Obama fails to get Nobel Prize in Economics
 

On Oct 12, 12:32*pm, "CalifBill" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message

...
On Oct 12, 10:55 am, Canuck57 wrote:



His achievement was $1.3 trillion debt-corruption-spend in only 8
months. Guinness Book of records material perhaps?-

what's really a record is how quickly george bush and his rich free
market friends stole my 401K

And Obama gave a trillion bucks to the same rich people.

they left him no choice. they trashed the banking system then told the
middle class they'd lend no money unless we paid for their mistakes

*Enough so that
bankrupt AIG could give million in bonus bucks. *Enough that Bankrupt
GoldmanSaks could give out 6.5 billion bucks. *Yup, Obama is taking care of
the idiots oops make that non rich people.

idiots like george bush

Obama fails to get Nobel Prize in Economics
 

On Oct 12, 3:05*pm, Jim wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Oct 12, 12:59 pm, Jim wrote:
wf3h wrote:

no wonder they got their asses handed to them in the last election
Wrong on all points.
And unless you change your thinking, you will continue to be a loser.-

hey jim

who's president? if i'm a 'loser'

then why did the GOP just get wiped out in the last election?

not too swift, are you?

Last time I checked, O'Bama was president. Didn't you know that?

ah. so you finally caught up? doesn't do much to call someone a loser
if their party's in the whitehouse, does it?


Are you taking credit for McCain losing the election?

me and the rest of america who got fed up with right wing lies

Obama fails to get Nobel Prize in Economics
 

wf3h wrote:
On Oct 12, 12:35 pm, Canuck57 wrote:
wf3h wrote:


my corrective action is not to trust the rich anymore...you're too
stupid to learn that
Instead of envy, distrust and hate of the rich, learn to think like
them. They have people paid big bucks to keep them out of financial
trouble, certainly more than you or I can afford.

how does one think like a thief who bribes politicians when one has no
money to bribe politicians?

Don't mistake real capitalist-conservatives with corrupted types. Big
difference. You can be a leftist-socialist and corrupt, in fact that is
where the worst of it is.

Because the left promises a lot, delivers little but to the coffers of
the government.

Corruption from any sector, be it business or government robs from us all.

When government said nothing to worry about re-debt markets in 2007 and
again in 2008, this was your/our first red flag.

me and ever nobel prize winning economist on the planet.
You can sit on your arse and bitch about the rich, but there are good
reasons why they have money and you do not.

yeah. they inherit it and bribe politicians to game the system so we
have NO choice BUT to invest with them.

I don't bribe politicians, but anticipating the non-causal relationship
between the CEO's of GM, Chrysler, Ceberus, Carlyle etc. sure rewarded
me, I bough Ford at $2.50 or less and sold out at $6.50 or more. Nice
ROI in betting on GMs futures would unfold the way they did. Because I
understood the government would bailout GM for it's politicial
connections are strong. Which left Ford in a better position.

I subscribe to the saying that investing is like chess. A game of
strategy, logic and emotions best checked into the toilet. Which
included liberal media BS.

Of course we have to invest! If you let $100 sit in a bank account then
you loose money. Money, cash, it's a deprediating asset. It's value is
in liquidity to trade, nothing more.


so the REAL answer is to change the system instead of doing like YOU
recommend which is to pat them on the back for being such good thieves

Pat who? I never suggested patting anyone. If it were myself as
president back in Feb/Mar in talking with GM's Wagoner, I would say to
Wagoner "I think you should declare bankruptcy now as if you go on with
this rouse the SEC will pay you an Enron like visit."

But I was banking on Wagoner from Harvard having pull and he wanted his
$20M retirement. See, if GM went down, Ford would have supply problems.
But if GM took the PR hit on bankruptcy, and made solvent, Ford would
do well.

And the reason is simple,
they do their research and humbly and rationally know the markets on how
they really operate.

bull****. pure bull****. if they did so, they wouldnt have to come to
me and ask me to bail them out after they stole my money

Only the corrupt ones are. And your politicians are too corrupt
themselves to do the right thing.

what the hell do you smoke?

Nothing. Don't even drink, ok, one beer in the last year.

