Page 17 of 18 FirstFirst ... 715161718 LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 176

Thread: Sirius Thread Month of AUGUST 2010

  1. #161
    Havakasha is offline
    So the 2nd worst recession in our countries history was simply the result of a housing crisis. You smoking crack John?

    Lets examine the drivers that have created the Bush Recession, and make sure we agree that these collective actions happened long before the Obama administration was in the White House

    First, the sub-prime mortgage meltdown. During the 8 years the Bush administration was in charge, we saw a dramatic expansion in available credit to borrowers who where not able to quality for conventional mortgages. This boom in new buyers drove up housing prices, creating a bubble of newfound wealth in the equity of homes, and creating a cycle of borrowing against newly inflated home equity. This bubble was evident to economists and consumers alike, yet in the absence of any legislation or government controls - the trend continued to balloon.

    Second, Iraq. The cost of our dramatic increase in military spending provided a huge drain on the Federal Budget, as services that were heretofore part of the military budget became privatized and outsourced. Companies like Blackwater and Halliburton received huge military contracts to provide services - often without bids or oversight. Now, seven years later, we're uncovering fraud, waste, and violations of human rights that reflect both the size of the contracts and the Government's basic lack of ability to oversee or administer these programs. The elixir of privatization and deregulation created an environment that was ripe for fraud and misuse. In hindsight, is this any surprise?

    Third, abandonment of a US economic vision. For 8 years the Bush administration focused on security and fear, while any vision of our economic future got put on hold. Gasoline taxes, emission standards or innovation in our core sectors were all either ignored or frowned upon.

    Fourth, the environment. As George Bush dragged his heals on any environmental science, things like Kyoto were left unsigned. As former Vice President Al Gore raised the nation's awareness of Global Warming, the Bush Administration sought to minimize and obfuscate the science around climate change. As a result, government funding for new energy was back-burnered, and industries that count on the Government to legislate change and create a level playing field continued to build and produce gas guzzling trucks and automobiles. While world governments have used gas taxes to drive both conservation and innovation, the Bush administration essentially subsidized fossil fuel burning automobiles. The result, our energy industries are desperately behind, and our automotive industry is almost a decade behind in thinking about alternative energy.

    Fifth, Wall Street and Banking. For 8 years there has been a dramatic expansion in the services and fast consolidation of what had been separate and in some cases regulated industries. As banking, brokerage, insurance, and financial services companies acquired and merged - the speed of these transactions far exceeded the regulatory ability or resources (not by accident) resulting in such things as credit default swaps that now even seasoned wall-streeters say were hard to understand.

    The Bush Recession isn't the result of a single bad decision, or even actions out of our control. For 8 years we've allowed a handful of private industries to operate without oversight or review, with a focus on short term gains, as environmental and world economic issues have loomed large.

  2. #162
    Havakasha is offline
    Quote Originally Posted by candleman View Post
    Good try Julie! It sure would be nice to see a little discussion about the company that we all own. That used to be what this thread was for.
    Sorry Candleman,
    I asked Charles to enforce no politics in stock threads and force John to discuss this stuff in the POLITICS thread but he has not replied.

  3. #163
    Havakasha is offline
    Quote Originally Posted by SiriuslyLong View Post
    The proof is in the link. It's on tape. Tape never lies. How much did we pay to bail out freddie and fannie? For Julie's sake, if you want to continue, can we at least bail on this thread?

    PS - I took economics in grad school. Got an "A". Easy stuff compared to physical chemistry.
    i got an "A" too. How about that. So i quess that means you know all about supply side economics and Mr. Laffer huh? lol
    I got plenty of tape that doesnt lie either. One persons tape is another man's....

    I would love to move this to politics thread. Let me see you ask John.
    Last edited by Havakasha; 09-08-2010 at 02:51 PM.

  4. #164
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    I will make what should be the last post on this subject of tax cuts.

    I will explain as clear as one can and even give clear examples to show how the top tax rate is directly linked many of the jobs.


    First, even the Obama administration says that the top 2% tax rate will only effect 1 MILLION small businesses out of the total of 23 million. For arguements sake, I will even accept that. Now any business that has between 1 and 500 employees is considerd a small business and included in that 23 million number. What the Obama administration does not tell you is that about half of the people employed are employed by small businesses that are part of that 1 MILLION small business number that will be effected by not extending the tax cut to the top 2%. The fact is it would be very hard for any small business to have more then 15 employees and not have more then 250,000 in income.

    Now I said I would give you clear examples so here they are:

    This site (and any just like it, SRPG, KOAT, and Orbitcast) is a good one to start with. Now while I am not totally sure how Charles has set up this site, I will go from common sense and logic and the fact that any accountant and lawer will tell you, a "sub S corp", is the best way to protect your other assets (personall or otherwise) from this one. Ether way it would be included in that 23 million small business number. Now it is a fact that Tyler and Charles both do NOT consider this site its sole income and have other jobs (probably in a business with more then 15 employees) to make up the difference. Now the same can be said about the other sites just like this one. So what that leaves you with is 4 small businesses that do not really employ (that means with a sustainable income) ONE person.

    I also used to own several small businesses and can say with certainty that it would be very difficult to employ anymore then 10 people (full time) much less 15 and not be in that OVER 250,000 dollar income bracket as a, sub S corp. Hell we had 2 S corporations just for one small business. One owned all the property to include the building and machines while the other was the real business and rented everything from the other.

  5. #165
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    John's hero Mr. Laffer in August, 2006

    "THE UNITED STATES ECONOMY HAS NEVER BEEN IN BETTER SHAPE"

    You really dont know anything about tennis do you? That is defintiely
    GAME. SET. MATCH.

    He not only said everything was ok with the US economy but he said that
    "it has never been in better shape" You cant be any more off and he is your
    economic mentor and savoir? Wow. just wow. Check out Paul Krugman and Mr. Roubini's analysis at the time.
    To try to compare this with Democrats being off about the unemployment rate is absolutely embarassing. You really need to take LOGIC 101 again.

    Dont worry i will get to the Orszag article and the stuff on stimulus etc.




    Once again you never do your research. So what was the GDP for July of 2006??? Haaa thats right, GDP was 4.7%. So ether you consider a GDP of 4.7% a bad thing (which would put you in the dumbass catagory).

    OR


    Maybe you looked at what the unemployment rate was then?????????

    Opps I guess not,,,,, that just dropped from 5% to 4.9%.


    "According to the latest labour force statistics released today (August 17) by the Census and Statistics Department, the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate declined from 5.0% in April - June 2006 to 4.9% (provisional figure) in May - July 2006. The underemployment rate also declined from 2.7% to 2.6% (provisional figure) between the two periods."

    http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/2...0608170127.htm


    Now what was considerd full employment during the Clinton years?????? Ho thats right, 5% wasn't it. So according to your own liberial economist we were not just at full employment we had a better then full employment rate. So according to the Clinton administration the impossible just happen better then full employment.

  6. #166
    Havakasha is offline
    Oh S&L where are you? I thought you were taking over as moderator. lol

    John we were in one giant bubble. We were living a lie built by people like
    you supply siders who said we could have it all. It went bust.

    John you cant possibly be this much of a dumbass can you.
    Do you ever use logic or do research. Jeez.

    "ONE OF THIS ERA'S DEFINING MOMENTS OCCURRED ON AUGUST 28, 2006, WHEN STOCK BROKER AND UC BERKELEY ALUMNUS PETER SCHIFF APPEARED ON CNBC AND PROCALIMED THAT BY 2008,
    OUR ADDICTION TO DEBT-FINANCED CONSUMPTION AND THE COLLAPSE OF THE HOUSING BUBBLE WOULD PLUNGE THE COUNTRY INTO ONE OF THE DEEPEST RECESSIONS IT HAD EVER SEEN. SQUARING OFF AGAINST SCHIFF WAS NONE OTHER THAN ART LAFFER, FORMER ECONOMIC ADVISOR TO RONALD REAGAN AND THE GODFATHER OF SUPPLY-SIDE ECONOMICS. 'THE UNITED STATES ECONOMY HAS NEVER BEEN IN BETTER SHAPE,' ASSURED LAFFER, WHO EVEN WENT SO FAR AS TO BET SCHIFF A PENNY THAT THE ECONOMY WOULDNT CRASH. 'I'LL BET YOU A LOT MORE THAN A PENNY,' SCHIFF RETORTED.

