Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 69
  1. #1
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    Living on credit and financing stupid wars is starting to catch up with the American economy...


    The Fading of the Mirage Economy

    Now that the housing bubble has burst, residential real estate is finding a new equilibrium, that place where supply and demand come back into a rough balance, and at a lower price. The dollar is also being repriced, after a long period of overvaluation. And don't think that those cheap airline tickets were anything but a mirage. That's another industry in a painful repricing.

    Now that the housing bubble has burst, residential real estate is finding a new equilibrium, that place where supply and demand come back into a rough balance, and at a lower price. The dollar is also being repriced, after a long period of overvaluation. And don't think that those cheap airline tickets were anything but a mirage. That's another industry in a painful repricing.

    Suddenly, it seems, we're getting hit from all directions.

    Energy and food prices are soaring. The housing market continues to collapse. Government revenue is falling, and taxes are rising. Airlines are jacking up fares and fees while reducing service. Banks are pulling credit lines. Auto companies are cutting production once again. Even investment bankers are losing their jobs.

    The tendency is to see these as separate developments, each with its own causes and dynamic. Fundamentally, however, they are all part of the same story -- the story of the global economy purging itself of large and unsustainable imbalances that for a time allowed many Americans to think they were richer than they really were.

    Most of us understand that an overabundance of cheap, easy credit created a housing bubble that artificially inflated the price of land and housing, produced too many homes and homeowners, and persuaded too many Americans to dip into their home equity to support a lifestyle their income could not sustain. Now that the bubble has burst, we are coming to accept the reality of lower prices, reduced production, declining homeownership rates and the wisdom that a house is not an ATM or a subs ute for a retirement fund.

    Put another way, residential real estate is finding a new equilibrium, that magical place in the economist's imagination where supply and demand of houses and mortgages come back into some sort of rough balance at a lower price.

    But the thing to remember is that it's not just residential real estate. The same factors that were behind the housing bubble were also at work, to varying degrees, in the auto bubble, the commercial real estate bubble, the travel bubble, the college tuition bubble, the retail bubble, the Web 2.0 bubble and most recently the commodities bubble. Unlike housing, which began losing steam two years ago, these other sectors have just begun the painful process of repricing and finding a new balance between supply and demand.

    Take the case of the airline industry, which likes to blame its woes on skyrocketing fuel prices.

    While there's an ongoing debate about why the price of oil has doubled over the past year, there is little doubt that the declining dollar is a significant factor. The decline is the result of years of large and growing U.S. trade deficits that should have caused the exchange rate to adjust years ago but didn't because so many of our trading partners in Asia and the Middle East were intent on linking their currencies to the dollar. In the process of maintaining those dollar pegs and reinvesting those surpluses in Treasury bonds and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac securities, they created a surfeit of cheap credit that spawned all those bubbles.

    Now that the process is reversing itself, the overvalued dollar is being repriced. But in the short run, it has played havoc with the cost of commodities, most of which are priced in dollars. Producers have raised their dollar prices to prevent a decline in the global purchasing power from their commodities sales. At the same time, some of the excess credit that financed mortgages and corporate takeovers has been shifted to commodity speculation, turbocharging the swings in prices of everything from corn futures to jet fuel. At some point, that speculative bubble will burst and energy prices will plunge. When things finally settle down, the new equilibrium price is almost certain to be well above where it was last year at this time.

    That said, jet fuel is hardly the airlines' only problem. The reality is that for too many years, airlines have sold too many tickets at prices that failed to reflect the real cost of providing the service passengers want and expect. That includes such things as cleaning planes; handling reservations, check-ins and baggage without undue waiting; serving a decent meal when necessary; and treating passengers fairly when flights are canceled. But they also include costs that may be less obvious, like keeping up with preventive maintenance, hedging fuel costs, paying a decent wage to front-line employees, investing in modern air traffic control systems, and paying a price that reflects the true value of scarce air space and landing rights.

    Airline executives will say that if they were to charge enough to reflect all these costs, they would have many fewer passengers. That's the point: A sustainable equilibrium will inevitably involve a smaller industry with fewer planes, fewer flights, fewer passengers and fewer employees.

    And what about that $199 round-trip fare from Washington to L.A.? Sad to say, it was no less a part of the previous economic mirage than the no-doc subprime loans, Google at $750 a share and takeover deals financed at 80 percent leverage.

    What I've described is a double whammy for American households: the slower growth that comes with downsizing a number of key industries that expanded as a result of the credit bubble, along with rising prices for a food, energy, health care and almost everything imported. And you can add a third blow, this one from government.

    Across the country, state and local governments are already hip-deep into budget crises in response to declining revenue from property assessments and real estate transfers. Here in Washington, a dramatic drop off in revenue from business profits and capital gains has wiped out any hope of reducing federal operating deficits that, under the likeliest political and economic scenarios, will exceed $500 billion a year for as far as the eye can see.

    This is another example of an unsustainable equilibrium that has roots in the trade deficit and the credit bubble. Despite the happy talk you might be hearing from the presidential candidates, it presents Americans with a stark and unpleasant choice.

    One option is to raise taxes and leave less money for private spending, which is what many state and local governments have begun to do. The other is to accept lower levels of government service and subsidies, which inevitably will lower the incomes of some households while forcing others to go without services or pay for them privately. Either way, it amounts to a lower standard of living than we thought we had achieved.

    Is all this the end of the world? For the richest country on the planet, certainly not. But it does represent the end of a decade or more during which Americans were permitted and even encouraged by the rest of the world -- and by their own leaders -- to live way beyond their means. As a result, the United States has gone from being the largest creditor nation to the world's largest debtor. For the first time since the early 1980s, Americans will have to endure several years of uncomfortably slow growth and uncomfortably high inflation as the U.S. economy regains its balance and creates a foundation for more solid and sustainable growth.
    Washington Post

    The really sad part is is that the people most responsible for putting into this financial mess - Republicans, will get to sit back and blame everyone (mainly Obama and democrats) else for rising taxes, less services and a declining standard of living...

  2. #2
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Post Count
    15,842
    "Republicans, will get to sit back and blame everyone (mainly Obama and democrats) else for rising taxes, less services and a declining standard of living..."

    The Repug/neo- /PNAC goals were never about the USA, nor its citizens, nor the national well-being, nor national security, nor GWOT, but exclusively about the enriching and protecting the predatory, kleptocratic plutocracy, the modern equivalent of Robber Barons (but much more sophisticated, deceptive, invisible, even passive), that manipulates the USA as it pleases.

  3. #3
    Retired Ray xrayzebra's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Post Count
    9,096
    The really sad part is is that the people most responsible for putting into this financial mess - Republicans, will get to sit back and blame everyone (mainly Obama and democrats) else for rising taxes, less services and a declining standard of living...
    No, the really sad thing is that you believe what you said in
    the above post. Really, really, sad.

  4. #4
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Post Count
    15,842
    The Mirage Economy is plugged in to, and unpluggable from, the world economy.

    ============


    June 2, 2008
    Op-Ed Columnist

    The World Is Upside Down

    By ROGER COHEN
    RIO DE JANEIRO

    For a while the world was flat. Now it’s upside down.

    To understand it, invert your thinking. See the developed world as depending on the developing world, rather than the other way round. Understand that two-thirds of global economic growth last year came from emerging countries, whose economies will expand about 6.7 percent in 2008, against 1.3 percent for the United States, Japan and euro zone states.

    The sharp rise in prices for energy, commodities, metals and minerals produced mainly in the developing world explains part of this shift. That has created the balance of payments surpluses fueling dollar-dripping sovereign wealth funds in the gulf and East Asia. They amuse themselves picking up a stake in BP here, a chunk of Morgan Stanley there, and why not a sliver of Total.

    We of the developed-world Paleolithic species are fair game for the upstarts now, our predator role exhausted. The U.S. and Europe may one day need all the charity they can get.

    To place this inversion in focus, it helps to be in Brazil, where winter (so to speak) arrives with the Northern Hemisphere summer, and economic optimism, as exuberant as the vegetation, increases at the same brisk clip as U.S. foreclosures.

    Huge offshore oil finds, a sugarcane ethanol boom, vast reserves of unused arable land, mineral wealth and abundant fresh water contribute to Brazilian buoyancy. But natural resources are only part of the story. As in China and India, an expanding internal market is bolstering growth. So is increasing corporate sophistication and global ambition.

    At the annual National Forum, a gathering of business leaders, I felt like a first-world pipsqueak as leaders of the national energy company Petrobras (bigger than BP, S and Total) and Companhia Vale do Rio Doce, or C.V.R.D. (the world’s second largest mining company), reeled off head-turning statistics.

    Petrobras, which has spearheaded Brazil’s push to self-sufficiency from heavy dependence on imported oil 30 years ago, will more than double oil production to 4.2 million barrels a day in 2015 from 1.9 million barrels today.