Obama fails to get Nobel Prize in Economics
 

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:25:04 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

On Oct 12, 12:35*pm, Canuck57 wrote:
wf3h wrote:


my corrective action is not to trust the rich anymore...you're too
stupid to learn that

Instead of envy, distrust and hate of the rich, learn to think like
them. *They have people paid big bucks to keep them out of financial
trouble, certainly more than you or I can afford.

how does one think like a thief who bribes politicians when one has no
money to bribe politicians?


When government said nothing to worry about re-debt markets in 2007 and
again in 2008, this was your/our first red flag.

me and ever nobel prize winning economist on the planet.

You can sit on your arse and bitch about the rich, but there are good
reasons why they have money and you do not.

yeah. they inherit it and bribe politicians to game the system so we
have NO choice BUT to invest with them.

so the REAL answer is to change the system instead of doing like YOU
recommend which is to pat them on the back for being such good thieves

*And the reason is simple,
they do their research and humbly and rationally know the markets on how
they really operate.

bull****. pure bull****. if they did so, they wouldnt have to come to
me and ask me to bail them out after they stole my money

They didn't come to you. 'Bama came to you. And, like a dummy, you
said OK.

Obama fails to get Nobel Prize in Economics
 

thunder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 10:06:43 -0600, Canuck57 wrote:


Look at the obvious, as soon as it looked like the Mesiah BO was going
to get elected the market tanked. The bubble burst as it knew the
economy couldn't take more liberal debt spending yet that is what was a
happening.

But you are a true liberal, lots of excuses.

Do you make this up as you go along? I won't blame Bush for this
economy. It is, after all, a free market. The facts are, however, the
Dow reached it's all time high, in October, *2007*. By July, 2008, it
was off that high by 20%, and heading down, not bottomed, but already
tanked. The National Conventions hadn't occurred yet, and, McCain and
Obama, were running even in the polls in August.

I may be a liberal, but you don't let facts get in the way, do you?

Who knows, maybe I am wrong. But none the less, the smell of more
liberal democrats scared me to liquifing to about 70%+ cash, something I
haven't done since 1991. And since I seem to make/preserve money doing
it, be the analysis right or worng I plan on sticking with it. Left me
in a very good position.

Obama fails to get Nobel Prize in Economics
 

On Oct 12, 3:58*pm, John H wrote:
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:25:04 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:





On Oct 12, 12:35*pm, Canuck57 wrote:
wf3h wrote:

my corrective action is not to trust the rich anymore...you're too
stupid to learn that

Instead of envy, distrust and hate of the rich, learn to think like
them. *They have people paid big bucks to keep them out of financial
trouble, certainly more than you or I can afford.

how does one think like a thief who bribes politicians when one has no
money to bribe politicians?

When government said nothing to worry about re-debt markets in 2007 and
again in 2008, this was your/our first red flag.

me and ever nobel prize winning economist on the planet.

You can sit on your arse and bitch about the rich, but there are good
reasons why they have money and you do not.

yeah. they inherit it and bribe politicians to game the system so we
have NO choice BUT to invest with them.

so the REAL answer is to change the system instead of doing like YOU
recommend which is to pat them on the back for being such good thieves

*And the reason is simple,
they do their research and humbly and rationally know the markets on how
they really operate.

bull****. pure bull****. if they did so, they wouldnt have to come to
me and ask me to bail them out after they stole my money

They didn't come to you. 'Bama came to you. And, like a dummy, you
said OK.-

guess you forgot bush was president the last 8 years.

i'll just keep repeating this since it's obvious you have alzheimer's

Obama fails to get Nobel Prize in Economics
 

On Oct 12, 12:41*pm, Canuck57 wrote:
H the K wrote:
At this point, there's little question that "the government" is far more
honest and accountable than the "free market" corporations.

Hahaha... you really do have your head between your knees.

Government could never operate on the same priciples as Sarbanes-Oxley
or SEC, in fact can you download a finacial statement and balance sheet
for the US government? *Hell no. *They don't know themselves.

why not try downloading one say, from bernie madoff?

try telling us how honest that one was?

ever take an accounting course?

Obama fails to get Nobel Prize in Economics
 

Jim wrote:
Jim wrote:
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message
...
Jim wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Oct 12, 11:40 am, Jim wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Oct 12, 10:55 am, Canuck57 wrote:
His achievement was $1.3 trillion debt-corruption-spend in only 8
months. Guinness Book of records material perhaps?-
what's really a record is how quickly george bush and his rich free
market friends stole my 401K
So sorry for your loss. Too bad you don't have at least some
control of
your 401. You might look at fixing that instead of blaming the
boogyman.
i did have control. i did what the right wing said to do: trust the
rich.

my corrective action is not to trust the rich anymore...you're too
stupid to learn that
Excuse me. Who lost nearly half of his portfolio? Not me.
1/3 here. I wasn't quick enough to move it.

In hindsight, when Bush made that speech a year ago, where he
said,"Because of my incredibly bad leadership, you are all ****ed,"
I should have moved it right then.

I remember being amazed at that speech. I've never heard a
president panic the stock market as bad as that. I should have
known what the effects would be.

We were all taught the best tactic was to make your choices based on
the long term, don't move it around very often.

Following that advise makes it my fault I lost.

All the bitching about Obama's economy makes me wonder if anyone was
paying attention to the last 8 years.


My portfolio went down about 30%, but I didn't panic and basically
stopped looking. I finally checked last month, and I was about $200K.
I believe in dollar cost averaging, so I figured I'd be ok. I've been
using that strategy since I started earning money.


I'll second everything you said.

I now know that I should actively manage my 401, daily. Long term,
yes, but watching for a president that panics people is more
important. A financial planner I saw told me I should invest
according to my risk tolerance. Duh.

I keep moving my risk from about 6% to 30% and then back again. I'd
like to risk more, but am unsure, now, exactly how to do this
managing. It was all so much easier until a year ago when we all were
hit in the face with the realities of what can happen.

Thankfully I took personal finance in college and learned some things.
I feel badly for those who didn't attend college or didn't learn from
personal finance courses.

Those are the guys deeply in debt and can't figure out what to do
about it.

The more you want to make the more you have to risk. At this point in my
life I'm in preservation mode and this market didn't hurt me too badly.
Younger folks that took heavy losses will eventually recover if they
don't get greedy and try to get their money back too quickly.

Duh.

Obama fails to get Nobel Prize in Economics
 

wf3h wrote:
On Oct 12, 3:58 pm, John H wrote:
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:25:04 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:





On Oct 12, 12:35 pm, Canuck57 wrote:
wf3h wrote:
my corrective action is not to trust the rich anymore...you're too
stupid to learn that
Instead of envy, distrust and hate of the rich, learn to think like
them. They have people paid big bucks to keep them out of financial
trouble, certainly more than you or I can afford.
how does one think like a thief who bribes politicians when one has no
money to bribe politicians?
When government said nothing to worry about re-debt markets in 2007 and
again in 2008, this was your/our first red flag.
me and ever nobel prize winning economist on the planet.
You can sit on your arse and bitch about the rich, but there are good
reasons why they have money and you do not.
yeah. they inherit it and bribe politicians to game the system so we
have NO choice BUT to invest with them.
so the REAL answer is to change the system instead of doing like YOU
recommend which is to pat them on the back for being such good thieves
And the reason is simple,
they do their research and humbly and rationally know the markets on how
they really operate.
bull****. pure bull****. if they did so, they wouldnt have to come to
me and ask me to bail them out after they stole my money
They didn't come to you. 'Bama came to you. And, like a dummy, you
said OK.-

guess you forgot bush was president the last 8 years.

i'll just keep repeating this since it's obvious you have alzheimer's

Bush set the stage for the bailouts. He stalled and let Obama do the
dirty work.

To those who listen to the well organized Republican "keep it on track"
messages, Obama is the bad guy. Only works if you ignore the last 8
years of irresponsibility. Easy to do if you get your news from the Fox
News Corp.

Obama fails to get Nobel Pri
 

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:27:28 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

On Oct 12, 12:59*pm, Jim wrote:
wf3h wrote:


no wonder they got their asses handed to them in the last election

Wrong on all points.
And unless you change your thinking, you will continue to be a loser.-

hey jim

who's president? if i'm a 'loser'

then why did the GOP just get wiped out in the last election?

not too swift, are you?

Haven't you been doing all the whining about 'losing' all your money?
Wouldn't one who loses his money earn the name 'loser'?