Things are getting dark

evince

evince

Truthmatters
http://www.nysun.com/article/66268

How in the hell will the Rs blame this on the Dems?



After what Los Angeles money manager Arnold Silver called "a brutal three days," the question is: What now for the market?

A Wall Street superstar this year who runs Balestra Capital Partners, Jim Melcher, says he's "worried about a recession. Not a normal one, but a very bad one. The worst since the 1930s. I expect we'll see clear signs of it in six months with a dramatic slowdown in the gross domestic product."

Balestra Capital, a $350 million New York hedge fund, was up 3% for the past three market sessions, when the Dow Jones Industrials, spearheaded by widespread declines in financial stocks and fears of more billion-dollar-plus asset write-downs, tumbled more than 677 points, or about 4.5%. The Nasdaq fared worse, skidding about 7%, triggered by across-the-board declines in those fast-stepping technology stocks.

Balestra
 
Desh said:
http://www.nysun.com/article/66268

How in the hell will the Rs blame this on the Dems?



After what Los Angeles money manager Arnold Silver called "a brutal three days," the question is: What now for the market?

A Wall Street superstar this year who runs Balestra Capital Partners, Jim Melcher, says he's "worried about a recession. Not a normal one, but a very bad one. The worst since the 1930s. I expect we'll see clear signs of it in six months with a dramatic slowdown in the gross domestic product."

Balestra Capital, a $350 million New York hedge fund, was up 3% for the past three market sessions, when the Dow Jones Industrials, spearheaded by widespread declines in financial stocks and fears of more billion-dollar-plus asset write-downs, tumbled more than 677 points, or about 4.5%. The Nasdaq fared worse, skidding about 7%, triggered by across-the-board declines in those fast-stepping technology stocks.

Balestra
Click to expand...

What the hell are you talking about? Are you implying that the Reps will blame the dems for a recession should it indeed hit? Of course they will try to blame the dems and the dems will try to blame the Reps. That is all that we can truly be confident in getting from our politicians.... finger pointing.

None are likely to step up and say... yeah, the consumers and lenders screwed up and we did not do enough to prevent it or at the very least make consumers aware how bad an idea it is (normally) to take out an I-only or ARM when interest rates are at 40 year lows.
 
You watch they will find a way to say it was the democrats fault.

I remember back in 1993 when congress passed ad Bill signed the bill which set us on the path to fiscal balence I turned to my husband and said " watch them try and claim this as their doing" They have done just that. The bill was signed without ONE single R vote and was credited by the CBO and the GAO as a major reason for the surpluses. The Rs base still thinks it was Newt. They will claim it , it will be twisted logic and some will buy it.
 
Superfreak said:
What the hell are you talking about? Are you implying that the Reps will blame the dems for a recession should it indeed hit? Of course they will try to blame the dems and the dems will try to blame the Reps. That is all that we can truly be confident in getting from our politicians.... finger pointing.

None are likely to step up and say... yeah, the consumers and lenders screwed up and we did not do enough to prevent it or at the very least make consumers aware how bad an idea it is (normally) to take out an I-only or ARM when interest rates are at 40 year lows.
Click to expand...


Heres the KEY. The rs have had complete control for the years.They even enacted some bankruptcy laws which made it harder for people to go bankrupt and save their homes not to mention they did nothing to fix the laws to protect uneducated buyers from this frenzy.

It is the fault of corporate whores and the republicans.
 
Desh said:
Heres the KEY. The rs have had complete control for the years.They even enacted some bankruptcy laws which made it harder for people to go bankrupt and save their homes not to mention they did nothing to fix the laws to protect uneducated buyers from this frenzy.

It is the fault of corporate whores and the republicans.
Click to expand...


If you want to point to the Bankruptcy Reform bill as part of the problem you can point squarely to plenty of Democrats that voted for that shitty bill, particularly in the Senate.
 
Desh said:
You watch they will find a way to say it was the democrats fault.

I remember back in 1993 when congress passed ad Bill signed the bill which set us on the path to fiscal balence I turned to my husband and said " watch them try and claim this as their doing" They have done just that. The bill was signed without ONE single R vote and was credited by the CBO and the GAO as a major reason for the surpluses. The Rs base still thinks it was Newt. They will claim it , it will be twisted logic and some will buy it.
Click to expand...

Again, yes, they will find a way to blame the Dems.... and the Dems will find a way to blame the Reps. This really shouldn't come as a surprise to you Desh. They have been doing it for decades. When in doubt... blame the other party..... something you are very good at.

Again you are posting your idiotic assertion that one bill caused surplusses? How many fucking times do you have to be shown that the budget is created on an annual basis? Or do you really believe that it takes SIX years for that bill to work its way into an ANNUAL process? Funny how you start a thread about how the Reps will try to find a way to blame Dems when you are doing the same damn thing in reverse.

If you don't understand economics and want to learn, that is great. But quit spouting off ignorant crap like this.
 
Superfreak said:
Again, yes, they will find a way to blame the Dems.... and the Dems will find a way to blame the Reps. This really shouldn't come as a surprise to you Desh. They have been doing it for decades. When in doubt... blame the other party..... something you are very good at.

Again you are posting your idiotic assertion that one bill caused surplusses? How many fucking times do you have to be shown that the budget is created on an annual basis? Or do you really believe that it takes SIX years for that bill to work its way into an ANNUAL process? Funny how you start a thread about how the Reps will try to find a way to blame Dems when you are doing the same damn thing in reverse.

If you don't understand economics and want to learn, that is great. But quit spouting off ignorant crap like this.
Click to expand...



