beowulf Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 we will see if his approach works or not. if it does not, I am certain it will be his downfall that get him booted from office. if it does, I am sure you will throw 100% of your support behind him (yea right) No, no, no...you said PROVEN. Not "we will see" but proven. P-R-O-V-E-N to work. Where is the proof. Please point it out to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocco Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 The War actually started around 1939, when unemployment rates dropped and stayed down effectively ending the depression. you forgot "by increasing government spending massively" thats the part that revisionist history buffs forget. you see, it was Roosevelt spending that ended the depression (not to discount the fact that people were employed - fed and kept homes instead of losing them as well). the revisionists want to say it was WW2, but they forget, that if it were WW2, then it was actually - "massive government spending" on the war effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b4unoit Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 A copy and paste from a blog Do you posses an original thought of your own? Or is there not enough room in there? I would ask you to try to refute any of this post but then that would mean you actually understanding any of it. So we will move on from you now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 you forgot "by increasing government spending massively" thats the part that revisionist history buffs forget. you see, it was Roosevelt spending that ended the depression (not to discount the fact that people were employed - fed and kept homes instead of losing them as well). the revisionists want to say it was WW2, but they forget, that if it were WW2, then it was actually - "massive government spending" on the war effort. How much longer can Obama play the "blame bush" excuse for the tanking economy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocco Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 For those of us who don't dwell on your every biased, voluminous inane arguments, it should be easy to refer us to your supporting facts. Please verify the facts of your 8% number. And again, where do you teach so our kids can avoid your bias. You should be embarrassed to admit you are a teacher. It does a great disservice to a respected and honorable profession. LOL - yea - right. I am going to give out intimate details of where I work on an on line message board at the request of a whack job like you. You a funny man - very entertaining indeed. Oh - and the 8%. As I sated, the source was detailed in this thread as well as others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocco Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 How much longer can Obama play the "blame bush" excuse for the tanking economy? Well, economists and the public believe he has a year and a half leeway, grace period, before results must be expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 How much longer can Obama play the "blame bush" excuse for the tanking economy? Oblingo is going to play it to the MAXIMUM. Evey single one of Obama's failures will all be Bush's fault or Bush did it so I will too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 Well, economists and the public believe he has a year and a half leeway, grace period, before results must be expected. the economy would have turned around whether the spending took place or not. It always has. So what we have is a huge spending bill that would not have mattered to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 Well, economists and the public believe he has a year and a half leeway, grace period, before results must be expected. Grace period? You are truly befuddled. Who are these so-called "economists"?????????/ HMMMMMMMMMMMM? On what basis do you claim that the "public" insists on a year and a half grace period? Is this in one of your infamous polls? @ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 Well, economists and the public believe he has a year and a half leeway, grace period, before results must be expected. rocco, to borrow from a well-worn "put-down": What exactly are you smoking? How can you possibly say this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 It was both. You're saying because they bought that mortgage from another lender that they're not responsible for the money? Each mortgage is assigned a rating as to determine the likelihood of it being paid back, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac both bought tons and tons of subprime mortgages because the riskiest loans are the ones who pay back the highest dividends. What you said there is that it's ok for you to buy a house sight unseen and say it's not your responsibility to fix the hole in the ceiling because the person who had it before you didn't do it either. That is exactly what happened.People were buying more than one at once too. I've read where people had out money down on 4 or 5 places in new developments hoping to be able to turn them over before they were even finished at a profit and some did too. I've read about new developments in Miami and in California where properties were sold 4 or 5 times before they were even finished for occupation all at a much higher cost than previous.Loans were financed where the buyer had no possibility of repaying with their income.Now of course on these loans there was a higher rate involved to the buyer but there was also more to be made by the broker. Of course the person that got caught in the downturn with a lot of large down payments out lost money but the banks lost much more.well turns out the taxpayer was really the loser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 rocco, to borrow from a well-worn "put-down": What exactly are you smoking? How can you possibly say this? He reads things other then blogs. If you did too you would have read it as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 the economy would have turned around whether the spending took place or not. It always has. So what we have is a huge spending bill that would not have mattered to begin with. When would it have turned around? We're almost a year and a half into this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 Well, economists and the public believe he has a year and a half leeway, grace period, before results must be expected.He has a 4 year contract. Now