Reply With Quote
Agreed, but, he's not any worse than McCain/Palin woulda been.
McCain still thinks the foundation of our economy is strong
AGAIN you voted for him the first time smh
Agreed, but, he's not any worse than McCain/Palin woulda been.
McCain still thinks the foundation of our economy is strong
I meant you resorted to correcting my spelling when I asked if you were defending ACORN or trying to present the truth. It was as if you changed the subject as not to answer my question.
But presidents do not create jobs. The marketplace does. Clinton was lucky to be president when the tech boom started to really take off.
Clinton owes his good economy to the Y2K scare, and CMP.
Also, that he didn't have democrats writing legislation for his last six years. Not that republicans are much better... They just aren't democrats.
If you go back and review the 2008 election threads, you will see I was no fan of McCain. I don't recall him saying the foundation of our economy is strong, but I don't doubt you. I will say I disagree with McCain if he did say that.Agreed, but, he's not any worse than McCain/Palin woulda been.
McCain still thinks the foundation of our economy is strong
Are you standing on your head, Darrin? This protest is against the biggest welfare queens ever.
(Government bailout, $Ts in ultra low interest Fed loans, cash for trash swaps etc. -- just keep hitting the snooze bar, D)
Last edited by Winehole23; 10-07-2011 at 03:36 AM.
Didn't you say that the election of Obama would kill jobs, because owners wouldn't want to create new jobs with a Democratic president?
I don't recall my exact words, but in essence, that democrats talking about policies they want to implement, scare the job creators, and they are afraid to take chances and grow. Therefore, they stop hiring employees for new ventures, because they don't start new ventures when they believe the tax system and regulations will harm them in unforeseen ways.
So, as it turns out, much of the "Occupy Wall Street" crowd are just astroturf for Unions and Communist organizations.
Someone has suggested the Democrats are experiencing Tea Party Envy and, therefore, are trying to figure out how to safely associate themselves with the group whose message seems to be, "anarchist for big government."
They Should Be Occupying K Street
The article makes points I've been trying to make in here...
...A few facts are in order. Capitalism is responsible for lifting more poor people out of poverty, and lifting the standards of living for more individuals around the world than any other economic system. Government decided to bail out the banks. They could have let them go bust. Government was at the root of the banking crisis; banks reacted to government incentives.
Sadly, it turns out, the "Occupy Wall Street" crowd is being led around by big government cronies...OWS protestors are highly critical of big corporations lobbying Congress and Washington DC regulatory agencies to tilt the playing field in big business favor. It sounds like they don’t appreciate the virtues of crony capitalism, otherwise known as “The Chicago Way”.
Well guess what?
Companies that are successful lobbying the Washington DC apparatus are simply playing off big government. To kill the effect of lobbying, skewer the beast and make government smaller.
Allowing companies to stay alive with government support also empowers big government. Allowing the capitalistic force of creative destruction is something the Tea Party is behind. What about Occupy Wall Street?
Then, as I've been saying...There are some troubling signs with Occupy Wall Street. The SEIU is busing people to join the marches. Other unions, and socialist Senator Sanders are supporting the cause.
Members of up to five powerful unions, rights defenders in dozens of cities, plus Michael Moore, Susan Sarandon, Roseanne Barr, Dr. Cornell West and other celebrities have joined the protesters who intend to occupy the Wall Street area indefinitely, until change occurs in the financial situation that Olbermann and Sanders concur is being demanded by an overdue, active, motivated, American Left coalition forming for betterment of the United States
Any movement that has has beens like Roseanne Barr and Susan Sarandon as a part of it make me think that their agents told them this was a good way to get visible again. Michael Moore ceases to be relevant and Cornell West has ideas that are simply on the fringes of organized society. Who watches Keith Olberman besides his immediate family? He couldn't even get an audience on the hard left MSNBC.
My gut tells me at the root of this, you will find an Obama administration operative. They want to co opt some of the Tea Party themes into Occupy Wall Street and divert attention from the really poor job they have done on the economy. It’s a re-election strategy.
Sorry, I don’t think this is a small government movement. Whatever the original intentions of the founders were, Occupy Wall Street has become a hard leftist movement. All the above mentioned people are determined to end the American capitalist system. Of course, they all have benefited from it and are so wealthy, any abrupt change to socialism won’t affect them or their lifestyle. Social justice and fairness are not a strategy to level the playing field.
I couldn't agree more.I do understand their frustration with Big Government, with the bank bailouts, with the lobbying, with the revolving door between industry, unions, and Washington DC. There is one sure fire way to end all of that. Shrink the size and scope of government, not increase it.
The Occupy Wall Street crowd, or at least the new public backers that have joined them, put their faith in government. I can’t rebut them any better than this:
There are lots of ideas to accomplish the task of reducing the governments influence. I know of only one sure fire way to do it. Starve the beast. Flat tax, and end all write offs. Cut millions of regulations. Then there is nothing to lobby for. Allow Coase Theorem to work.
The celebrities joining forces with the “working class” on Wall Street and the media that is giving it publicity don’t trust the individual. Economic systems that don’t trust individuals are commonly called socialism, or at an extreme, communism. We know they don’t work and are bad for “working people”.
Instead of occupying Wall Street, maybe they ought to occupy K Street.
"the "Occupy Wall Street" crowd are just astroturf for Unions and Communist organizations."
YOU ING SLANDEROUS LIAR
Big Soros Money Linked to “Occupy Wall Street”
Can you say, "astroturf?" I knew that you could.
Organizer admits to paying ‘Occupy DC’ protesters [VIDEO]
Can you say, "astroturf?" I knew that you could.
Favorite parts?
Latinos calling the anglo organizer, "Boss."
Anglo "boss," admitting that not all of the protesters are volunteers.
Can you say, "astroturf?" I knew that you could.
For the uninitiated, Answer is a communist organization.
Can you say, "astroturf?" I knew that you could.
For the uninformed, "makebankspaycalifornia.org" is a coalition of unions and union front groups.
I read unions joining the protests a couple days ago. I figured the usual ankle-biters would react accordingly. /self pat in the back
Wall Street Protestors Have Met the Enemy and It Is They
That is why the Wall Street protesters are foolish and petulant. American households levered a $6 trillion net inflow of foreign savings during the decade 1998 through 2007 into a bubble that benefited them far more than it did Wall Street. The impact of the bubble on the household balance sheet exceeds the growth in real-estate assets, moreover, because most small business expansion followed the housing bubble.
For fifteen years we rode a tsunami of foreign capital pouring into American markets. We didn’t save a penny. Why should we? Our home equity was our retirement account. Our smartest kids got MBAs and went to Wall Street derivatives desks. Engineering was for dummies. Home prices rose so fast that local governments swam with tax revenues and hired with abandon.
Everybody went to the party. Now everybody has a hangover, especially the bankers. We thought we were geniuses because we won the lottery. Now we actually have to produce and export things, and we have to play catch-up. Our kids are competing with Asian kids who go to cram school and practice the violin in the afternoon. This isn’t going to be easy, and the sooner we decide to roll up our sleeves and get back to work instead of looking for bankers to blame, the better our chances of coming back.
this is what i dont get with the bailouts from the govt to the banks
banks are own by shareholders, whatever happen to capital raising through its own shareholders....
instead of bailing them out through large loans, why not just buy the bank and its discounted share price, and nationalise it, pay of debts and then run a profit, then privatised it.....then again out through this process the same wankers with the banks will continue to hold their jobs who were the problem in the first place....
lol crying over student loan debts....dude mustve studied a ARTS degree hahahahaha
EPS won't measure the benefits banks receive.
That said, the article's sentiment is pretty ing sensible.
CDS and MBS and betting against your own failing is far worse than what people did (which they could only do because the banks were happy making money off of it so they could bet against the MBS to begin with!).
BTW, Simultaneously saying the free market rules all while blaming customer irrationality for our problems is ing ironic as .
Damn, this movement is really putting the fear into Yonivore.
What makes you think I'm afraid?
I think the OWS movement is a desperate move by the Left to save the political power they see slipping away with the disastrous presidency of Barack Obama.
Does this chart just say there are fewer "bankers" now?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
