227 posts
chase — May 07, 2010how about this shit
That has to be investigated
Latest I heard was a huge fuck up in a trade with a case of market lemmings.
Could also be something more - a lot of wealth changed hands in that 10 minute period.
considering the current path we are on and projected to go down, i find that conclusion laughable.
i would like to see a austerity measure similar to greece around these parts. everyone will have to suck it up and accept a ~20% standard of living decrease initially though, which would make it an impossible platform to run on. people want to have their cake and eat it too...
chase — May 08, 2010people want to have their cake and eat it too...
Lotza that, fo sho.
fingers — May 08, 2010[quote author=chase link=1272178696/125#143 date=1273212627]how about this shit
That has to be investigated
Latest I heard was a huge fuck up in a trade with a case of market lemmings.
Could also be something more - a lot of wealth changed hands in that 10 minute period.
summed up nicely...
http://market-ticker.denninger.net/archives/2282-Mr.-President-Unplug-the-Fing-Computers.html
chase — May 08, 2010considering the current path we are on and projected to go down, i find that conclusion laughable.
i would like to see a austerity measure similar to greece around these parts. everyone will have to suck it up and accept a ~20% standard of living decrease initially though, which would make it an impossible platform to run on. people want to have their cake and eat it too...
Pseud Party Years Debt %GDP $Tn %Change Start Finish
George W. Bush R 2001-2005 56.4% 63.5% 1.73 +7.1%
Reagan2 Ronald Reagan R 1985-1989 43.8% 53.1% 1.04 +9.3%
Reagan1 Ronald Reagan R 1981-1985 32.5% 43.8% 0.66 +10.8%
Bush GHW George H. W. Bush R 1989-1993 51.1% 66.1% 1.40 +13.0%
Bush GW2 George W. Bush R 2005-2009 63.4% 83.4% 2.63 +20.0%
You talking about these as saviours ?
chase — May 08, 2010[quote author=fingers link=1272178696/150#150 date=1273281091][quote author=chase link=1272178696/125#143 date=1273212627]how about this shit
That has to be investigated
Latest I heard was a huge fuck up in a trade with a case of market lemmings.
Could also be something more - a lot of wealth changed hands in that 10 minute period.
summed up nicely...
http://market-ticker.denninger.net/archives/2282-Mr.-President-Unplug-the-Fing-Computers.htmlA superficially "plausible" explanation - if anything I am actually quite impressed at how quickly those "computers" recovered from the glitch - 10 mins.
The quesiton is how did the price that caused the collapse make the market.
As for unplugging the computers - may as well blame a black out on electricity.
Blackouts never happened with candles.
fingers — May 08, 2010[quote author=chase link=1272178696/150#151 date=1273281189]considering the current path we are on and projected to go down, i find that conclusion laughable.
i would like to see a austerity measure similar to greece around these parts. everyone will have to suck it up and accept a ~20% standard of living decrease initially though, which would make it an impossible platform to run on. people want to have their cake and eat it too...
Pseud Party Years Debt %GDP $Tn %Change Start Finish
George W. Bush R 2001-2005 56.4% 63.5% 1.73 +7.1%
Reagan2 Ronald Reagan R 1985-1989 43.8% 53.1% 1.04 +9.3%
Reagan1 Ronald Reagan R 1981-1985 32.5% 43.8% 0.66 +10.8%
Bush GHW George H. W. Bush R 1989-1993 51.1% 66.1% 1.40 +13.0%
Bush GW2 George W. Bush R 2005-2009 63.4% 83.4% 2.63 +20.0%
You talking about these as saviours ?
i'm sure not talking about this saviour
or this one
Those projections are the result of the financial crisis.
If you got your desire to see Obama lynched and
a republican in the whitehouse it wont change those numbers,
And given the history of proflicate republicans -likely make them even worse.
that same old excuse is tired. if obama had his way we would run the largest deficit in history by a large margin. cap and trade alone would push our deficit into the stratosphere. add on amnesty for illegal aliens and it keeps getting bigger. the only reason his deficit isn't as massive as it could be are the republicans.
Wow - obama will be out of power in 2013 and
the deficits go up again when the republicans get in. :P
no, the programs already in place will cause the escalation in deficit spending you see in the projections. the republicans will probably add onto that as well
Look republicans screwed up the economy
that is where >90% of the deficit comes from
we have been through this before, programs initiated
by Obama have added little to the deficit yet, he has been
president for <18 months.
You are simply blinded by your partisan loyalties.
Well, you may want to look at the dems on the no mention list Fingers. Some were considered among the worst ever. Like Carter. They handled money well and still fucked up the country.
Obama totally shit on your charts and figures. ;D
I would like to see Clintons view of all this mess and wonder how he'd fix this shit.
If John McCain was president now the numbers
would look the same, or likely worse.
no doubt, but quit acting like democrats are the great responsible financial choice. if they had cart blanche, and could do as they pleased right now they would be spending even more money. the entire system is fucked
fingers — May 09, 2010If John McCain was president now the numbers
would look the same, or likely worse.
If my Aunt had balls she'd be my Uncle.
There is no point in arguing this case with facts, fingers.
(denial + short memory) - ideas = Teapublican
The reason Reagan looked as he did was the cold war. The reason Bush looked as he did was the two wars we were fighting. Clinton was cool! Carter was so stupid he didn't know he could spend money. Ford thought he was the head of a car company. Bush 2 found out he could spend money but forgot he told the people he wouldn't. ;D
fingers — May 09, 2010If John McCain was president now the numbers
would look the same, or likely worse.
These are Chargers facts. ;D
Whatever you do don't cut education
spending.
Look
your whole argument is based on saying that the
numbers would be different if Obama wasn't president.
I say the numbers would not be any different
you claim I have no facts - where the fuck are yours to show the opposite case?
Your infantile explanation above - Reagan had to pay for a cold war
look you retard - so did every president prior to him since ww2.
Including Carter, jfk etc.
Here's the point to my childish sounding post. ;D
Americans have become conditioned to accept excuses for out of control spending. Spending and deficits have become the norm. That has to be reversed. I don't have the answers or the cure, but I know it needs attention in the most urgent way. Government is just doing what government thinks needs done without consideration of "it's people". The governments boss.
The only thing I could imagine that would change that is protest. Not out of control ignorant shit like the tea party crap, serious knowledgeable people on a defined mission to stop government from implementing and dictating to it's people how to live, etc. America needs a financial reality check and the check book taken away from our government. their job is not to take care of everyone, provide for everyone, and tax like crazy without consequences.
Every President that had a deficit and spent like crazy had an excuse. Doesn't make it right or wrong, just makes them have a reason. I say fuck any reason for deficits. I can accept the fact that Obama's situation may be partly excused based on his decisions being that of necessity, but he's still spending money in a big way. Other that the necessity. Very simply put, we don't have fucking money, cut back the government, and quit spending money we don't have.
fingers — May 10, 2010
Look
your whole argument is based on saying that the
numbers would be different if Obama wasn't president.
they may be the exact same. in which case i would still be screaming "we are spending too much money on stupid shit"
Exactly Chase. Doesn't matter who's spending, it's the spending period that needs to stop.
Bush spent to much money also. There, that should make you feel better since your so protective of Obama. (Not you Chase)
There is a huge difference between what Bush did--spending tons of money for, essentially, nothing--a couple of wars and a lot of fiscal crises--
--and spending money for a reason--mainly, to keep us from spiraling into an economic black hole.
charger — May 11, 2010There is a huge difference between what Bush did--spending tons of money for, essentially, nothing--a couple of wars and a lot of fiscal crises--
--and spending money for a reason--mainly, to keep us from spiraling into an economic black hole.
We didn't have to have health care reform. Not now. Not half what Obama really wanted. We didn't have to bail out car companies, again. Obama is continuing the wars.
Everyone has excuses, and excuses are like assholes. Your just so dedicated to the liberal cause and Obama it's pitiful. Everything Bush did was not bad, I hate to inform you. The economy was kicking fucking ass for years and the stock market you love so much hit all time highs under his watch. It wasn't all Bush's fault. Wake up man.
Obama has the highest projected budget ever. And if Obama dreamed this budget up without any plan to pay it down, he's not much smarter than Bush going to Iraq and not having a plan to exit Iraq.
Now I don't care to blame Obama for the debt that was deemed a necessity for our economy, but don't act like he's flawless. He isn't, not even close.
Spending money the way our government has in the last 10 or 20 years is unacceptable and not excusable, with the exception I mentioned concerning Obama. That's a damn fact, no matter what party you want to blame. Their both guilty.
Give Bush his due - he started the spending of trillions worldwide on stopping the spiral into a black hole.
October 2008
That stage was his finest hour and will be seen in history as such.
For all the sovereign problems - when push comes to shove - all countries and currencies and debts look bad bets to investors.
And these investors are not aliens from out of space outside the system, some of them are Greek for instance.
So when they take all their money out of the US debt they put it into what exactly ?
Gold ?
Then you have the absurdity of a basically fixed amount of Gold being pushed to being the fixed sum total of the monetary wealth of the globe.