you're saying no one expect results for almost half of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 He has a 4 year contract. Now you're saying no one expect results for almost half of it? It's that bad. It's been going on since October of 2007. Or did no one tell you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocco Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 the economy would have turned around whether the spending took place or not. It always has. So what we have is a huge spending bill that would not have mattered to begin with. You are once again incorrect. I do not know where you get this type of information from (other than you obviously make it up. what makes you think the economy has always turned around without any kind of intervention from the federal government? Because it is simply not so. @ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 The markets discount the the future, and they price companies at what they expect they will be worth in the future. The markets began discounting the subprime mess in late 2007. In Mid 2008, they then saw the problems with Fannie and Freddie and began discounting banks and brokers who relied on them and invested in them. That took us down to 11,000 on the Dow. Then they saw the coming of Obama when his poll numbers began to leave McCain in the dust. That was August 2008, and we have been on the Obama downhill slide ever since. Nothing he has said indicates he will be good for business. If businesses can't make money, jobs will suffer and the economy will suffer. Obama said many times in his campaign he wanted "to share share the wealth" and bring down the gap between the wealthy and the poor. He's doing it alright, by spreading around the poverty. He will learn, and he will teach us all the hard way that democratic capitalism cann0t be strong without capitalists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocco Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 Grace period? You are truly befuddled. Who are these so-called "economists"?????????/ HMMMMMMMMMMMM? On what basis do you claim that the "public" insists on a year and a half grace period? Is this in one of your infamous polls? @ Who are these economists you ask? You know, people who went to school and got maters degrees at fine universities in the united states, specializing in their feilds. You dont know what an economist is? and yes - the public has been polled and they will give the new president a year and a half to fix things or pay the price. do you watch news? are you aware of public opinion polls? do you evr watch "news" - you know - outside opinion, entertainers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocco Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 rocco, to borrow from a well-worn "put-down": What exactly are you smoking? How can you possibly say this? ummmmm cuz it's so??!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 I'm guessing the true bottom is a date and not a number. Around July 2012, we'll see the writing on the wall and know that the excursion into socialism is over. That'll be the bottom and the time to buy. I'll do my research in January 2012, undate monthly, and buy as soon as an Obama defeat looks inevitable. It wouldn't surprise me if July 2012 to July 2013 turns out to be the best year in stock market history. I just pray that I'll be able to buy in 2012 and not put it off until 2016 (I'm out of the market until the socialist is ready to get the boot). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocco Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 He has a 4 year contract. Now you're saying no one expect results for almost half of it? That is correct yes. Well, almost correct. I am not saying it, economists and the American public are sayig it, and I am passing that information on to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 Who are these economists you ask? You know, people who went to school and got maters degrees at fine universities in the united states, specializing in their feilds. You dont know what an economist is? and yes - the public has been polled and they will give the new president a year and a half to fix things or pay the price. do you watch news? are you aware of public opinion polls? do you evr watch "news" - you know - outside opinion, entertainers? Another non-answer. A Typical Rocco Response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 That is correct yes. Well, almost correct. I am not saying it, economists and the American public are sayig it, and I am passing that information on to you. Thanks for passing along fantasy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocco Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 I'm guessing the true bottom is a date and not a number. Around July 2012, we'll see the writing on the wall and know that the excursion into socialism is over. That'll be the bottom and the time to buy. I'll do my research in January 2012, undate monthly, and buy as soon as an Obama defeat looks inevitable. It wouldn't surprise me if July 2012 to July 2013 turns out to be the best year in stock market history. I just pray that I'll be able to buy in 2012 and not put it off until 2016 (I'm out of the market until the socialist is ready to get the boot). I disagree. both of our postions are opinion. But.. While the American public says they will give Obama a year and a half, before "taking it out" on him. I believe their patience will run out much sooner (as the American public are notoriously not patient. I think around mid year this year (perhaps sooner) they start to lose patience and by years end, if there is not movement in the eoncomy that shows some type of favorable result, they turn on him like a pack of wild dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2009 Report Share Posted March 9, 2009 Who are these economists you ask? You know, people who went to school and got maters degrees at fine universities in the united states, specializing in their feilds. You dont know what an economist is? and yes - the public has been polled and they will give the new president a year and a half to fix things or pay the price. do you watch news? are you aware of public opinion polls? do you evr watch "news" - you know - outside opinion, entertainers? I couldn't find your "economists", rocco, in this article. Perhaps you could suggest another? http://finance.yahoo.com/#market_summary_us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.