BoatBanter.com - When Bush took office...

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)

- General (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/)

- - When Bush took office... (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/87793-when-bush-took-office.html)

When Bush took office...

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..

That doesn't answer the question. Please name the socialized medicine
which you approve of and would not want to see eliminated.

I would get rid of Medicaid, Medicare and any other government sponsored,
managed or promoted medicine. People live too long. Those over 60 should
have the decency to do the right thing and die. This would stop the drain
on the Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid. And that silly Part D
plan that Bush promoted.

There's one more example. It fits the definition nicely. Here's a pretty
generic definition:

"medical and hospital services for the members of a class or population
administered by an organized group (as a state agency) and paid for from
funds obtained usually by assessments, philanthropy, or taxation"

This is easy. Think hard. We need to finish this branch of the discussion
before justwait's attention span fizzles.

When Bush took office...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Canuck57" wrote in message
news:EzEZi.200735$1y4.155047@pd7urf2no...
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Tim" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Nov 10, 9:49 pm, " JimH" ask wrote:
"HK" wrote in message

. ..

JimH wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
...gasoline was $1.46 a gallon.
And the highest gasoline prices were under the leadership of
Carter.
And your point is?
Just another data point with which to bury Republicans next year.
Explain how the "Republicans" caused the increase in gasoline prices.

Why would gasoline prices be different today if a Democrat were in
office?
Well I'm not worried about it. Pres. Hillary Obama will get it right
back down to a "buck forty-nine" in just six months, and will have
exec. reps on a rope just like a stringer fll of blue gills.
Nobody will get the price down until we eliminate oil speculation by
investors who have absolutely no connection with the oil business.
Most of the increases in gasoline prices for the last year are due to
the devaluation of the greenback, not in any real way has the value of a
barrel of oil changed.

It is opposite thinking from what politicians preach. A paper currency
is just like stock. It goes up when people want it, and down when
people don't want it. Just like commodities, currency fluxuates in
value.

If the US fed raised interest rates and tightened up the money supply
the dollar would have more value. Does not congress work with the Fed
on such maters?

Combine this with sub-prime mortgages and asset backed paper liquidity
problems....

It is more accurate to think of the barrel of oil value being constant
and the currency has lost value. If you had 100% of your investments in
a stable currency last year, they would have gone up 20% against the USD
not including interest.

Blame government monetary policy.

All true, but I stand by my original comment. Oil is one commodity which
should be untouchable by recreational speculators. I'm talking illegal,
go to jail, that sort of thing. You know I'm right.
Why should oil be off limits to "recreational" speculators? A commodity is
a commodity and should be treated as such regardless of who is
speculating. Those "recreational" speculators can and do become the
institutional speculators of the future.

Give me 3 examples of institutional speculators, please.

The Roman Catholic Church
Any Protestant Church
The Bush Administration

When Bush took office...

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 15:59:04 -0500, BAR wrote:

The Dems are less than not effective. They are
pursing political ends rather than doing what this country needs and
that is long term planning.

Heh, and the republicans are doing what? The republicans have lost
their way as the traditional advocates of fiscal stability. There are
many reasons for that, none of which are on topic for this newsgroup.

I'd be happy to discuss via EMAIL if anyone is interested.

When Bush took office...

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:44:16 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Give me 3 examples of institutional speculators, please.

Index hedge funds

Private hedge funds

Sovereign funds.

Reinsurer funds.

Want me to continue? :)

When Bush took office...

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:44:16 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Give me 3 examples of institutional speculators, please.

Index hedge funds

Private hedge funds

Sovereign funds.

Reinsurer funds.

Want me to continue? :)

Good work. You get extra chocolate milk later.

Now, why should any of those entities be entitled to move the price of a
commodity that's so crucial to almost everything we do?

Answer: They shouldn't. But, I'll stand by for your creative "other answer".

When Bush took office...

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:44:16 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Give me 3 examples of institutional speculators, please.

There's lots on the web about futures markets.
I'm not sure why you're bitching about commodities futures, which
spot markets always bring quickly to reality.
It's the equities markets - Wall Street - that has weakened the
dollar, and the U.S.
If you seriously think that the equity market caps of many companies
are more real than a commodity futures price, try liquidating the
shares of a large corporation for actual cash and see what it brings.
Wall Street is more of a fantasy than any commodity futures market.
Most equities just doesn't reach the real spot market - not yet
anyway.
Any return on Wall Street equities beyond paid dividends is the result
of speculative forces, and nothing else.
Gambling is gambling. Poker, craps, horses, equities, futures, real
estate. Your pick.

--Vic

When Bush took office...

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:44:16 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Give me 3 examples of institutional speculators, please.

There's lots on the web about futures markets.
I'm not sure why you're bitching about commodities futures, which
spot markets always bring quickly to reality.
It's the equities markets - Wall Street - that has weakened the
dollar, and the U.S.
If you seriously think that the equity market caps of many companies
are more real than a commodity futures price, try liquidating the
shares of a large corporation for actual cash and see what it brings.
Wall Street is more of a fantasy than any commodity futures market.
Most equities just doesn't reach the real spot market - not yet
anyway.
Any return on Wall Street equities beyond paid dividends is the result
of speculative forces, and nothing else.
Gambling is gambling. Poker, craps, horses, equities, futures, real
estate. Your pick.

--Vic

If a bunch of fools bid up the price of a stock to a level that's absurd,
you (and I mean specifically YOU) do not have to buy that stock at that
price.

Do you agree with that statement?

When Bush took office...

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 22:14:31 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:44:16 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Give me 3 examples of institutional speculators, please.

There's lots on the web about futures markets.
I'm not sure why you're bitching about commodities futures, which
spot markets always bring quickly to reality.
It's the equities markets - Wall Street - that has weakened the
dollar, and the U.S.
If you seriously think that the equity market caps of many companies
are more real than a commodity futures price, try liquidating the
shares of a large corporation for actual cash and see what it brings.
Wall Street is more of a fantasy than any commodity futures market.
Most equities just doesn't reach the real spot market - not yet
anyway.
Any return on Wall Street equities beyond paid dividends is the result
of speculative forces, and nothing else.
Gambling is gambling. Poker, craps, horses, equities, futures, real
estate. Your pick.

--Vic

If a bunch of fools bid up the price of a stock to a level that's absurd,
you (and I mean specifically YOU) do not have to buy that stock at that
price.

Do you agree with that statement?

Yes.

--Vic