Discussion
Gotta love this President. He whipped their asses in the election in November. Now the GOP told him to blink. He said "you blink mofos". They blinked, he won again.
That's vested interests and morons 0 The American people 3
This is a politician with balls. Small wonder he tops the gallup poll of most admired man amongst Americans for the 5th year in a row.
That's vested interests and morons 0 The American people 3
This is a politician with balls. Small wonder he tops the gallup poll of most admired man amongst Americans for the 5th year in a row.
Brother D said:
The Gordon Brown of America? - You are very strange.
You're funny.Look where the UK is under CMD and the Euro Zone is under austerity. Then look at the USA under Obama - 33 consecutive months of job growth, rising housing market, record company profits, stock market at record highs, consumer confidence rising etc.. Not to say anything of the new healthcare program and other social changes and the end of 2 wars.
Gordon Brown was a profligate schmuck who never won an election and who sold off the UK's gold reserves at the bottom of the market and mismanaged the economy to the brink of collapse. Obama won 2 elections and took a broken economy that was haemororrhaging 800,000 jobs a month and turned it around.
unrepentant said:
Gordon Brown was a profligate schmuck who never won an election and who sold off the UK's gold reserves at the bottom of the market and mismanaged the economy to the brink of collapse. Obama won 2 elections and took a broken economy that was haemororrhaging 800,000 jobs a month and turned it around.
Exactly. Americas level of prudence in regards to federal debt, since 2001 but accelerated after 2009, is to be extolled as a virtue of forward thinking. I literally can't see one problem that will be caused by a borrow-and-spend approach to balancing the federal budget.
Look I like Obama. He was the best candidate and managed well in his first term but it would be reckless to let this approach continue indefinitely.
speedy_thrills said:
unrepentant said:
Gordon Brown was a profligate schmuck who never won an election and who sold off the UK's gold reserves at the bottom of the market and mismanaged the economy to the brink of collapse. Obama won 2 elections and took a broken economy that was haemororrhaging 800,000 jobs a month and turned it around.
Exactly. Americas level of prudence in regards to federal debt, since 2001 but accelerated after 2009, is to be extolled as a virtue of forward thinking. I literally can't see one problem that will be caused by a borrow-and-spend approach to balancing the federal budget.
Look I like Obama. He was the best candidate and managed well in his first term but it would be reckless to let this approach continue indefinitely.
OP!!!
How the F... can an economic failure who increased your debt by 60% within 4 years (1o trillion to 16 trillion) be considered a success?
Oh Bummer!!!
However I agree Gordon Brown was the worst piece of s
te that ever had economic sayso and the worst PM ever....
BUT...Time the US paid proper taxes and proper petrol prices.....!!!
How the F... can an economic failure who increased your debt by 60% within 4 years (1o trillion to 16 trillion) be considered a success?
Oh Bummer!!!
However I agree Gordon Brown was the worst piece of s
te that ever had economic sayso and the worst PM ever....BUT...Time the US paid proper taxes and proper petrol prices.....!!!
So is this true, or not?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/w...
Is tha majority of the BO spending actually the pre-assigned budget of the previous administration under Bush, namely the stimulus? (This was the stimulus that was being voted on during the presidential race from what I remember, as McCain made a big deal of going back to vote in it)?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/w...
Is tha majority of the BO spending actually the pre-assigned budget of the previous administration under Bush, namely the stimulus? (This was the stimulus that was being voted on during the presidential race from what I remember, as McCain made a big deal of going back to vote in it)?
Some running commentary on how the life raft was punted a few metres back along the Potomac.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/debt-crisis-liv...
More paddling needed in a couple of months iirc.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/debt-crisis-liv...
More paddling needed in a couple of months iirc.
unrepentant said:
33 consecutive months of job growth,
the number of people employed in the US has not been growing for 33 consecutive months. It's higher than it was 33 months ago, but only 1.1 million people have gained jobs since he took office. The participation rate has dropped from 65.7 to 63.6% in a growing population. Hardly something to celebrate.
record company profits,
S&P earnings are good, but not blowing the past out of the water.
stock market at record highs,
none of the three main indices are near their all time highs.
consumer confidence rising,
yes it's rising, but again it's not exactly high enough to give cause for celebration
Obama won 2 elections,
that he did.
and took a broken economy that was haemororrhaging 800,000 jobs a month and turned it around.
the only months during which the economy gave up 800,000 jobs that I can see were under Obama's leadership
My bold. Quite an odd thread.the number of people employed in the US has not been growing for 33 consecutive months. It's higher than it was 33 months ago, but only 1.1 million people have gained jobs since he took office. The participation rate has dropped from 65.7 to 63.6% in a growing population. Hardly something to celebrate.
record company profits,
S&P earnings are good, but not blowing the past out of the water.
stock market at record highs,
none of the three main indices are near their all time highs.
consumer confidence rising,
yes it's rising, but again it's not exactly high enough to give cause for celebration
Obama won 2 elections,
that he did.
and took a broken economy that was haemororrhaging 800,000 jobs a month and turned it around.
the only months during which the economy gave up 800,000 jobs that I can see were under Obama's leadership
TheHeretic said:
So is this true, or not?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/w...
