Guest Guest Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 Sorry pal this is from the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE. You may want to have your shrink / Economist friend come over and Analise it for you. Another example of him doing this AGAIN, "When somebody who has a different opinion than you do posts something factual you either change the subject, lie or make up some BS to get off track, attempt a spin, make some stupid comment about where they got their facts that they posted, resort to name calling or insults, or completely ignore the post and pretend you didnt see it because you are trapped with no reply to the truth and you know it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest scott's fan club Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 Is this not the topic we are on? "Obama Stimulus, You Liberals got what you wanted - DOW tanking" I will take that as you still refuse to answer the question. hate to break it to ya chief, but there is no question being asked in that thing that's supposed to be a sentence/question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aphoristically Moderate Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 The $100 question: What sparked the depression beginning in 1929?! Don't worry. It's nice to have a fan club. Without looking it up... and without asking for $100... the "Depression" didn't really start in 1929. 1929 is famous for the market crash. Black Thursday, Black Monday and Black Tuesday. It was preceded by... get this... declining real estate values. The Depression started shortly after an international trade war in response to the Smoot Hawley Tariff Act in 1930. Scott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 hate to break it to ya chief, but there is no question being asked in that thing that's supposed to be a sentence/question. I hate to break it to ya chief, but he was asked to answer a question a few times and kept ignoring it and as usual he replied with his usual nonsense, therefore I concluded that he still refuses to answer the question. Go back and research the conversation before you comment, better yet, I posted it below for you. Who was the president from 2003-2008 and what did the Dow do during those years? Also who was the president when the Dow reached its highest? http://futures.tradingcharts.com/chart/DW/M @ QUOTE (Guest @ Mar 9 2009, 09:04 PM) Rocco? You cant answer these questions can you? @ Rocco replied with: (again he is attempting to change the subject) Your obsession with the Dow and it's relation to economic health and the state of our economy shows a woeful lack of knowledge of both, the market and our economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignorant Poster Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 Don't worry. It's nice to have a fan club. Without looking it up... and without asking for $100... the "Depression" didn't really start in 1929. 1929 is famous for the market crash. Black Thursday, Black Monday and Black Tuesday. It was preceded by... get this... declining real estate values. The Depression started shortly after an international trade war in response to the Smoot Hawley Tariff Act in 1930. Scott Primarily, the point I was trying to make is the failure of the stock market had a direct impact on the economy, but I may be revising history again... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 Another example of Rocco doing this AGAIN, "When somebody who has a different opinion than you do posts something factual you either change the subject, lie or make up some BS to get off track, attempt a spin, make some stupid comment about where they got their facts that they posted, resort to name calling or insults, or completely ignore the post and pretend you didnt see it because you are trapped with no reply to the truth and you know it." This post may have looked like it was meant towards you b4unoit, but it was agreeing with you about Rocco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b4unoit Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 Don't worry. It's nice to have a fan club. Without looking it up... and without asking for $100... the "Depression" didn't really start in 1929. 1929 is famous for the market crash. Black Thursday, Black Monday and Black Tuesday. It was preceded by... get this... declining real estate values. The Depression started shortly after an international trade war in response to the Smoot Hawley Tariff Act in 1930. Scott Very good Scott. You know what they history not learned is bound to repeat it self. Hope not But "Patriot Employer Act," Mr. Obama's proposal would designate certain companies as "patriot employers" and favor them over other, presumably not so patriotic, businesses. The legislation takes four pages to define "patriotic" companies as those that: "pay at least 60 percent of each employee's health care premiums"; have a position of "neutrality in employee [union] organizing drives"; "maintain or increase the number of full-time workers in the United States relative to the number of full-time workers outside of the United States"; pay a salary to each employee "not less than an amount equal to the federal poverty level"; and provide a pension plan. In other words, a patriotic employer is one which fulfills the fondest Big Labor agenda, regardless of the competitive implications. The proposal ignores the marketplace reality that businesses hire a work force they can afford to pay and still make money. Coercing companies into raising wages and benefits above market rates may only lead to fewer workers getting hired in the first place. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1204071215...=googlenews_wsj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b4unoit Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 This post may have looked like it was meant towards you b4unoit, but it was agreeing with you about Rocco. I understood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 So just wondering rocco you get your e-mail alert yet? Obama musters campaign army for economic fight http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CN...;show_article=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest scott's fan club Posted March 10, 2009 Report Share Posted March 10, 2009 I hate to break it to ya chief, but he was asked to answer a question a few times and kept ignoring it and as usual he replied with his usual nonsense, therefore I concluded that he still refuses to answer the question. Go back and research the conversation before you comment, better yet, I posted it below for you. Who was the president from 2003-2008 and what did the Dow do during those years? Also who was the president when the Dow reached its highest? http://futures.tradingcharts.com/chart/DW/M @ QUOTE (Guest @ Mar 9 2009, 09:04 PM) Rocco? You cant answer these questions can you? @ Rocco replied with: (again he is attempting to change the subject) Your obsession with the Dow and it's relation to economic health and the state of our economy shows a woeful lack of knowledge of both, the market and our economy. sorry about that chief. i believe the correct answer is george w. bush. and i'm sure to be fair, you would want to mention that is when the recession started and the DOW was propped up by phony numbers and accounting tricks. the economy was not good and our defecit was snowballing. george w. also "cooked the books" by not showing the cost of the war as an expenditure. that would have affected the DOW as well. his economic policies were a disaster along with his whole presidency. is that the right answer chief???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 Thursday, 3/12 OK, the DOW is up recently. Does that mean that Obama has been doing a better job the last few days? Trick question, the answer is absolutely not. There has been some short term economic news that wasn't as bad as expected so the DOW has bumped up a little. Still not close to recovering for the losses since Obama was elected and announced his abysmal efforts to restore the economy and effective efforts to raise taxes, create more entitlement, enlarge our government to unprecedented levels, and go on a spending spree that will put our grandchildren into debt. Her is more support that Obama has had a horrible effect on our economy. The following link is a poll taken of 49 leading economists grading the job that Obama and his treasury secretary Geithner have done. The result are horrible. They both got "F's". Here's the link. Rocco, this flys in the face of your comments that all experts are happy with Obama's economic efforts so far. Show us a poll to argue this finding. The DOW will continue to reflect this lack on confidence, this recent increase aside. Look for the market to lose it's recent gains in a hurry unless Obama undoes the damage he has done so far. @ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b4unoit Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 This is probably the answer for the upswing in buying the last three days. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/economy-w...ml?hpid=topnews FASB Head: Mark-To-Market Relaxation Within Three Weeks The head of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) -- which, along with the SEC, oversees corporate accounting -- told a House panel today that "in three weeks" his organization will issue new guidance on mark-to-market rules, allowing financial firms some flexibility in accounting for the toxic assets poisoning their balance sheets, the Associated Press is reporting. Testifying before Rep. Paul Kanjorski's (D-Penn.) Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises subcommittee, FASB chairman Robert Herz said that the new rules -- which had been promised by June -- could actually be delivered within three weeks. @ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 About time they're actually targeting problems rather than approving every pork project known to man. Maybe there's a glimmer of hope that this economy won't turn into complete crap, but we still have a ways to go before we know if we hit bottom yet. @ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 when will they call this a depression Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocco Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 Primarily, the point I was trying to make is the failure of the stock market had a direct impact on the economy, but I may be revising history again... true - but the failure of the economy had a direct impact on the stock market as well. @JL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.