While the actual economy the one that keeps bread on your table day to day collapses.
The so called "Austrian School" of economists - a bunch of illiterate cranks
They need to learn some maths.
What they argue for as if it is some kind of impressive insight is this.
gold is better than other numeraires as a meaure of money.
It is just a yellow metal the value of which is based on human love of shiny usless things.
it is illiterate.
Hookbender — May 11, 2010[quote author=charger link=1272178696/175#176 date=1273596080] The economy was kicking fucking ass for years and the stock market you love so much hit all time highs under his watch. It wasn't all Bush's fault. Wake up man.
On borrowed money - you run a huge deficit when the party was raging.
If the economy was so good why do you add 4 trillion to the debt over that period ?
and I am talking before 2008 when it all went tits up into crisis.
Did any of you ever see that Twilight Zone episode where this guy steals a bunch of gold with some cronies, hides in a cave with a time machine (thinking that the crime would be forgotten in the future), wakes up and kills off his "helpers," then finds out that mankind has learned how to create as much gold as they want during the time he jumped over so his portion is now worth next to nothing? ;D
Finger's post reminded me of that episode. :)
01/29/2001 5,739,059,297,122.31
01/29/2009 10,626,297,420,130.85
From here
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np
01/29/2007 8,688,015,869,941.75
01/29/2008 9,207,775,844,006.23
01/29/1993 4,167,200,410,899.83
01/29/2001 5,739,059,297,122.31
for comparison - 93 is the earliest it goes.
That's the shit you should be angry about.
Not the guy who has to sort the mess out.
Clinton passed on a decent legacy he didn't add any harm
Bush passed on a poisoned chalice.
fingers — May 11, 2010[quote author=Hookbender link=1272178696/175#177 date=1273619293][quote author=charger link=1272178696/175#176 date=1273596080] The economy was kicking fucking ass for years and the stock market you love so much hit all time highs under his watch. It wasn't all Bush's fault. Wake up man.
On borrowed money - you run a huge deficit when the party was raging.
If the economy was so good why do you add 4 trillion to the debt over that period ?
and I am talking before 2008 when it all went tits up into crisis.
Simple. He spent to much damn money. I never said he was some great President or anything remotely close to that. He's just not 100% at fault. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that point. If you think that, your nothing but a partisan tool who smokes to much crack and wants their party of choice to succeed more than their country. What other conclusion is one to come to? We need to stop spending and stop creating a deficit it takes years and years to get under control. I don't care who stops it, I don't care which party stops it, and I don't care who gets credit for stopping it. And...I don't care who started it. It simply needs to stop and our government needs to be held accountable for their actions or lack of action.
Explain the data - the facts of debt management since 93
since it is your single biggest issue now
aren't you at least a little curious at that abrupt doubling of it under Bush?
No. Not more than any other president adding to, etc, the debt. Why should I be? "Information is a distraction". ;D ;D
I had no control or say in what any President did with money. I just know it was spent and we didn't have it to spend. What difference, really, would it make what the money was spent on? I'll just make sure, when I vote, to think about that. I don't recall the debt even being discussed during this election by the way.
fingers — May 12, 2010Explain the data - the facts of debt management since 93
since it is your single biggest issue now
aren't you at least a little curious at that abrupt doubling of it under Bush?
what are these atrocities you speak of when it comes to the bush budget in those 8 years? i'm sick and fucking tired of hearing about how he spent so much money on fruitless endeavors. show me what he spent it on that a democratic president in the same circumstances wouldn't have? it sure as hell wasn't a social program, as i've never met a democrat that didn't love a "free government program". homeland defense? you bet your ass al gore would have done the same fucking thing.
i would be willing to put money on the fact that al gore would have spent more money than bush did. we would have a "department of global warming awareness" that would suck a cool trillion off the top every year. cap and trade would have happened under him, there goes a noticeable percentage of the GDP right off the top.
the only thing you have is iraq, which while questionable nobody knows what intel bush was being fed. maybe it was a mistake, maybe it wasn't. the simple truth is any administration would have carried on much the same path. the same way you are crying now that if a republican were in office he would be spending the same money obama has been.
when your walking down the wrong street, it doesn't matter if your on the left or the right...
I can't wait to get Bush's book in November. Should be a great read if he's honest in it, which I see no way he couldn't be. He'd be hamored to death if he told one untruth.
Thinking about getting Karl Roves book tomorrow. Very interested in what really went on, or the story told by the actual people themselves. They deserve a voice as at least Bush has been silent so far.