Is tha majority of the BO spending actually the pre-assigned budget of the previous administration under Bush, namely the stimulus? (This was the stimulus that was being voted on during the presidential race from what I remember, as McCain made a big deal of going back to vote in it)?
Absolutely! It's a fallacy to describe Obama as a spender. People accuse him of being a big government liberal but there are hundreds of thousands fewer public employees now than there were when he came into office. We had all these arguments during the election and he won them. Even conservatives accept that the defecit will be cut considerably during his second term. That's why even on the morning after the election the likes of Limbaugh were lamenting the fact that Obama would "unfairly" claim credit for the recovery. http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/w...
Is tha majority of the BO spending actually the pre-assigned budget of the previous administration under Bush, namely the stimulus? (This was the stimulus that was being voted on during the presidential race from what I remember, as McCain made a big deal of going back to vote in it)?
Obama has done what was neccessary to turn round the ship of state but it's a big ship and it was sinking when he became the skipper so it takes a while to turn.
The republicans are obsessed with tax cuts for the few, it's their answer to everything. Well we tried that and it failed and what's more it was rejected by the electorate.
afrochicken said:
My bold. Quite an odd thread.
Which 3 indicies are you referencing?Rusell 2000 is above its previous high and for US small cap is widely regarded and used.
Dow? 30 massive stocks and part of S&P 500. Nasdaq? Narrow tech focus.
S&P 500? about 7% off all time high.
Not querying your conclusions per se, just some of the data on this point.
ellroy said:
Which 3 indicies are you referencing?
Rusell 2000 is above its previous high and for US small cap is widely regarded and used.
Dow? 30 massive stocks and part of S&P 500. Nasdaq? Narrow tech focus.
S&P 500? about 7% off all time high.
Not querying your conclusions per se, just some of the data on this point.
Dow is within 1.5% of it's high. And is 52% higher than where Bush left it.Rusell 2000 is above its previous high and for US small cap is widely regarded and used.
Dow? 30 massive stocks and part of S&P 500. Nasdaq? Narrow tech focus.
S&P 500? about 7% off all time high.
Not querying your conclusions per se, just some of the data on this point.
ellroy said:
afrochicken said:
My bold. Quite an odd thread.
Which 3 indicies are you referencing?Rusell 2000 is above its previous high and for US small cap is widely regarded and used.
Dow? 30 massive stocks and part of S&P 500. Nasdaq? Narrow tech focus.
S&P 500? about 7% off all time high.
Not querying your conclusions per se, just some of the data on this point.
Dow all time high about 14200, currently 13340
S+P all time high 1576, currently 1452
Nasdaq all time high 5132, currently 3090
Since the open I've heard that the Russell has made a new high, the little blighter
unrepentant said:
TheHeretic said:
So is this true, or not?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/w...
Is tha majority of the BO spending actually the pre-assigned budget of the previous administration under Bush, namely the stimulus? (This was the stimulus that was being voted on during the presidential race from what I remember, as McCain made a big deal of going back to vote in it)?
Absolutely! It's a fallacy to describe Obama as a spender. People accuse him of being a big government liberal but there are hundreds of thousands fewer public employees now than there were when he came into office. We had all these arguments during the election and he won them. Even conservatives accept that the defecit will be cut considerably during his second term. That's why even on the morning after the election the likes of Limbaugh were lamenting the fact that Obama would "unfairly" claim credit for the recovery. http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/w...
Is tha majority of the BO spending actually the pre-assigned budget of the previous administration under Bush, namely the stimulus? (This was the stimulus that was being voted on during the presidential race from what I remember, as McCain made a big deal of going back to vote in it)?
Obama has done what was neccessary to turn round the ship of state but it's a big ship and it was sinking when he became the skipper so it takes a while to turn.
The republicans are obsessed with tax cuts for the few, it's their answer to everything. Well we tried that and it failed and what's more it was rejected by the electorate.
How about that debt he's built up?
devonshiredave said:
This should be fun..... Just hope the markets keep confidence in Americas ability to pay.
Is there a world series for kicking the can?
There will come a time surely, where the credibility of the USD as reserve currency passes a tipping point and markets re-align?Is there a world series for kicking the can?
Then it will get ugly, but for now this is all part of the race to the bottom.
Digga said:
devonshiredave said:
This should be fun..... Just hope the markets keep confidence in Americas ability to pay.
Is there a world series for kicking the can?
There will come a time surely, where the credibility of the USD as reserve currency passes a tipping point and markets re-align?Is there a world series for kicking the can?
Then it will get ugly, but for now this is all part of the race to the bottom.
Ineffective government + Credulous electorate + Stein's Law = USA facing major problems
Stein's Law: What cannot go on forever will not go on forever.
Short-term it's all wonderful!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff