What a Muppet!

[Mark]

Mark!

It doesn't have to be FUBAR!

Ignore the little man behind the curtain. The family is under attack, and is split by the necessity of man and wife having to work to meet tax obligations. Solution, audit the government!

Kids will still end up playing with the box all that junk came in and they'll start putting baseball cards on their bikes when they realize that the baseball card market has collapsed:~)

Make it possible for small business to operate again, and the old Henry Ford ideas will start taking over the market again.

Small government, my man, that's the ticket!!!!

100% agree with you Bob. Absolutely. The same is true and equally applicable here.

I suppose that my 'attitude to posting in here may often come across as an acceptance of the FUBAR'ishness of it all. It is not, or I would never post.

But you see how you and I are often 100% opposed and yet here we are intotal agreement? Fooking fabulious that is and it makes my day!

Until more people refuse to accept the way it is and combine all that is good in all of us, the sooner our two great peoples - No I don't mean socialist brothers - would be able to stand up to the governements we have whored ourselves to and insist upon the changes necessary.

OOw Err. Am I a revolutionist now? I hope not, I much prefer to aim toward realist. One can hope.

 

[Keith]

Sacre Bleu!

A la lanterne, monsieur Peekford... :hanged:

 

[Pat]

You say that like its a bad thing.

They did save the banks, they did save the brokerage firms, they did save the auto industry..................

They did save the economy!!!!

Stocks are up because the economy was saved. You should be thankful.

Jim, I worked for a bank and it was FORCED to take TARP. The original stated intent was for funding to go to biggest banks to buy smaller insolvent ones so the government didn't have to intervene as they did in the S&L crisis in the '90s. We (like others) didn't want it nor did we need it. Disturbing story about bank forced to take TARP funds | Western Free Press
The Bush administration has some culpability here as well.
Uncovered TARP Docs Reveal How Paulson Forced Bankers To Take Cash - Business Insider
Like others cited above, our CEO was told that they were "expected to take it" and to pay the above market interest on it. TARP provided coverage for the government Wall Street cronies that actually needed it (Goldman Sachs, AIG). (FYI Citigroup-#4 TARP recipient- just hosted a fundraiser for Mr. Biden). #1 and #2 recipients were government controlled lenders Fannie and Freddie.
In truth, he bailed out his buddies on Wall Street, not Main Street.
If GM has been allowed to go into bankruptcy, they could have gotten out from the onerous union contracts that were dragging them down. Instead the bond holders for forced to capitulate to in favor of the unions-a key Obama crony. Mr. Obama talks about saving the “auto industry”. That’s not true, he didn’t bail out Ford, he sold Chrysler at fire sale prices to Fiat and GM still has $49B in taxpayer money and is now resorting to subprime lending to move cars. In Vietnam they used to say “We burned the village to save it” guess so… If GM had been allowed into full bankruptcy they could have been broken up unto smaller, more nimble business units and (like AT&T years ago) become more far more profitable in its parts than it’s unwieldy union pension choked whole. But that’s the kind of evil thing Bain Capital would do…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2009/05/25/AR2009052502135.html
Massive stimulus funds didn't go to build "shovel ready projects" but went to fund public union jobs in danger of local cost cutting by local and state governments running out of money-not going to solve anything but the maintenance of union jobs. Now that the money is running out, cities in your state are declaring bankruptcy.
This administration is the party of the special interests like SEIU and big money Solindra donors have reaped the largess at taxpayer expense. Like Regan once said, I didn’t leave the Democratic Party (25 year member), it left me.

If you want to know what the massive printing of money has done for us, look at at the price of your weekly groceries compared to four years ago!

 

[Mark]

Sacre Bleu!

A la lanterne, monsieur Peekford... :hanged:

To quote my favourite lyricist:

There's no bread, let 'em eat cake
There's no end to what they'll take
Flaunt the fruits of noble birth
Wash the salt into the earth

But they're marching to Bastille Day.
La guillotine will claim her bloody prize.
Free the dungeons of the innocent
The king will kneel
And let his kingdom rise.

There's stained velvet, dirty lace,
Naked fear on every face
See them bow their heads to die
As we would bow as they rode by
And we're marching to Bastille Day
La guillotine will claim her bloody prize
Sing, oh choirs of cacophony
The king has kneeled
To let his kingdom rise.

Lessons taught but never learned
All around us anger burns
Guide the future by the past
Long ago the mould was cast
For they marched up to Bastille Day
La guillotine claimed her bloody prize
Hear the echoes of the centuries
Power isn't all that money buys.

 

[Tom P]

Tom,

The economy has grown substantially since Reagan, dollar changes show nothing, percent change is really the only way to fairly judge changes.

US GDP at start of FDR's Presidency: $58 Billion
US GDP at start of Reagan's Presidency: $3,253 Billion
US GDP at start of Obamas Presidency: $14,369 Billion
US GDP 2 days ago 15,596 Billion

Tom, you do want to be fair don't you?

Percentage is a good way to show GDP growth, your graph shows national debt. For instance, Reagans debt percentage is a large percentage of a small number. At the start of Reagan's term the debt was $934 billion, 8 years later it rose $1.76 trillion to $2.69 trillion. GW Bush started with $5.7 trillion and over 8 years he added $4.89 trillion for a total of $10.6 trillion at the start of Obama's presidency. GW Bush's $4.89 trillion is a big percentage of the start of $5.7 trillion while Obama's debt in under 4 years is a larger number $5.29 trillion, it's a smaller percentage of the starting number of $10.6 trillion. Obama with his small percentage number has added $400 billion ($5.29 trillion) more to the debt in under 4 years than GW Bush ($4.89 trillion) did in 8 years. So percentages are misleading.

 

[Tom P]

No Tom,

They were 90% the same stocks, the Dow declined under BushII and has gone up under Obama.

Jim, I don't know when you bought your stocks, but let's say you bought them in the 4th quarter of 2007. They would have totally"shit the bed" when Obama was voted in and been at a low when he was sworn in. Today they would be a loss. Had you bought them in the 2nd quarter of 2003 and sold at the begining of the 4th quarter of 2007 you would have shown a profit. Once again, misleading.

 

[Bob Fechter]

Why we don't demand a full audit of the government on a quarterly basis is beyond me.

 

[Tom P]

Why we don't demand a full audit of the government on a quarterly basis is beyond me.

If you handled your finances the same way the government does you would be sharing a room with Bernie Madoff.

 

[Jim Craik]

Jim, I don't know when you bought your stocks, but let's say you bought them in the 4th quarter of 2007. They would have totally"shit the bed" when Obama was voted in and been at a low when he was sworn in. Today they would be a loss. Had you bought them in the 2nd quarter of 2003 and sold at the begining of the 4th quarter of 2007 you would have shown a profit. Once again, misleading.

Tom,

I entered the market in 1990 and have made massive profits, including 1999 when I cleared over 100%. I got out of the market 01/01/2000, a very good move. BushII came in and the DOW tanked!

Yes, anyone who bought at the very top of the market, late in 2007 would be down. But then anyone who got in the market in late 2007 should really not be the market at all!

But investments made at almost any other time except at the end of BushII would have made a profit.

 

[Tom P]

Tom,

I entered the market in 1990 and have made massive profits, including 1999 when I cleared over 100%. I got out of the market 01/01/2000, a very good move. BushII came in and the DOW tanked!

Yes, anyone who bought at the very top of the market, late in 2007 would be down. But then anyone who got in the market in late 2007 should really not be the market at all!

But investments made at almost any other time except at the end of BushII would have made a profit.

Correct. I always felt like the stock market is closely linked with a casino, some people are good with it, for me it's luck.

 

[Jim Craik]

Tom,

Homework and good advice can take much of the risk out of the process.

 

[Bob Fechter]

The Associated Press: So far, London Olympics wins gold medal for gaffes

 

[Mark]

Isn't great? :thumbsup:

Everyone seems to be having a good time though. Which is nice.

 

[Bob Fechter]

Isn't great? :thumbsup:

Everyone seems to be having a good time though. Which is nice.

you're as good as your work, Mark! You've passed the "get over it" test with flying colors!

 

[Mark]

I do try Bob. I do try

 

[Bob Fechter]

So does Boris!

Boris Johnson gets stuck on zip wire carrying two Union flags - Telegraph