Bush's Economy - really bad?

[Lucky... 0]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Nice dodge but please back up what you said


I don't know where you would find data indicating the demographic of stock investors, but if you want to believe it's the homeless guy down the block, who am I stop you from doing so?


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Your profile says you are a ho. Do you have a full time job?


Yes, pointing out your ridiculous statements. I'm A&P, IA, FCC GROL, PP; good enough?


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Glad you said something about gas prices. Who will not drill here and now? Drill here and now fuel prices will drop. Most people I know are having trouble be cause they life in debt.


Oh, about how Bush has fucked em up? That's the thread title, check it out. Then you go and make this a thread about drilling for oil.....see what I mean, it's a full-time job.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The mountain of DEBT was carefully constructed under the Republicans. The reason the economy is tanking now is on account of the GOP manufactured deficits and debt

Hmm, while I agree that deficit spending and debt are bad, the economic effects are that deficit spending stimulates the economy in the short term. Rising debt crowds out private investment and manifests itself in higher interest rates, which in the long term will depress the economy. That hasn't happened. The higher interest rates are the result of problems in the mortgage industry and the Fed's fear of inflation.

Right, and we had the short term stimulus, and now we're paying the price because revenues fell far behind Bush's spending spree in the short, medium and long terms.

The largest increase in govt. spending EVER came in Bush's watch with a GOP controlled House and a GOP controlled Senate.

Matched with the largest debt compilation ever............

[bodypilot90 0]

you said

Quote

I don't know where you would find data indicating the demographic of stock investors, but if you want to believe it's the homeless guy down the block, who am I stop you from doing so?

after you said

Quote

Uh, the investors grow. How many poor/middle class play the stocks a lot vs how many upper class? That just supports class seperation.

how many middle class homeless do you know?

here

Quote

Washington, DC, September 27, 2002 - Nearly half of all U.S. households, an estimated 52.7 million, owned equities as the year began, according to a survey released today by the Investment Company Institute (ICI) and the Securities Industry Association (SIA). That represents a 7.1 percent gain, or 3.5 million more households, from January 1999, when ICI and SIA conducted a similar study.

The typical investor holds an equity portfolio of moderate value (nearly half had equity assets of less than $50,000) and is married, employed, college-educated, and in his or her late 40's, with a median household income in the low $60,000's. More than a third (34 percent) own mutual funds, individual stocks, or a combination of both inside an employer-sponsored plan. Nearly as many (33.7 percent) hold equities outside such plans.

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

you said

Quote

I don't know where you would find data indicating the demographic of stock investors, but if you want to believe it's the homeless guy down the block, who am I stop you from doing so?

after you said

Quote

Uh, the investors grow. How many poor/middle class play the stocks a lot vs how many upper class? That just supports class seperation.

how many middle class homeless do you know?

here

Quote

Washington, DC, September 27, 2002 - Nearly half of all U.S. households, an estimated 52.7 million, owned equities as the year began, according to a survey released today by the Investment Company Institute (ICI) and the Securities Industry Association (SIA). That represents a 7.1 percent gain, or 3.5 million more households, from January 1999, when ICI and SIA conducted a similar study.

The typical investor holds an equity portfolio of moderate value (nearly half had equity assets of less than $50,000) and is married, employed, college-educated, and in his or her late 40's, with a median household income in the low $60,000's. More than a third (34 percent) own mutual funds, individual stocks, or a combination of both inside an employer-sponsored plan. Nearly as many (33.7 percent) hold equities outside such plans.

Or to put it another way:

More than half of US households have NO equity investments at all, and over 66% have no equity investments other than a retirement plan.

Seems to support what he wrote.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Lucky... 0]

I wrote:

Uh, the investors grow. How many poor/middle class play the stocks a lot vs how many upper class? That just supports class seperation.

And then:

I don't know where you would find data indicating the demographic of stock investors, but if you want to believe it's the homeless guy down the block, who am I stop you from doing so?

bodypilot90 response:

>>>>>>>>>how many middle class homeless do you know?



It makes no sense that you can't understand the meaning and have to try to contort it to something it's not. Let's break it down in sequence:

- Uh, the investors grow. (in all economies)
- How many poor/middle class play the stocks a lot vs how many upper class?
- That just supports class seperation.
- I don't know where you would find data indicating the demographic of stock investors,
- but if you want to believe it's the homeless guy down the block, who am I stop you from doing so?


The key is the last assertion where I claim that it is not the homeless guy down the block who is investing in stocks; how can you contort that into some assertion that I'm saying the middle class is homeless? Also, early on I assert where I ask how many poor/middle class play stocks a lot. Byu a lot I mean how many have substantial portfolios. So if a guy has 4k in his 401K, and it increases 10%, you consider that the same as a rich guy that has 10M in there and gains a million. Stock gains DON'T help the poor and slightly help the middle class on an individual basis; that is my point that you unsuccessfully skewed.


Lastly, why am I surprised that there is no citation to your quote? Post one.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

you said

Quote

I don't know where you would find data indicating the demographic of stock investors, but if you want to believe it's the homeless guy down the block, who am I stop you from doing so?

after you said

Quote

Uh, the investors grow. How many poor/middle class play the stocks a lot vs how many upper class? That just supports class seperation.

how many middle class homeless do you know?

here

Quote

Washington, DC, September 27, 2002 - Nearly half of all U.S. households, an estimated 52.7 million, owned equities as the year began, according to a survey released today by the Investment Company Institute (ICI) and the Securities Industry Association (SIA). That represents a 7.1 percent gain, or 3.5 million more households, from January 1999, when ICI and SIA conducted a similar study.

The typical investor holds an equity portfolio of moderate value (nearly half had equity assets of less than $50,000) and is married, employed, college-educated, and in his or her late 40's, with a median household income in the low $60,000's. More than a third (34 percent) own mutual funds, individual stocks, or a combination of both inside an employer-sponsored plan. Nearly as many (33.7 percent) hold equities outside such plans.

Or to put it another way:

More than half of US households have NO equity investments at all, and over 66% have no equity investments other than a retirement plan.

Seems to support what he wrote.

Right, and many poor have a few thousand dollars in thier 401 that they end up using for a house, medical, college or just an emergency. Stock market increases help the upper classes, esp on an individual basis, I think we all know that to be true.