erynthered Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 Anyways.. !@#$ the media. Obama is what I stand behind, he's a good man, a great president and has more "awesomeness" than any president we've had in decades.
Adam Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 And if Bush was still in office the market tanking would be front page news and the libs would be acting like the rabid ape eating peoples faces off. Sine it now appears that the Messiah and his cabinet is the premise for a large portion of the crash the media is down playing how bad it really has gotten. I couldn't care less who is president- just getr done. Enough with the lib, neocon, spindoctor garbage one side is no better than the other and I'm sick of it already
VABills Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 I couldn't care less who is president- just getr done. Enough with the lib, neocon, spindoctor garbage one side is no better than the other and I'm sick of it already then you'd better move to france where they're all the same. Actually they are here also, but at least one group if they ever go back to their platform makes for a good party. Too bad they try to play center of the road too much.
Adam Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 then you'd better move to france where they're all the same. Actually they are here also, but at least one group if they ever go back to their platform makes for a good party. Too bad they try to play center of the road too much. I'm talking about the partisan sheeple who find it ok to waste time finger pointing instead of looking for a solution. If the idiots in this country- which is most of the sheeple in this country would find the strength to change, then the politicians would have to change as well. Unfortunately, we have become "fat and lazy" and don't have a fraction of the resolve that our forefathers had. I am completely fine with the multi-party system as both have plenty of good ideas
Jim in Anchorage Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 I just wanted to bump this thread. It still makes me laugh. I think you would laugh at anything that was colorful and could roll across the floor.
DC Tom Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 I think you would laugh at anything that was colorful and could roll across the floor. Except maybe a toy elephant.
/dev/null Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Stocks-highe...set=&ccode=
DC Tom Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Stocks-highe...set=&ccode= I don't care how authoritative someone is, predictions like "Stocks will drop 10 percent in the space of three or four weeks, bringing the Standard & Poor's 500 index below 1,000 -- though he's not predicting when" are bull ****. I can do that: I predict that in the future the S&P will rise 20% in three weeks...but I'm not saying when. Hell, we mock Dwight Drane for pulling largely the same nonsense out of his ass ("The world's going to end...well, sometime"). And "The unemployment rate will be hovering above 8 percent a year from now?" 8% next Christmas would actually be a good thing.
Magox Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Stocks-highe...set=&ccode= El Erian is one smart dude. I follow him very closely and I'm usually in agreement with what he and the rest of the PIMCO crew say. Next year at this time my guess is we will see somewhere between 8.7%- 9.5% unemployment.
PastaJoe Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 Next year at this time my guess is we will see somewhere between 8.7%- 9.5% unemployment. Well given the problems of the past few years, that's relatively good news that the unemployment numbers will be declining. The unemployment rate under Reagan went from 7.6% to 9.7-9.8% in the summer after his inaugural, and remained at that level for two years. And he wasn't faced with the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression, the collapse of the automobile industry, or inherit two wars.
Magox Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 Well given the problems of the past few years, that's relatively good news that the unemployment numbers will be declining. The unemployment rate under Reagan went from 7.6% to 9.7-9.8% in the summer after his inaugural, and remained at that level for two years. And he wasn't faced with the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression, the collapse of the automobile industry, or inherit two wars. Considering that inflation was above 10% back in 1980 and as a result of it, interest rates shot up over 15% for homes, ya, it's pretty difficult to grow under those circumstances. The most important thing to remember during Reagans tenure as president is that over 13 million people were added to employment in the private sector and that inflation went below 3%. Now that is a feat.
Jim in Anchorage Posted December 28, 2009 Posted December 28, 2009 Well given the problems of the past few years, that's relatively good news that the unemployment numbers will be declining. The unemployment rate under Reagan went from 7.6% to 9.7-9.8% in the summer after his inaugural, and remained at that level for two years. And he wasn't faced with the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression, the collapse of the automobile industry, or inherit two wars. Nether is Obama. He's in Hawaii, living the good life. Surfs up!
Recommended Posts