But yeah, give your list of Bush trashing money and maybe that will inspire me to list Obama's garbage spending and we can compare 8 years to 2 years.
Hookbender — May 11, 2010[quote author=fingers link=1272178696/175#179 date=1273620025][quote author=Hookbender link=1272178696/175#177 date=1273619293][quote author=charger link=1272178696/175#176 date=1273596080] The economy was kicking fucking ass for years and the stock market you love so much hit all time highs under his watch. It wasn't all Bush's fault. Wake up man.
On borrowed money - you run a huge deficit when the party was raging.
If the economy was so good why do you add 4 trillion to the debt over that period ?
and I am talking before 2008 when it all went tits up into crisis.
Simple. He spent to much damn money. I never said he was some great President or anything remotely close to that. He's just not 100% at fault. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that point. If you think that, your nothing but a partisan tool who smokes to much crack and wants their party of choice to succeed more than their country. What other conclusion is one to come to? We need to stop spending and stop creating a deficit it takes years and years to get under control. I don't care who stops it, I don't care which party stops it, and I don't care who gets credit for stopping it. And...I don't care who started it. It simply needs to stop and our government needs to be held accountable for their actions or lack of action.
And you think the time to readjust our spending and go into austerity mode is in the middle of the greatest financial crisis in 70 years? That this is a really good time to make some moves that will surely cause intense pain in our economy? That, teetering on the verge of collapse, Obama should have used the last year and a half to cut spending, thereby providing no relief to the economy, and allowing the internal situation to get completely out of control? Do you think it would have been better if, as Chase has espoused, the monetary system was allowed to fail and the American people were not propped up long enough to get through the crisis?
chase — May 12, 2010[quote author=fingers link=1272178696/175#186 date=1273623261]Explain the data - the facts of debt management since 93
since it is your single biggest issue now
aren't you at least a little curious at that abrupt doubling of it under Bush?
show me what he spent it on that a democratic president in the same circumstances wouldn't have? it sure as hell wasn't a social program, as i've never met a democrat that didn't love a "free government program".
Dude, don't be an asshole. That's just a shit comment with no merit whatsoever.
charger — May 12, 2010[quote author=Hookbender link=1272178696/175#185 date=1273621688][quote author=fingers link=1272178696/175#179 date=1273620025][quote author=Hookbender link=1272178696/175#177 date=1273619293][quote author=charger link=1272178696/175#176 date=1273596080] The economy was kicking fucking ass for years and the stock market you love so much hit all time highs under his watch. It wasn't all Bush's fault. Wake up man.
On borrowed money - you run a huge deficit when the party was raging.
If the economy was so good why do you add 4 trillion to the debt over that period ?
and I am talking before 2008 when it all went tits up into crisis.
Simple. He spent to much damn money. I never said he was some great President or anything remotely close to that. He's just not 100% at fault. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that point. If you think that, your nothing but a partisan tool who smokes to much crack and wants their party of choice to succeed more than their country. What other conclusion is one to come to? We need to stop spending and stop creating a deficit it takes years and years to get under control. I don't care who stops it, I don't care which party stops it, and I don't care who gets credit for stopping it. And...I don't care who started it. It simply needs to stop and our government needs to be held accountable for their actions or lack of action.
And you think the time to readjust our spending and go into austerity mode is in the middle of the greatest financial crisis in 70 years? That this is a really good time to make some moves that will surely cause intense pain in our economy? That, teetering on the verge of collapse, Obama should have used the last year and a half to cut spending, thereby providing no relief to the economy, and allowing the internal situation to get completely out of control? Do you think it would have been better if, as Chase has espoused, the monetary system was allowed to fail and the American people were not propped up long enough to get through the crisis?
there is no correct answer to your question, only conjecture. what is a fact is that the extra spending that is unnecessary is harming us, right now. the only reason we are in the fortunate position we are in economically right now is due to the fact that the rest of the world is imploding faster than we are. their is no better option than the dollar right now regardless of how fucked up our gdp/debt ratio is, how much of our total budget goes to simply paying the interest on our debt, how fraudulently our entire investment banking community has behaved the last decade, etc and so forth.
i will ignore TARP even though it has been managed piss poorly. the rest of the wastfulness has been like fat kid on top of the dogpile; simply too much to handle
I put the numbers up and a site where you can get them from.
Go look into them yourselves.
Considering you are so fucking concerned about
debt you can sure make excuses for a republican spending
hypocrites.
Nothing fucking happened to Bush that required that spending spree apart from dumb ass military escapades and unfunded tax cuts to buy your votes.