    “With the latest discoveries, the South Atlantic will become a huge oil producer,” predicted Jose Sergio Gabrielli de Azvedo, its chief executive.
    Roger Agnelli of C.V.R.D. waved away the United States (“It’s full of debt”) to focus on the company’s ambitions in Asia. It was imperative to be there, he said, because that’s where growth, capital and ambition are. China, he noted, will account for 55 percent of iron ore consumption, 31.6 percent of nickel, and 42 percent of aluminum by 2012. Case closed.

    Like many other big emerging-market corporations, C.V.R.D. has been on a buying spree. It’s not just sovereign wealth funds that are acquiring first-world companies these days. It’s the new giants of the NAN (Newly Acquisitive Nations).

    Emerging-market mergers and acquisitions are up 17 percent this year to $218 billion, while for the rest of the world they’re down 43 percent to $991 billion, according to Thomson Reuters.

    The 2007 Unctad World Investment Report said developing-world direct foreign investment totaled $193 billion in 2006, compared with a 1990s annual average of $54 billion. The U.S. 2006 figure was $216.6 billion.
    C.V.R.D. bought Canada’s Inco, a nickel miner, for $17 billion in 2006. It came close to acquiring the Anglo-Swiss miner Xstrata for $90 billion this year. Just last week, India’s Vedanta Resources reached a $2.6 billion deal to buy U.S. copper miner Asarco.

    That deal is being challenged by Grupo Mexico, creating a Latin-American-Asian fight for a U.S. company.


    If you have trouble getting your mind around that, try standing on your head.

    That’s also a good position from which to view India’s Tata Motors agreeing to buy Land Rover and Jaguar from Ford for $2.3 billion, or Tata Steel’s acquisition last year of the Anglo-Dutch Corus Group steel company for $12 billion.

    Globalization is now a two-way street; in fact it’s an Indian street with traffic weaving in all directions.

    “In an inverted world, not only have developing economies become dominant forces in global exports in the space of a few years, but their companies are becoming major players in the global economy, challenging the in bents that dominated the international scene in the 20th century,” said Claudio Frischtak, a Brazilian economist and consultant.

    A shift in economic power is under way to which the developed world has not yet adjusted. Of course the G-8 and the permanent membership of the U.N. Security Council need to be expanded to reflect this change. The 21st century can’t be handled with 20th-century ins utions.

    That’s obvious. Less obvious is how the United States, which underwrites global security at vast expense, begins to share this burden, so that the new multi-polarity of wealth is reflected in a multipolarity of security commitments.

    Headstands are in order for the next U.S. president.

    ===============

    I just can't imagine Old Sick McFlopPanderKeating doing headstands, physically or metaphorically.

  5. #5
    Believe. BradLohaus's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Post Count
    1,343
    I'm guessing that we won't be hearing any straight talk like that from the conventions.

    I thought this was a surprising article the other day; Paul Volcker and the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia pretty much threw Greenspan and Bernanke under the bus regarding inflation.

    The White Elephant That Could Destroy Your Portfolio
    http://seekingalpha.com/article/7866...ource=wildcard

    The financial crisis has recently made talking heads of several heavy hitters in the investment community. Most notable amongst them is Warren Buffett, who now appears on TV almost every other day offering his sage insight to where we are in the crisis.

    Buffett, as he commonly states in public, is not a “macro” guy. And I’m sure he appreciates the opportunity to impress with his insights and draw attention away from his recent embarrassment— losing nearly $1 billion in derivatives trading after famously calling derivatives “weapons of mass destruction.”

    However, to me, a far more significant character has recently joined the financial media roundtable. Unlike Buffett, he’s very much a macro guy. And he understands the Federal Reserve and its actions better than anyone: He was the last decent Fed Chairman we’ve had in 30+ years.

    I’m talking about Paul Volcker.

    For those of you who are unfamiliar with Volcker, he served as Fed Chairman from 1979 to 1987. Volcker came in when the US was experiencing the worst inflation since the Civil war and left when the Fed experienced the worst protests and political backlash since the Great Depression.

    Simply put, Volcker kicked off a serious recession in order to slay inflation. From an objective standpoint, his decision made economic sense, but it was a political death knell. Volcker’s clearly aware of the fact, joking that the “greatest strategic error” in his life was not the recession, but taking his wife fly-fishing in Maine for their honeymoon.

    Our country has long struggled because people make political decisions differently from economic decisions. Volcker’s decision to impose a temporary set-back — a recession — to stop a problem that could easily result in the long-term destruction of Americans’ quality of life — inflation — is a perfect example of this discrepancy. It stands in sharp contrast to later Fed Chairmen Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke’s decisions to stave off a recession at the expense of the dollar.

    So to see Paul Volcker speaking to Congress and hinting that the Federal Reserve is screwing up, is a BIG deal. Unlike his successors, Volcker understands economics. And it’s clear he now has a better understanding of political backlash: His criticism is expressed more via hints and insinuations than outright accusations.

    And what is Volcker’s real concern? His old arch-nemesis, and the white elephant in the living room of the financial media, inflation.

    The mainstream financial media has talked our heads off about “bottoms,” GDP growth, recessions and other news items. Amazingly, inflation, which is currently in the double digits (more on this later), hardly gets any mention. When it does, it’s the usual blather that it’s “better” or “worse than expected.”

    A far more informative approach — and one that would be much more helpful to investors — would be to stop discussing inflation relative to expectations and start talking about inflation relative to reality. The Fed has changed its measure of inflation twice in the last 30 years; both times it chose to become more lenient. In fact, if you measured inflation today as you did when Volcker was Fed Chairman, you’d find inflation was in the double-digits.



    As you can see, the Fed’s current measure of inflation is beyond inaccurate; it’s outright fraudulent. In fact it’s so bad that both Paul Volcker and members of the Philadelphia Federal Reserve bank have publicly stated it is not the “best predictor of total inflation.” You know things are bad when even current members of the Fed are beginning to admit their measures are somewhat inaccurate.

    If you haven’t taken steps to protect your portfolio from inflation, you need to do so immediately. I’ll explain how in Tuesday’s essay (financial markets will be closed Monday in observance of Memorial Day).

    PS. You can see Paul Volcker’s recent testimony to Congress and his interview with Charlie Rose here and here.
    11+% inflation currently if we use the Volcker era measurements. As the WP article said, the dollar is the correction mechanism that is adjusting our excess.

  6. #6
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Living on credit and financing stupid wars is starting to catch up with the American economy...
    War is coveed by cons ution. Social programs are not. Cut the social programs first.

    The really sad part is is that the people most responsible for putting into this financial mess - Republicans, will get to sit back and blame everyone (mainly Obama and democrats) else for rising taxes, less services and a declining standard of living...
    How are they to blame? They didn't come to power until 1995, following the 1994 elections. Our two trade agreements that cause us the most grief were negotiated by a democrat controlled congress and sign into law by president Clinton in 1994.

    Please check the facts before spewing propaganda. You should research NAFTA and FTAAP before you respond. The other agreements by republicans are miniscule in comparison.

    Aren't we seeing more goods from China than elsewhere? This is a demonrat thing, and president Clinton banked out big on it. He sold us out.

  7. #7
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    154,406
    Just because a war is cons utional it is good?
    How are they to blame? They didn't come to power until 1995, following the 1994 elections. Our two trade agreements that cause us the most grief were negotiated by a democrat controlled congress and sign into law by president Clinton in 1994.

    Please check the facts before spewing propaganda. You should research NAFTA and FTAAP before you respond. The other agreements by republicans are miniscule in comparison.
    So what did Republicans do to fix those errors when they controlled all three branches of government?

  8. #8
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Just because a war is cons utional it is good?
    Why do you read into what people say? War is never good. It's a necessary evil. We can disagree about the merit of this war. Fine. However, it is a cons uitional power. Social programs are not.
    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Cons ution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
    So what did Republicans do to fix those errors when they controlled all three branches of government?
    What can they do to nullify a treaty? Is there a way? I don't have that answer. Do you?

    Please. I would like to know. How do you nullify a teaty?

  9. #9
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    154,406
    Why do you read into what people say? War is never good. It's a necessary evil. We can disagree about the merit of this war. Fine. However, it is a cons uitional power. Social programs are not.
    But war can be ended much easier than social programs.



    What can they do to nullify a treaty? Is there a way? I don't have that answer. Do you?

    Please. I would like to know. How do you nullify a teaty?
    There are any number of ways to nullify a treaty, but since your major is about China, that is unnecessary.

    Why did the Republicans do nothing about China?

  10. #10
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    But war can be ended much easier than social programs.
    That's why the federal government should not be financing social programs. It becomes a never ending expenditure.

    There are any number of ways to nullify a treaty, but since your major is about China, that is unnecessary.

    Why did the Republicans do nothing about China?
    I don't know they can. Can they? How do you nullify the FTAAP treaty?

    Again, how do you nullify a treaty?

    Really. I don't know. What is the process? Is there one?

  11. #11
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    154,406
    That's why the federal government should not be financing social programs. It becomes a never ending expenditure.
    Kind of like this war....


    I don't know they can. Can they? How do you nullify the FTAAP treaty?
    Doesn't a treaty have to be ratified first?

    When did the US Senate ratify the FTAAP?

    Again, how do you nullify a treaty?

    Really. I don't know. What is the process? Is there one?
    In the case of NAFTA:

    Article 2205: Withdrawal

    A Party may withdraw from this Agreement six months after it provides written notice of withdrawal to the other Parties. If a Party withdraws, the Agreement shall remain in force for the remaining Parties.


    http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/nafta/chap-22.asp#A2205

    All we have to do to get out of NAFTA is give six months' notice.

    Why didn't the Republicans do that?

  12. #12
    Poker Phenom. Heath Ledger's Avatar
    My Team
    Detroit Pistons
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Post Count
    4,082
    Oh no the sky is falling the sky is falling what will we do....

  13. #13
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Doesn't a treaty have to be ratified first?

    When did the US Senate ratify the FTAAP?
    WOW... I missed that. I thought it was radified in 1994. My bad. Oh well, China has been under "Most favored Nation" status since the early 90's. Can you deny the Clinton's didn't benifit big?

    Now I agree. Why didn't the republicans do something? Maybe because like I said before, they moved to the left...

    In the case of NAFTA:

    Article 2205: Withdrawal

    A Party may withdraw from this Agreement six months after it provides written notice of withdrawal to the other Parties. If a Party withdraws, the Agreement shall remain in force for the remaining Parties.


    http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/nafta/chap-22.asp#A2205

    All we have to do to get out of NAFTA is give six months' notice.

    Why didn't the Republicans do that?
    If that is true, we probably should. Problem is, both parties are for more power. Not letting 'we the people,' have our own power.

    Actually, I don't mind NAFTA so much. They are our immediate neighbor and I believe it benifits us to help their economy.

    [DREAMMODE]
    If their nation could increase it's living standards, we wouldn't need to worry about border control so much. We really have few problem between us and Canada. Wouldn't it be nice to have the same situation on the southern border?
    [/DREAMMODE]

    I say we use NAFTA as leverage. We withdraw if Mexico continues to aide their people in getting here illegally.

  14. #14
    Believe. BradLohaus's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Post Count
    1,343
    If the dollar falls lower in the coming years and the peso gets close to where it was before the '94 devalutation then they might just go home on their own.

    Ford to open new plant in Mexico
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7428952.stm

    US giant Ford is to invest $3bn (£1.5bn) in a new car plant in Mexico, the biggest investment in the country's manufacturing sector.

    The move is a blow to American car workers who had hoped the factory would be built in the United States.

    Ford has lost more than $15bn (£7.5bn) over the past two years and says the new facility is crucial to its future.

    Mexican President Felipe Calderon hailed the announcement as a "turning point" for his country.

    The new factory, and other changes to Ford's Mexican operations, are likely to create an estimated 4,500 jobs in Mexico, where car workers earn substantially less than their American counterparts.

    Mr Calderon made the announcement with Ford president Alan Mullaly at the presidential compound in Mexico City on Friday.

    "We want Mexico to be an automotive country, one that is compe ive and with the most advantages so that the worldwide automotive industry will establish itself here," Mr Calderon said.

    Mr Mullaly said: "We are convinced the geographic location as well as Mexico's highly qualified labour force and economic stability make this decision the right one for our business."

    Environmental concerns

    The factory will build Ford's new Fiesta sub-compact car, which is the company's attempt to shift towards the fast-growing market for smaller, more fuel-efficient cars.

    It will be located near Mexico City and the plant is expected to start delivering the Fiesta to the US market in 2010.

    The BBC's Duncan Kennedy in Mexico City says Ford, the second largest car manufacturer in the US, is being hit by the slowdown in consumer spending and soaring oil prices.

    Drivers are moving away from Ford's traditional stable of bigger trucks and Sports Utility Vehicles because of rising fuel prices, plummeting house prices and concerns about the environment, he says.

    The decision to invest in Mexico will be a blow to the United Auto Workers union, which reached a cost-cutting agreement with Ford in a bid to make US plants more compe ive.

    The company had also hoped its programme of slashing cut-price vehicles to car hire companies would help ease its financial woes.

    But earlier this month, Ford announced it was abandoning its goal of making its loss-making North American business profitable next year.

    Ford's plans in Mexico also include moving one of its factories from large truck to small car production, and opening a new diesel engine line at another plant.

  15. #15
    Veteran
    My Team
    Utah Jazz
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Post Count
    7,778
    And I already thought American made cars were ty.

  16. #16
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Post Count
    15,842
    "they might just go home on their own."

    Just like anybody else, they follow the money, for a better life.

    Where's the crime in that, esp when US businesses fully encourage and reward the illegals for crossing over? Cheap illegals illegally/cheaply exploited and drugs, two MX imports in huge demand in USA. It's a conservative's wet dream of "free market", supply/demand naturally servicing each other. The conservative's real agenda is racism, not illegal immigration.

    That Ford is going to build a plant in MX (where exactly?) is not as important as whether Ford will build cars the market wants. They haven't been too good at that vs Toyota in recent years, no matter where the factory or what the costs.

  17. #17
    Free Throw Coach Aggie Hoopsfan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Post Count
    31,094
    "Republicans, will get to sit back and blame everyone (mainly Obama and democrats) else for rising taxes, less services and a declining standard of living..."

    The Repug/neo- /PNAC goals were never about the USA, nor its citizens, nor the national well-being, nor national security, nor GWOT, but exclusively about the enriching and protecting the predatory, kleptocratic plutocracy, the modern equivalent of Robber Barons (but much more sophisticated, deceptive, invisible, even passive), that manipulates the USA as it pleases.
    Do you honestly believe that the Democratic power brokers feel any differently than their Republican counterparts?

    Question.

  18. #18
    JEBO TE! Clandestino's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Post Count
    5,649
    dan and boutons think the u.s.a is so ed up, but they sit on their asses constantly ing and complaining. i love it! hahaha.

  19. #19
    Believe. possessed's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    526
    The important question is how do we get Obama to pay our mortgages for us? When is he going to bail us out of our house payments anyway? I could use the extra dough to add an in-ground pool and rec room.

  20. #20
    Veteran
    My Team
    Utah Jazz
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Post Count
    7,778
    dan and boutons think the u.s.a is so ed up, but they sit on their asses constantly ing and complaining. i love it! hahaha.

    What are they supposed to do? Overthrow the government by force? Give up their lives and families here and move to Venezuela? Get a clue.

    And nobody thinks the USA is ed up, only half of it's citizenry. (the southern half primarily)

  21. #21
    Believe. PEP's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Post Count
    423
    dan and boutons think the u.s.a is so ed up, but they sit on their asses constantly ing and complaining. i love it! hahaha.
    Yeah, I like how bufoon keeps saying how bad it is in Iraq and all that is wrong with GWOT but he wont ever answer me if he's actually been there on the ground to see the progress, I just got back from spending a few weeks over there and I dont see what the he ever talks about.

    I'd be more than happy to take them both with me next time I go.

  22. #22
    JEBO TE! Clandestino's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Post Count
    5,649
    What are they supposed to do? Overthrow the government by force? Give up their lives and families here and move to Venezuela? Get a clue.

    And nobody thinks the USA is ed up, only half of it's citizenry. (the southern half primarily)
    well, if the usa is so, soo, sooo ed up as they alwasy try to say how are they still able to sit around and post all day?

    and why are half the citizens ed up? you may be one of the losers...baillijuana??? wtf is that about?

  23. #23
    Free Throw Coach Aggie Hoopsfan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Post Count
    31,094
    What are they supposed to do? Overthrow the government by force? Give up their lives and families here and move to Venezuela? Get a clue.

    And nobody thinks the USA is ed up, only half of it's citizenry. (the southern half primarily)
    So by southern half do you mean anyone who's conservative? Because I can play the same game and say all the liberal northerners and easterners are ed up.

    It's just as baseless as your claim. Man, that was easy.

  24. #24
    JEBO TE! Clandestino's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Post Count
    5,649
    have you guys seen the northerners eating from the trash lately? i forget the term for them.

  25. #25
    What's the Word? Don Quixote's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    3,339
    Oh no the sky is falling the sky is falling what will we do....
    I know! Let's let the government handle our health care. And our income. And while we're at it, let's let them buy our mortgages for us, and turn our corn into fuel while we have tons of oil in the ground.

    Sounds like a plan!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •