Are you trying to confuse me? I was wrong about it being 2007. I didn't say 2006. I said after the 2006 elections, and yes I was pointing towards blaming democrats.
which one has been causing the other?[/quote]
![]()
Are you trying to confuse me? I was wrong about it being 2007. I didn't say 2006. I said after the 2006 elections, and yes I was pointing towards blaming democrats.
Keep maxing it out, and place it in good stock oriented mutual fund that have the better potential to recover. Think of it this way. You are buying it all at half value. You will be very happy once the markets recover.
It was in March of 2006, so no dice.
Besides, the Fed is independent of the USG. Politicians have no input. All they can do is replace the chairman from time to time
I believe the stimulus--to the extent that it actually is an economic stimulus that works--will temporarily, and artificially, boost the stock market.
The financial bailout was designed, in part, to keep the market afloat. The stimulus package is designed, in part, to keep the market afloat by keeping people spending and creating work for businesses through government contracts. It may work for a few years. It may not. (I find the supposed multiplier effect of government spending very unpersuasive.)
All I'm saying is that younger people are doomed to pay the bill, regardless. Older people--especially those whose retirement packages are dependent on stock market performance--stand the most to gain from the financial bailout and the proposed stimulus. (Well, government employees and liberal pet projects stand a lot to gain, too.)
Best case scenario. I hope you're right about this, but I have my doubts, too.
Educate yourselves
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article7843.html
The Fed needs to be burned to the freaking ground.
Last edited by angrydude; 01-30-2009 at 06:46 PM.
That was a pretty powerful segment. Scary stuff!
bump. more pertinent than palin.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)