seniors to use coupons to purchase services, when the inflation rate of medical services is far and beyond what the indexing of the vouchers would be. In effect defunding the system through lowered purchasing power. It doesn't work plain and simple. The "savings" come straight out of the pensioners pocket.
I really don't get why Ron Paul is labeled an idiot. Most people that say this either give no reason or if they try to give "facts" to back the argument. It is usually taken out of context or completely false assumptions.
At first, I thought raising taxes on everyone would help. After doing a lot of reading. I believe lowering taxes would benefit a lot more. By lowering taxes on everyone. You provide business America a reason to create jobs and feel safe about doing so. Creating more jobs will create more revenue from income tax since more people are working. More people will spend money creating more tax revenue from profits of companies. It's a win win for everyone.
By raising taxes. Companies will spend less on creating jobs. People will spend less. This scenario only hurts the economy, but you get some more revenue. I don't think doing anything to hurt the economy at this moment is a great idea.
Now back to Ron Paul.
Seriously, what is wrong with ending the policing of the world, lowering taxes, and regaining civil liberties? I do not see how this makes someone an idiot. Even the legalization of drugs isn't stupid. This is another war we pay for that has completely failed and has hindered our civil liberties in the process. At first when I discovered Ron Paul 6 years ago. Yes, I was all for him because of pot. Now I'm 25, and might take 4 puffs a week if that. I don't drink and I do not use any other hard drugs. I do not condone the use of hard drugs either.
Give me one logical argument against Ron Paul, because the only argument I ever see is that he is an idiot, which is followed by some absurd assumption. + Show Spoiler +
I voted for ralph Nader in 04, voted for Obama in 08. Was a registered independent up until this summer where I switched to republican to vote for Paul. I fear that the election will be Obama vs Romney which scares the he'll out of me. They are basically the same person. Kind of like bush vs Kerry, which Kerry is now on this super debt panel and scares me as well.
Any republican that votes for Romney needs to look into what this guy actually did as governor. Which was Romney care (used by Obama for obamacare) and his state finished 3rd to last in job creation every year. He couldn't even run his own state, but he's leading the GOP race? Wake up America!
I won't agree with idiot part. I don't believe the idiots are in congress, it is the people that vote them in. It is the same here in Oz.
Anyway, my issue with Mr Paul is his "solution" to the medicare problem. I can't reconcile expecting seniors to use coupons to purchase services, when the inflation rate of medical services is far and beyond what the indexing of the vouchers would be. In effect defunding the system through lowered purchasing power. It doesn't work plain and simple. The "savings" come straight out of the pensioners pocket.
Not fair in my mind.
Ron Paul did not agree with the shitty Paul Ryan medicare plan which would have run off a voucher (coupon) system.
From an Ideological perspective, Ron Paul wouldn't condone a federal healthcare plan at all. He believes in states rights, and believes the states can individually handle medicare on their own (the way the forefathers and the constitution intended), and on their own terms. Similar to the plan Massachusetts that Mitt Romney is taking heat for..
But the good news, for people who don't want to touch medicare, like you, is that only congress can do away with medicare. And I can't imagine, they'll ever touch medicare.
What people don't understand is that at our current rate medicare is unsustainable, unfortunately..
Dont think the usa debt is a problem, definatly not on a global scale On a global scale (and why shouldnt we look at a global scale) debt is not a problem since every debt is also owned by someone, They just managing who can spend how much The FED,s monney creation,global economy and financial system are extremely complicated though and even after years of study i still cant say i fully understand how it all works
Ben bernanke once said:
the U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost
And this is the border line, with the dollar beeing the world reserve currency and also the currency needed to buy oil the usa can indeed print monney without to manny repercussions (unlike 3rd world countrys) Off course they cant go to far with this but my guess is that there is still alot of room Also it wont be difficult for the usa to get a surplus for the government,the tax is still so low there... i remember in the years clinton was president ( a democrat...) the usa had an surplus on its anual budget for several years in a row The whole usa monetary system is based on debt, every dollar is debt and the fed and its owners live on it basicly but this is rather complicated
EPT
wrote:![[image loading]](http://i1190.photobucket.com/albums/z443/joeshmoe762/heritage-spending-revenue-gap-6-2010.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i1190.photobucket.com/albums/z443/joeshmoe762/1us-bases-in-the-middle-east-a.jpg)