    John you big dumbass. Your hero bet that the "economy wouldnt crash". He was wrong you dummy. Get it into your thick ideologically head. You cant escape that FACT.



    OUR economy was clearly a house of cards when Laffer made his remark. you can focus on one element- GDP all you want but the FACT IS THAT THE ECONOMY WAS ABOUT TO COLLAPSE WHEN Mr. Laffer (your economic hero) said:

    "THE US ECONOMY HAS NEVER BEEN IN BETTER SHAPE" He was wrong. In fact it was about to collapse and many people knew it except of course Mr. Laffer, you, and other blind ideiologues, ASK Mr. Roubini, Mr. Schiff, Mr. Krugman and on and on.

    HE WAS WRONG. He made a bet which he lost. Do you understand wrong? LOL.
    The bet was that the economy was going to collapse by 2008. What do you not understand about the bet? You dumbass ideologue.
    Last edited by Havakasha; 09-08-2010 at 04:05 PM.

  7. #167
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    So the 2nd worst recession in our countries history was simply the result of a housing crisis. You smoking crack John?

    Lets examine the drivers that have created the Bush Recession, and make sure we agree that these collective actions happened long before the Obama administration was in the White House

    First, the sub-prime mortgage meltdown. During the 8 years the Bush administration was in charge, we saw a dramatic expansion in available credit to borrowers who where not able to quality for conventional mortgages. This boom in new buyers drove up housing prices, creating a bubble of newfound wealth in the equity of homes, and creating a cycle of borrowing against newly inflated home equity. This bubble was evident to economists and consumers alike, yet in the absence of any legislation or government controls - the trend continued to balloon.

    Second, Iraq. The cost of our dramatic increase in military spending provided a huge drain on the Federal Budget, as services that were heretofore part of the military budget became privatized and outsourced. Companies like Blackwater and Halliburton received huge military contracts to provide services - often without bids or oversight. Now, seven years later, we're uncovering fraud, waste, and violations of human rights that reflect both the size of the contracts and the Government's basic lack of ability to oversee or administer these programs. The elixir of privatization and deregulation created an environment that was ripe for fraud and misuse. In hindsight, is this any surprise?

    Third, abandonment of a US economic vision. For 8 years the Bush administration focused on security and fear, while any vision of our economic future got put on hold. Gasoline taxes, emission standards or innovation in our core sectors were all either ignored or frowned upon.

    Fourth, the environment. As George Bush dragged his heals on any environmental science, things like Kyoto were left unsigned. As former Vice President Al Gore raised the nation's awareness of Global Warming, the Bush Administration sought to minimize and obfuscate the science around climate change. As a result, government funding for new energy was back-burnered, and industries that count on the Government to legislate change and create a level playing field continued to build and produce gas guzzling trucks and automobiles. While world governments have used gas taxes to drive both conservation and innovation, the Bush administration essentially subsidized fossil fuel burning automobiles. The result, our energy industries are desperately behind, and our automotive industry is almost a decade behind in thinking about alternative energy.

    Fifth, Wall Street and Banking. For 8 years there has been a dramatic expansion in the services and fast consolidation of what had been separate and in some cases regulated industries. As banking, brokerage, insurance, and financial services companies acquired and merged - the speed of these transactions far exceeded the regulatory ability or resources (not by accident) resulting in such things as credit default swaps that now even seasoned wall-streeters say were hard to understand.

    The Bush Recession isn't the result of a single bad decision, or even actions out of our control. For 8 years we've allowed a handful of private industries to operate without oversight or review, with a focus on short term gains, as environmental and world economic issues have loomed large.


    Ok let me break what you siad down and explain were you are wrong and totally dishonest.

    You first say Bush did nothing during his 8 years to control the mortgage proplem.

    First I have linked several times to example after example of how the Bush administration tried in 2002, 2003, 2004 and in 2006 to regulate Fanny and Freddy. I showed you the links where the democrats did everything in commitee to block it. Hell I just put a video up OF JUST THAT. That was in 2004 you dumb twit, why do you think that was even being talked about. I showed you Obama voted to FILIBUSTER (in 2005) the very same bill he voted FOR in 2007, TO REGULATE FANNY AND FREDDY. I even showed you the importance of why the dates were important. That the fact was that most of the financing done/held by Fanny and Freddy was done AFTER 2002. That over have of it had been done AFTER 2004. And that 1.3 TRILLION of the total 8 TRILLION was done after 2006.




    Next you say the war caused this recession.


    The war in Iraq cost a total of 700 Billion, So first of all going from your logic: If that 700 billion over 7 YEARS is what caused this bad of a recession, then what did Obamas 847 billion stimulas spending in 2 years do.

    So lets look at this closer:

    Bush= 700 billion over SEVEN YEARS, Obama= 847 billion over TWO YEARS.


    Now, Bush had almost 5/6 of congress approval to goto war and that includes almost 3/4 of the democrats. Bush also had over 60% approval from the American people to goto war. After 911 (which even conservative estimates are at LEAST 1.5 trillion out of our economy (that also did not including the actual cost of buildings and other)) it was understood that things changed and oceans could not protect us that we would have to be more proactive in that protection. Intelligence was wrong, we did not know that until after we went to war. That does not mean you can just pull out once that is realized. Now I know you love the UN, so even there own rules state that you cant just leave that country and have to at least leave it the same as when you came in.


    Hey havasucker you want to bring up the cost of 650 billion over 10 years in Bush tax cuts, then I will bring up the over 1.3 trillion in deficit spending Obama is running in ONLY HIS SECOND YEAR (yes thats right, just one year).



    Now as for your 3rd and 4th issues on the environment and going green. I have shown you several times that going green has already been tried and failed Spain used to be Obamas big example, why is it do you think he is no longer using them??????? Hummm could it be that they are now warning the rest of us that it is a bad idea that for every green job created, 2.3 other jobs are lost. Maybe it is because they are passed going broke.

    Anyway here is some good reading and totally disproves what you just said.

    "Since last December, when President Bush signed an energy bill that requires auto companies to achieve a 35-mpg fuel economy standard by 2020, with substantial improvements by 2015, auto executives have been gnashing their teeth while environmentalists have been flashing the V sign for victory.



    Three months later, it has become evident the road to greater fuel efficiency is full of potholes. For one thing, the new legislation adds a new level of complexity to the 35-year-old CAFE system [sounds like French for "coffee," but stands for Corporate Average Fuel Economy]. Then there's the issue of technology -- or lack thereof: Automakers say they don't have the means to make pickup trucks and large sport-utility vehicles much more fuel-efficient than they are now. "We cannot get to 35 miles per gallon with anything resembling the current product portfolio, or with anything resembling current technology," said GM (GM) Vice-Chairman Robert Lutz.



    Car companies also warn that the new standard will force them to raise prices on vehicles, which could spark a backlash from consumers. That may be the industry's best hope of getting politicians to revisit the legislation. James Press, who joined Chrysler last year as vice-chairman after a long career at Toyota Motor (TM), says the new bill is "just part of the political process," suggesting the law was all about Congress and the White House trying to show voters they are taking action on climate change and U.S. dependence on foreign oil. Press, who remains a staunch advocate of hybrid technology and reducing the carbon footprint of vehicles, says it may not be the last word on fuel economy.



    Will the U.S. Keep on Truckin'?

    The Big Three are betting that sooner or later lawmakers will run into resistance from the sizable portion of the U.S. population that is allergic to small econo-cars, and from those who cherish American pickup truck culture. "I'm pretty sure the state of California isn't going to outlaw pickup trucks," quips Chrysler's Press.



    He has a point. Even with thousands of suburban weekend warriors shifting away from pickups as gas prices climb, demand from people who need working trucks remains. GM, Ford Motor (F), and Chrysler have a disproportionate amount of that business, though Toyota has its Tundra pickup. So far this year, 61% of GM's unit sales in the first two months were light trucks, including pickups and SUVs, compared with 42% for Toyota."

    http://www.lifewhile.com/money/15689477/detail.html


    Finally and I find it laughable that you think letting companies merge was the cause of this recession. That just figures coming from you Havasucker.

