On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:07:14 -0500, Harry
wrote:





Obama has worked tirelessly to clean up some of the messes Bush left for
us. Most of those messes are going to take years, if not decades, to
clean up. Bush by any meaningful measurement was the worst president of
the last 100 years.


no,no, no....

you have to sing the party line!

everyone in america was rich. unemployment was minus 5%.

until inauguration day of last year. then, in 1 day, unemployment went
to 500%, the banks all collapsed and the chinese took over the govt.

in 1 day.

On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 17:53:15 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:



Sure has a funny way of doing it, giving all the debt to the middle
class and the cash to corrupt corporations. Don't forget, Bush hardly
signed any money away. It was Obama who signed the checks to the banks
and GM. Bush only gave GM enough to hobble to Obama is officially my
mama day.


guess the idiot would have preferred 25% unemployment like we had in
the 29 crash.

of course, the unemployed would be middle class, so he doesn't care

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 10:36:18 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 00:21:06 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

$383,071,060,815.42 last year 12,3%

Expect to see that shoot up with the extra $2 trillion


What extra $2T? And, it won't make that much difference. The "debt"
issue
is
seriously overblown. It's not insignificant, but it's not anywhere close
to
a crisis.

The extra $2T we added to the debt in the last year. ($10T to $12T) If
you think the added 20% of interest on the $2T is not that much
difference, "De Salude Don Corleone"


So, it went from 12.3% to 20%? Amazing math.

Let's slow down. The debt service WAS 12.3% of the budget in 2009
(one thing)
We added 20% to the debt since last year so the basis for the interest
will go up 20% (a different thing)
The missing number is what the auction will set the interest at for
the paper when it rolls over. If the US starts looking just a little
more risky that rate will go higher. The "risk" isn't really the
threat of default, only the threat of the devaluation of the dollar
but that can go over the tipping point.


There's no "threat of default." That's just a fear tactic.

--
Nom=de=Plume

wrote in message
news
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:37:17 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

The "risk" isn't really the
threat of default, only the threat of the devaluation of the dollar
but that can go over the tipping point.


There's no "threat of default." That's just a fear tactic.

"No threat" is a bold statement but I did say it wasn't really the
risk that would drive up interest rates. That will simply be the
threat of devaluing the dollar and that is happening as we speak.
The problem is once it starts to slide that can become an avalanche
because we import so much of what we need to survive.


The dollar has lot value, significant value before. "Once it starts to
slide" is the Chicken Little philosophy.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On 1/29/2010 2:30 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
news
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:37:17 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

The "risk" isn't really the
threat of default, only the threat of the devaluation of the dollar
but that can go over the tipping point.


There's no "threat of default." That's just a fear tactic.

"No threat" is a bold statement but I did say it wasn't really the
risk that would drive up interest rates. That will simply be the
threat of devaluing the dollar and that is happening as we speak.
The problem is once it starts to slide that can become an avalanche
because we import so much of what we need to survive.


The dollar has lot value, significant value before. "Once it starts to
slide" is the Chicken Little philosophy.


Does that mean we should all go running around in circles screaming "The
sky is falling"?

"Don White" wrote in message
...
On 1/29/2010 2:30 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
news
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:37:17 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

The "risk" isn't really the
threat of default, only the threat of the devaluation of the dollar
but that can go over the tipping point.


There's no "threat of default." That's just a fear tactic.

"No threat" is a bold statement but I did say it wasn't really the
risk that would drive up interest rates. That will simply be the
threat of devaluing the dollar and that is happening as we speak.
The problem is once it starts to slide that can become an avalanche
because we import so much of what we need to survive.


The dollar has lot value, significant value before. "Once it starts to
slide" is the Chicken Little philosophy.


Does that mean we should all go running around in circles screaming "The
sky is falling"?


Better for you to scream...I'm an idiot and a loser.

On 1/29/2010 3:32 PM, Don White wrote:
"Don wrote in message
...
On 1/29/2010 2:30 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
news On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:37:17 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

The "risk" isn't really the
threat of default, only the threat of the devaluation of the dollar
but that can go over the tipping point.


There's no "threat of default." That's just a fear tactic.

"No threat" is a bold statement but I did say it wasn't really the
risk that would drive up interest rates. That will simply be the
threat of devaluing the dollar and that is happening as we speak.
The problem is once it starts to slide that can become an avalanche
because we import so much of what we need to survive.


The dollar has lot value, significant value before. "Once it starts to
slide" is the Chicken Little philosophy.


Does that mean we should all go running around in circles screaming "The
sky is falling"?


Better for you to scream...I'm an idiot and a loser.


I hate these damn spoofing morons.

On 1/29/10 4:05 PM, Don White wrote:
On 1/29/2010 3:32 PM, Don White wrote:
"Don wrote in message
...
On 1/29/2010 2:30 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
news On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:37:17 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

The "risk" isn't really the
threat of default, only the threat of the devaluation of the dollar
but that can go over the tipping point.


There's no "threat of default." That's just a fear tactic.

"No threat" is a bold statement but I did say it wasn't really the
risk that would drive up interest rates. That will simply be the
threat of devaluing the dollar and that is happening as we speak.
The problem is once it starts to slide that can become an avalanche
because we import so much of what we need to survive.


The dollar has lot value, significant value before. "Once it starts to
slide" is the Chicken Little philosophy.


Does that mean we should all go running around in circles screaming "The
sky is falling"?


Better for you to scream...I'm an idiot and a loser.


I hate these damn spoofing morons.


Looking in the mirror again?

On 28/01/2010 6:29 PM, Jack wrote:
On Jan 28, 7:53 pm, wrote:
On 28/01/2010 4:03 PM, bpuharic wrote:





On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 11:35:12 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 06:27:38 -0500, wrote:

guess he thinks obama's been president for 8 years. guess he forgot
about bush, who developed the giveaway to the banks, who held the
economy hostage to their mistakes, courtesy of the right wing.

I think the point is, Obama is just an extension of the last 8
(actually 20) years of Bush/Clinton./Bush.

really? bush tried to get the middle class health insurance?

he proposed taxing banks?

The guy in the White House is not as important as the people sitting
in the actual seats that direct financial policy and those are the
same guys. Names like Rubin and Summers keep popping up. Geitner and
Bernanke were at ground zero in creating the problem and now we
expect them to clean it up.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over,
expecting a different result.

the difference is that obama is actually trying to bring the middle
class into the political process. all bush did was cut taxes for rich
folks

Sure has a funny way of doing it, giving all the debt to the middle
class and the cash to corrupt corporations.

Hey! Don't do that... it gets the lib's panties in a wad. And they
are wadded enough...

A lot of liberals waddle.

On 28/01/2010 7:30 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 17:53:15 -0700,
wrote:



Sure has a funny way of doing it, giving all the debt to the middle
class and the cash to corrupt corporations. Don't forget, Bush hardly
signed any money away. It was Obama who signed the checks to the banks
and GM. Bush only gave GM enough to hobble to Obama is officially my
mama day.


guess the idiot would have preferred 25% unemployment like we had in
the 29 crash.

of course, the unemployed would be middle class, so he doesn't care

You have it, and just like the day after Obama spend-talk-a-lot the
market dipped.

Because capitalists know you can't debt-spend your way to prosperity.
And Obama is like a used car salesman selling you a lemon. Obama is a
big mouthed fraud. Going to put Amrica in the poor house.

I read an interesting article about government debt. How with taxes and
dollar devaluation the average standard of living in the USA and Canada
is going to take a wild dive in the next decade as more people in the
world compete for limited resurces. That the worlds population is going
to mandate a much lower standard of living, and Americans will not have
the cash to buy goods like before. Interesting read incinuationg this
is WWW III or global socialism and leaderships are pandering to it.