mead107 Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Stocks up . So much for his words driving the market down .
DC Tom Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Sigmund Freud would call this "projection" and Karl Rove would call it "attacking your opponent in an area where you yourself are weak". Which is it? Are you being intentionally ironic?
elegantelliotoffen Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Are you being intentionally ironic? Did you spill your coffee on your crib sheet? Even by your standards this was pretty weak.
Wacka Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Elliot using the intelligent sounding version of "I know you are, but what am I?".
elegantelliotoffen Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Elliot using the intelligent sounding version of "I know you are, but what am I?". I think you need to go back and re-read this thread, although I know it will take you a few hours with your mental deficiency and all, and explain to me how the person who made the assertion first can be playing the "I know you are, but what am I" card.
KD in CA Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Elliot using the intelligent sounding version of "I know you are, but what am I?". First, and likely last, time we'll ever see 'eliot' and 'intelligent' in the same sentence. He's really lost now that he's been shamed into not posting links!
elegantelliotoffen Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 First, and likely last, time we'll ever see 'eliot' and 'intelligent' in the same sentence. He's really lost now that he's been shamed into not posting links! Aww how cute! Talking Point Tom's cheering section is coming to his defense!
BillsNYC Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Stocks up . So much for his words driving the market down . That's from the auto bailout. I don't care much about the market with that quote, it's the fact that while I was watching the Today show this morning, the quote ran across the bottom scroll. I was thinking about the millions of people who are about to go Xmas shopping and see that, then decide that they should spend less this holiday if times will get harder. That is what concerns me.
DC Tom Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 He's really lost now that he's been shamed into not posting links! But you have no idea how humiliated I felt doing that to him.
mead107 Posted December 9, 2008 Posted December 9, 2008 That's from the auto bailout. I don't care much about the market with that quote, it's the fact that while I was watching the Today show this morning, the quote ran across the bottom scroll. I was thinking about the millions of people who are about to go Xmas shopping and see that, then decide that they should spend less this holiday if times will get harder. That is what concerns me. I am still waiting for change . I think the only change will be I pay more taxes .
/dev/null Posted December 9, 2008 Posted December 9, 2008 Elliot using the intelligent sounding version of "I know you are, but what am I?". I wonder how long until he starts an I'm rubber and you're glue tactic
The Dean Posted December 9, 2008 Posted December 9, 2008 I am still waiting for change . I think the only change will be I pay more taxes . Well, you didn't think any change, if there was to be any, would start BEFORE he took office, did you wacka...er, mead?
mead107 Posted December 9, 2008 Posted December 9, 2008 Well, you didn't think any change, if there was to be any, would start BEFORE he took office, did you wacka...er, mead? Just him winning should have sent the markets up not down .
The Dean Posted December 9, 2008 Posted December 9, 2008 Just him winning should have sent the markets up not down . Why? You can't hold what the markets do against Obama, who has yet to take office. Sorry, total bulls#it on that one.
IDBillzFan Posted December 9, 2008 Posted December 9, 2008 Why? You can't hold what the markets do against Obama, who has yet to take office. Sorry, total bulls#it on that one. I'm no economist, but you absolutely CAN hold the markets accountable for things Obama says and does prior to taking office. When Obama announced that Tim Geithner would be Treasury Secretary, the Dow jumped about 500 points and every financial talking head attributed that jump to the Geithner choice. So maybe it's better to say that you can't hold Obama accountable when the market takes a dump prior to his being in office, but you can give him credit if the market goes up. That should appease most of you, anyway.
mead107 Posted December 9, 2008 Posted December 9, 2008 I'm no economist, but you absolutely CAN hold the markets accountable for things Obama says and does prior to taking office. When Obama announced that Tim Geithner would be Treasury Secretary, the Dow jumped about 500 points and every financial talking head attributed that jump to the Geithner choice. So maybe it's better to say that you can't hold Obama accountable when the market takes a dump prior to his being in office, but you can give him credit if the market goes up. That should appease most of you, anyway. you are right on that .
The Dean Posted December 9, 2008 Posted December 9, 2008 I'm no economist, but you absolutely CAN hold the markets accountable for things Obama says and does prior to taking office. When Obama announced that Tim Geithner would be Treasury Secretary, the Dow jumped about 500 points and every financial talking head attributed that jump to the Geithner choice. So maybe it's better to say that you can't hold Obama accountable when the market takes a dump prior to his being in office, but you can give him credit if the market goes up. That should appease most of you, anyway. Until he takes the reigns, and actually starts making policy, I don't really think you can credit or blame Mr Obama, personally, for any change in the market. Right now, the market is reacting to guesses on what might occur, based on appointments, and statements. You really can't hold a guy responsible, good or bad, for the guesses people are making, and their reactions to them. Sorry, that s#it doesn't flush.
IDBillzFan Posted December 10, 2008 Posted December 10, 2008 Right now, the market is reacting to guesses on what might occur, based on appointments, and statements. You really can't hold a guy responsible, good or bad, for the guesses people are making, and their reactions to them. We're not discussing holding Obama responsible for the markets. We're discussing the market going up or down as a direct result of actions by Obama. It doesn't matter if he's in office. Whether he's announcing an appointment or discussing economic policy, the markets will react. That's not to say Obama does these things to make the market react. But as I stated earlier, you absolutely CAN hold the markets accountable for things Obama says and does prior to taking office.
The Dean Posted December 10, 2008 Posted December 10, 2008 We're not discussing holding Obama responsible for the markets. We're discussing the market going up or down as a direct result of actions by Obama. It doesn't matter if he's in office. Whether he's announcing an appointment or discussing economic policy, the markets will react. That's not to say Obama does these things to make the market react. But as I stated earlier, you absolutely CAN hold the markets accountable for things Obama says and does prior to taking office. Yes, you can hold the markets responsible, but not Obama. Which was my original point. Asking "where's the change?" is a very stupid question, right now.
DC Tom Posted December 10, 2008 Posted December 10, 2008 Yes, you can hold the markets responsible, but not Obama. Which was my original point. Asking "where's the change?" is a very stupid question, right now. Asking "where's the change" is a very stupid question in general. There's how many millions of federal workers? (I believe it's about three, excluding the military.) How many departments? How many levels of civil service management do you have to go up through before you get to the level where personell change with a new administration? The American government won't change over the timescale of a single administration, simply because of bureaucratic inertia. At many levels, bureacuracy exists just to perpetuate its existence. Obama's not going to change that.
Recommended Posts