YOu are doing just what I said . You refuse to realise that this bill indeed was what set us on the fiscal path. IT WAS!
 
Desh said:
You watch they will find a way to say it was the democrats fault.

I remember back in 1993 when congress passed ad Bill signed the bill which set us on the path to fiscal balence I turned to my husband and said " watch them try and claim this as their doing" They have done just that. The bill was signed without ONE single R vote and was credited by the CBO and the GAO as a major reason for the surpluses. The Rs base still thinks it was Newt. They will claim it , it will be twisted logic and some will buy it.
Click to expand...

What bill? His giant tax increase? Because that did not help with fiscal balance. It was spending cuts that did.

In the first 2 years of Clinton where the Democrats had the presidency, house and senate the debt went up by
$628,129,254,491.66 ($4,692,749,910,013.32 at end of 1994 minus 4,064,620,655,521.66 at end of 1992) or $314,064,627,245.83 per year.

In the next 6 years of Clinton's terms, Republicans controlled the house and senate and the debt went up by $981,428,299,873.54 ($5,674,178,209,886.86 at end of 2000 minus 4,692,749,910,013.32 at end of 1994) or
$163,571,383,312.26 per year
We know this was because they cut welfare, government and subsidies.


So, again when the Republicans controlled the house and senate in the 90's, the debt went up by only $163,571,383,312.26 per year, while when the Democrats controlled everything in the 90's, the debt went up by almost double at $314,064,627,245.83 per year.

All figures shown here:
http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdhisto4.htm
 
And if you want the perfect example of someone taking credit for others, that would have to be welfare reform pushed by Repubs in the 90's, which Clinton fought tooth and nail against, vetoing it twice and only then giving in to overwhelming public opinion for it and then taking credit for it.
 
Desh said:
YOu are doing just what I said . You refuse to realise that this bill indeed was what set us on the fiscal path. IT WAS!
Click to expand...

I have never said that it didn't play a part in it desh. But you give it far too much credit for the revenues generated in the late 90's and 2000. The capital gains tax cuts had a large part in it. The tech and internet boom played a large part in it. The general state of the economy led to the large influx of revenues. The budget battle between Clinton and Congress played a large part in it.

Bottom line, you are wrong to cling to the belief that this bill was significant in any other way than being a first step down a long path.
 
No you give it too little. It shifted the path and forced the Rs to try and do something to effect the balence in an attempt to claim the credit. It was the last time the modern republican party tried to help do more than just TALK about being the fiscal party.

The GAO and the CBO gave it top billing for creating the surpluses.

You watn to bury it because it sdoes not fit into your world view.
 
Desh said:
No you give it too little. It shifted the path and forced the Rs to try and do something to effect the balence in an attempt to claim the credit. It was the last time the modern republican party tried to help do more than just TALK about being the fiscal party.

The GAO and the CBO gave it top billing for creating the surpluses.

You watn to bury it because it sdoes not fit into your world view.
Click to expand...

Desh, you are a party hack. We get that. You can trot out your little GAO and CBO quotes all day long. They are the same ones that could not even come close to predicting the "outcome" of that bill on the surplus. They were way off. If you want to take their word for it, that is your choice. Anyone who understands economics knows why they are wrong on that.

That bill did little in the ways of creating the so-called budget surplusses. I am not going to relive this conversation any further though as you have proven time and again not to have any understanding of economics and that you are unwilling to learn. You cling to quotes from the government about how great the government is doing. Enjoy your fantasy world.
 
Desh said:
An internet guy's opinion against the GAO and the CBO......hmmm..... who should I go with?
Click to expand...

Like I said, cling to your government spoon fed quotes. IGNORE the fact that they were completely wrong in their predictions.... thats what all good little party hacks do.
 
Show me any projection which hits it on the head.

You see when you make a projection you do it without the benifit of unforseen elements which will enter the realm in the future.
 
Desh said:
You watch they will find a way to say it was the democrats fault.

I remember back in 1993 when congress passed ad Bill signed the bill which set us on the path to fiscal balence I turned to my husband and said " watch them try and claim this as their doing" They have done just that. The bill was signed without ONE single R vote and was credited by the CBO and the GAO as a major reason for the surpluses. The Rs base still thinks it was Newt. They will claim it , it will be twisted logic and some will buy it.
Click to expand...

With all due respect Desh, if you are not on the Democratic Party payroll you ought to be. You are the party's most ardent defender regardless. You should be remunerated for your effort.
 
I dont always get desh.. you have been talking market gloom for like 2years now... probably longer. Its not going to happen. we will have corrections as we always do. The housing market correction will end at some point because shelter is a necessity.

In terms of your pro tax increase.. and for all of you that think 2.6T annual tax receipts isnt enough for a small populous of 300M people your simply flat out socialists. its an absurd amount of money for what the government job should be.

Now if you want to tax the righ more thats fine.. but give the cuts back to the middle class. Poor already get off easy. it should be a wash. There is absolutely no need to collect more taxes.


1 Last thing.. only a fool would think the 90's historic bull market was the result of a tax increase. Did the tax increase help balance the budget? perhaps.. but there would have been no balance without the tech boom. So unless u think there is another golden boom around the corner to eliminate the pain of a tax increase on the middle class then I wouldnt be looking for it.
 
I'm not too worried about the economy-- first of all, the market may have taken a hit, but last week (I think, maybe two weeks ago) there was a day that set records for the amount of increase.

Not only that, but Desh likes to ignore that a great deal of economic success in the mid-late 90s came from Greenspan and the Fed., which Clinton frequently disagreed with but took the credit for Greenspan's successes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top