"And you think the time to readjust our spending and go into austerity mode is in the middle of the greatest financial crisis in 70 years? That this is a really good time to make some moves that will surely cause intense pain in our economy? That, teetering on the verge of collapse, Obama should have used the last year and a half to cut spending, thereby providing no relief to the economy, and allowing the internal situation to get completely out of control? Do you think it would have been better if, as Chase has espoused, the monetary system was allowed to fail and the American people were not propped up long enough to get through the crisis?"
Well, simply put, yeah. You remember....go over the budget or whatever....line by line. Like Obama said he would do. Yes, I expect him to do what he said, is that bad? ;)
fingers — May 12, 2010I put the numbers up and a site where you can get them from.
Go look into them yourselves.
Considering you are so fucking concerned about
debt you can sure make excuses for a republican spending
hypocrites.
Nothing fucking happened to Bush that required that spending spree apart from dumb ass military escapades and unfunded tax cuts to buy your votes.
Is that post to me? I never defended Bush's spending. He's included in my complaints. I've made that perfectly clear.
Hookbender — May 12, 2010"And you think the time to readjust our spending and go into austerity mode is in the middle of the greatest financial crisis in 70 years? That this is a really good time to make some moves that will surely cause intense pain in our economy? That, teetering on the verge of collapse, Obama should have used the last year and a half to cut spending, thereby providing no relief to the economy, and allowing the internal situation to get completely out of control? Do you think it would have been better if, as Chase has espoused, the monetary system was allowed to fail and the American people were not propped up long enough to get through the crisis?"
Well, simply put, yeah. You remember....go over the budget or whatever....line by line. Like Obama said he would do. Yes, I expect him to do what he said, is that bad? ;)
If the financial system had not been propped up, things would be really fucking bad right now, and you would be blaming Obama for that.
Be careful what you wish for.
As for spending, you
supported the healthcare bill. Talk out of one side of your mouth and you'll make a little more sense.
chase — May 12, 2010
there is no correct answer to your question, only conjecture. what is a fact is that the extra spending that is unnecessary is harming us, right now. the only reason we are in the fortunate position we are in economically right now is due to the fact that the rest of the world is imploding faster than we are. their is no better option than the dollar right now regardless of how fucked up our gdp/debt ratio is, how much of our total budget goes to simply paying the interest on our debt, how fraudulently our entire investment banking community has behaved the last decade, etc and so forth.
i will ignore TARP even though it has been managed piss poorly. the rest of the wastfulness has been like fat kid on top of the dogpile; simply too much to handle
I believe this is the closest we will ever get to Chase admitting that the economy is improving, regardless of his wishes and prognostications.
"If the financial system had not been propped up, things would be really fucking bad right now, and you would be blaming Obama for that."
If, I'm not dealing in if's. I've made myself clear. And for the last time I don't fault Obama for doing what was deemed a necessity at the time. O.K.? It's the other things.
"As for spending, you supported the healthcare bill. Talk out of one side of your mouth and you'll make a little more sense."
No. I won't be 100% liberal or 100% conservative. I supported the healthcare bill on principle. Not timing. And it really doesn't matter one way or the other, I had no say in the matter. To say I supported healthcare, as if I had a say or vote on the matter, is stretching it in a huge way. I support helping those that can't help themselves, I support no American having to suffer needlessly. If you want to use that agaist me, go for it. But the fact of the matter is that this was terrible timing and a huge draw of Obama's time and energy when other things could have been addressed, such as the economy and unemployment. You could take the stimulous package alone and find huge amounts of money that didn't need to be spent, I'm sure. I think I remember millions being spent on digital televsion studies or something like that. As in the 600 million range. Not sure that's close to accurate and I don't feel like looking it up. Just read the bill and you'll get the point, whether you admit it or not.
Have you no concern about the huge debt we are pilling up? Jesus christ man.
No, I really don't.
In previous times of crisis we've piled up huge debt too. If you look at history you will see that, when adjusted for modern value, we've been here before. We've always seen a way through. You can yell and scream about the injustice of a huge budget, but Bush had the highest budgets and spending under his watch every freaking year, without a massive financial system crisis, and you were totally silent. Every year, it was "most ever spent". And I'm sure there was a good excuse for it. Homeland Security, wars in Iraq, etc. There is always a good reason. But to me, wars and spying on your people and making us take our shoes off at airports are not good reasons to spend hundreds of billions.
Preventing economic catastrophe is.
Bottom line is I would rather get something for that money, than nothing. Funding Halliburton and Blackwater doesn't rise to the level of "getting something for our money" to me. Paying for healthcare (which we otherwise have to pay for anyway) does.