  8. #168
    Havakasha is offline
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    Oh S&L where are you? I thought you were taking over as moderator. lol

    John we were in one giant bubble. We were living a lie built by people like
    you supply siders who said we could have it all. It went bust.

    John you cant possibly be this much of a dumbass can you.
    Do you ever use logic or do research. Jeez.

    "ONE OF THIS ERA'S DEFINING MOMENTS OCCURRED ON AUGUST 28, 2006, WHEN STOCK BROKER AND UC BERKELEY ALUMNUS PETER SCHIFF APPEARED ON CNBC AND PROCALIMED THAT BY 2008,
    OUR ADDICTION TO DEBT-FINANCED CONSUMPTION AND THE COLLAPSE OF THE HOUSING BUBBLE WOULD PLUNGE THE COUNTRY INTO ONE OF THE DEEPEST RECESSIONS IT HAD EVER SEEN. SQUARING OFF AGAINST SCHIFF WAS NONE OTHER THAN ART LAFFER, FORMER ECONOMIC ADVISOR TO RONALD REAGAN AND THE GODFATHER OF SUPPLY-SIDE ECONOMICS. 'THE UNITED STATES ECONOMY HAS NEVER BEEN IN BETTER SHAPE,' ASSURED LAFFER, WHO EVEN WENT SO FAR AS TO BET SCHIFF A PENNY THAT THE ECONOMY WOULDNT CRASH. 'I'LL BET YOU A LOT MORE THAN A PENNY,' SCHIFF RETORTED.

    John you big dumbass. Your hero bet that the "economy wouldnt crash". He was wrong you dummy. Get it into your thick ideologically head. You cant escape that FACT.



    OUR economy was clearly a house of cards when Laffer made his remark. you can focus on one element- GDP all you want but the FACT IS THAT THE ECONOMY WAS ABOUT TO COLLAPSE WHEN Mr. Laffer (your economic hero) said:

    "THE US ECONOMY HAS NEVER BEEN IN BETTER SHAPE" He was wrong. In fact it was about to collapse and many people knew it except of course Mr. Laffer, you, and other blind ideiologues, ASK Mr. Roubini, Mr. Schiff, Mr. Krugman and on and on.

    HE WAS WRONG. He made a bet which he lost. Do you understand wrong? LOL.
    The bet was that the economy was going to collapse by 2008. What do you not understand about the bet? You dumbass ideologue.
    John, TRYING TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT AGAIN? LMFAO.
    John i will address what you wrote in due time. Completley dishonest,one sided ideological crap on your part as usual. However, i am not going to let you get away with your evasiveness on Laffer. I love how you ignore the facts when it is proven you are wrong.

    Your Hero lost the bet and was wrong and has been discredited. That means your economic knowledge base which comes from Laffer is worthless. i know its painful to lose face but you are going to have to act like a mature individual for once.
    Last edited by Havakasha; 09-08-2010 at 04:47 PM.

  9. #169
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    Sorry Candleman,
    I asked Charles to enforce no politics in stock threads and force John to discuss this stuff in the POLITICS thread but he has not replied.


    Now I am really LMFAO. That is really to rich, the guy who started getting political on this thread for no other reason then to get political is acting like he had nothing to do with what has happen. Once again Dumbass YOU were the cause of the problem. What you dont think people can go back and take a look at how it all started. Listen you dumb twit, this is not one of your liberial sites were all your "rules for radicles" tricks, will work.

  10. #170
    Havakasha is offline
    Hmm i seem to remember some guy named John who said he would never debate me. LOL> Come on over to POLITCAL thread john. Its fun.

    You injected some lying comments about Obama being radical in this thread.
    Go back and look it up.

    Oh and how about that hero of yours Mr. Laffer from Aug 2006 " The US ECONOMY HAS NEVER BEEN IN BETTER SHAPE" and then bets the US economy
    wont collapse by 2008. LMFAO.

    Game. Set. Match.

  11. Ad Fairy Senior Member
Page 17 of 18 FirstFirst ... 715161718 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •