mnealtx 0 #101 December 29, 2009 Quote During the 8 years of the BUSH presidency, the S&P 500 index fell 53%, while inflation added 21% to consumer prices. SO much for Voodoo Economics. You're absolutely right - tripling the deficit and ruining the economy is SO much better.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #102 December 29, 2009 QuoteQuote During the 8 years of the BUSH presidency, the S&P 500 index fell 53%, while inflation added 21% to consumer prices. SO much for Voodoo Economics. You're absolutely right - tripling the deficit and ruining the economy is SO much better. S&P 500 UP 36.6% since Obama took office. S&P 500 DOWN 53% during Bush's presidency. Ruining the economy was YOUR guy's specialty.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #103 December 29, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote During the 8 years of the BUSH presidency, the S&P 500 index fell 53%, while inflation added 21% to consumer prices. SO much for Voodoo Economics. You're absolutely right - tripling the deficit and ruining the economy is SO much better. S&P 500 UP 36.6% since Obama took office. S&P 500 DOWN 53% during Bush's presidency. Ruining the economy was YOUR guy's specialty. S&P is up, deficit is up, unemployment is up.... damn, it's a new Golden Child Age!!Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #104 December 29, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote During the 8 years of the BUSH presidency, the S&P 500 index fell 53%, while inflation added 21% to consumer prices. SO much for Voodoo Economics. You're absolutely right - tripling the deficit and ruining the economy is SO much better. S&P 500 UP 36.6% since Obama took office. S&P 500 DOWN 53% during Bush's presidency. Ruining the economy was YOUR guy's specialty. S&P is up, deficit is up, unemployment is up.... damn, it's a new Golden Child Age!! Yep, the economy has been sucky since the BUSH deficit started in Dec 2007. Fortunately the rate of increase in unemployment is now less than it was at the end of the Bush administration. The stock market generally follows leading indicators, so the rise in the S&P suggests things are improving.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #105 December 29, 2009 Quote The stock market generally follows leading indicators, so the rise in the S&P suggests things are improving. We can all hope so. Unfortunately, it can also be a false lead, and since government (deficit) spending has been the primary prop, the recovery hopes can't be that optimistic. Much of the market rebound stemmed from the oversell last year. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #106 December 30, 2009 QuoteQuote The stock market generally follows leading indicators, so the rise in the S&P suggests things are improving. We can all hope so. Unfortunately, it can also be a false lead, and since government (deficit) spending has been the primary prop, the recovery hopes can't be that optimistic. Much of the market rebound stemmed from the oversell last year. Better a 20% rise than a 50% drop. Bush's economic legacy is dismal, almost as bad as his foreign policy legacy. Not for nothing is he ranked among the worst presidents of all time.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #107 December 30, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote The stock market generally follows leading indicators, so the rise in the S&P suggests things are improving. We can all hope so. Unfortunately, it can also be a false lead, and since government (deficit) spending has been the primary prop, the recovery hopes can't be that optimistic. Much of the market rebound stemmed from the oversell last year. Better a 20% rise than a 50% drop. Bush's economic legacy is dismal, almost as bad as his foreign policy legacy. Not for nothing is he ranked among the worst presidents of all time. That 7% unemployment and 400 billion deficit he left is looking a WHOLE lot better than what we have now.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #108 December 30, 2009 Quote Better a 20% rise than a 50% drop. Bush's economic legacy is dismal, almost as bad as his foreign policy legacy. Not for nothing is he ranked among the worst presidents of all time. He'll likely end up there, but no reputable historian is going to rank him when he still is in the realm of current events. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #109 December 31, 2009 Quote During the 8 years of the BUSH presidency, the S&P 500 index fell 53%, while inflation added 21% to consumer prices. SO much for Voodoo Economics. Reagan and Bush were basically the same president. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #110 December 31, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote During the 8 years of the BUSH presidency, the S&P 500 index fell 53%, while inflation added 21% to consumer prices. SO much for Voodoo Economics. You're absolutely right - tripling the deficit and ruining the economy is SO much better. S&P 500 UP 36.6% since Obama took office. S&P 500 DOWN 53% during Bush's presidency. Ruining the economy was YOUR guy's specialty. Your guys = Reagan and GWB Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #111 December 31, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote During the 8 years of the BUSH presidency, the S&P 500 index fell 53%, while inflation added 21% to consumer prices. SO much for Voodoo Economics. You're absolutely right - tripling the deficit and ruining the economy is SO much better. S&P 500 UP 36.6% since Obama took office. S&P 500 DOWN 53% during Bush's presidency. Ruining the economy was YOUR guy's specialty. S&P is up, deficit is up, unemployment is up.... damn, it's a new Golden Child Age!! You guys are great for comedy. Hell, it took GHWB and Clinton 12 years to level off fascist pig Ronnies shopping spree. You act as tho this breater mess can be fixed in 2 weeks for 2 million dollars. Mike, meet reality; reality, Mike. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #112 December 31, 2009 QuoteQuote The stock market generally follows leading indicators, so the rise in the S&P suggests things are improving. We can all hope so. Unfortunately, it can also be a false lead, and since government (deficit) spending has been the primary prop, the recovery hopes can't be that optimistic. Much of the market rebound stemmed from the oversell last year. It's Jan 20, 2009, you just inherited the 2ns worst economy in US history, all indicators are down, unem is freefalling up; what do you do? - TAX CUTS, MY FRIENDS Reagan and GWB did this; we know the outcome - DO NOTHING Hoover did this; how many died? - DEFICIT SPEND Obama is doing this and all indicators are going the right way, unemp is even shading lower. So tell me, what is Obama doing wrong and why? What would you do? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #113 December 31, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote The stock market generally follows leading indicators, so the rise in the S&P suggests things are improving. We can all hope so. Unfortunately, it can also be a false lead, and since government (deficit) spending has been the primary prop, the recovery hopes can't be that optimistic. Much of the market rebound stemmed from the oversell last year. Better a 20% rise than a 50% drop. Bush's economic legacy is dismal, almost as bad as his foreign policy legacy. Not for nothing is he ranked among the worst presidents of all time. That 7% unemployment and 400 billion deficit he left is looking a WHOLE lot better than what we have now. Fuzzy math is a nice thing to call a blatant lie. http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?series_id=LNS14000000 7.6 in Jan to 8.1 in Feb 09 shows a freefall. Not to mention 7.6 is not 7%. With many things tenths are semantic, but with unemp 6/10 is huge, esp when it was 4.9 1 year prior and a full 1% lower just 3 months prior. This shows a major freefall in joblessness, so to assign whatever blame to the successor is, well, very Republican of you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #114 December 31, 2009 QuoteQuote Better a 20% rise than a 50% drop. Bush's economic legacy is dismal, almost as bad as his foreign policy legacy. Not for nothing is he ranked among the worst presidents of all time. He'll likely end up there, but no reputable historian is going to rank him when he still is in the realm of current events. Who'll end up there? Obama or Bush? If you mean Obama, no historian will rank anything current. But to rate Obama's job as negative is a joke. To be fair, Obama had small shows to fill; Clinton left big ones for Bush. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #115 December 31, 2009 QuoteFuzzy math is a nice thing to call a blatant lie. And you're bringing up that "12 million died" claim again, why? Quote7.6 in Jan to 8.1 in Feb 09 shows a freefall. Then 8.1 in Feb to 10.2 in October must be a supersonic dive.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #116 December 31, 2009 Quote And you're bringing up that "12 million died" claim again, why? AKA as: you don't have a clue as how to address my points so you build a straw man. For those who don't know the defintion of straw man, YOU, here's some help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position. Sit down. kid, ya bother me Quote Then 8.1 in Feb to 10.2 in October must be a supersonic dive. Yep, these things run exponentially. I bet if we graphed this we would see an exponential dive starting in late 2007. Remember, the start of the Great Republican Recession? Yea, you guys say late 2008, it's really mid-late 2007 as the NBER, Kallend and those with knowledge and underestanding say. Ironic, that's when unemp started to shade off, and we all know jobs lag going in and lag coming out. So the slow and modest drop starting in early 2008 adds up. Glad to see you so excited about the 10.2 to 10.0 drop and start of jobs recovery; you must want America to fail like heart attack boy does. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #117 December 31, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote The stock market generally follows leading indicators, so the rise in the S&P suggests things are improving. We can all hope so. Unfortunately, it can also be a false lead, and since government (deficit) spending has been the primary prop, the recovery hopes can't be that optimistic. Much of the market rebound stemmed from the oversell last year. Better a 20% rise than a 50% drop. Bush's economic legacy is dismal, almost as bad as his foreign policy legacy. Not for nothing is he ranked among the worst presidents of all time. That 7% unemployment and 400 billion deficit he left is looking a WHOLE lot better than what we have now. GOP Saint Ronald Reagan was 22 months into his presidency (Nov 1982) before the recession he inherited ended, and it was nothing like as bad as this one. Why do you have such a hypocritical double standard when it comes to Obama digging out of the excrement pile he inherited from GWB?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #118 December 31, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote The stock market generally follows leading indicators, so the rise in the S&P suggests things are improving. We can all hope so. Unfortunately, it can also be a false lead, and since government (deficit) spending has been the primary prop, the recovery hopes can't be that optimistic. Much of the market rebound stemmed from the oversell last year. It's Jan 20, 2009, you just inherited the 2ns worst economy in US history, all indicators are down, unem is freefalling up; what do you do? - TAX CUTS, MY FRIENDS Reagan and GWB did this; we know the outcome - DO NOTHING Hoover did this; how many died? - DEFICIT SPEND Obama is doing this and all indicators are going the right way, unemp is even shading lower. So tell me, what is Obama doing wrong and why? What would you do? Your question doesn't really follow from what I wrote, but in any event: spending trillion dollar deficits should be seen as an extraordinary remedy with deep consideration. Not rush to pass with the threat of dire consequences (10% unem, which happened anyway) otherwise. And the bill passed was so full of bullshit pork. And then to top it off, we're now about to pass trillion dollar deficit health care. The immediate problem for the country is this recession. But if the debt isn't brought back under control, that will be a far worse crisis for the country. It doesn't matter that Bush took the healthy outlook from Clinton and made it a problem again. It exists, and the country cannot afford to let the feds average a trillion in red ink for every year of the Obama Administration. He is going to have to start making tough decisions, likely very unpopular decisions, or he'll go down in the history as the President that rearranged chairs on the deck of the Titanic. Taxes or deep cuts in the defense. Ending the wars. Or something more creative. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
