Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
I guess this shows that there is no alternative except to spend money freely. This administration, having doubled the debt just in their time in office so far has no concept of budgeting. 0bama would have thrown tantrums forever until the money spigot was turned back on so he could direct the fire hose of cash at his favorite projects. The government dependent class wins again at the expense of the working taxpaying class.
This is sort of like if someone on "Survivor" wanted the tribe to follow their plan, then when they didn't get their way, they trash the shelter, throw the food into the jungle and break the fishing pole, then they wonder why they are getting voted out. I don't disagree with some of the issues that the Republicans had, but they played this horribly. This all continues (we'll be discussing all of this again come Jan/Feb), the Fed continues (Taper? Haha.) and invest accordingly.
The art of compromise was lost a long time ago. The duty of Congress was to debate back and forth (in a gentlemanly manner) and come to a agreement. Now it is either 0's way or the highway. Any talk of cuts is immediately trashed as racist or terrorist of which both are totally false.
Reply to @scott: Kenny Polcari even before the announced agreement: " Remember – If the probability of a real default – not a technical default was that high – then you would see much more volatility in the markets…..so the fact that the indices are reacting only modestly should tell you something. For the most part – the market DOES believe that this impasse will end and that the bozos will do the right thing. If that happens then watch as investors jump in and challenge the most recent high. If not – then no worries – The FED, large asset managers and Uncle Warren are buyers….so let the good times roll." Take good care – Kp http://www.kennypolcari.com/2013/10/16/morning-thoughtstwitter-calls-nyse-home-try-the-greek-style-slow-cooker-roast-turkey-breast/
Didn't they vote that senate and congress can trade based on inside information and it is okay? Methinks all this nonsense was just so that everyone had opportunity to make their plays.
No one can tell me what I'm saying is a conspiracy theory. Fact of the matter is, these guys DID vote rules are different for them. So THAT is a conspiracy.
Reply to @VintageFreak: It is a total fraud against the American people. Only Congress can ask that their remarks can be changed for the official record so whatever they say on the floor doesn't mean diddly squat.
The only thing these politicians know how to do is spend taxpayers money, and they are not very good at that. Most of them couldn't get a real job. Notice that most at the end of their time in politics go to think tanks or other fluff positions?
In the end however, all this spending of money will have consequences. To think that our country accumulated $7 trillion of debt in all the previous administrations and now this one has the debt up to near $17 trillion shows that they don't care about consequences. Both sides are guilty. But it would be nice to have a President that would demand some control on the spending side. People were squawking that Bush spent so much, yet the 0 gets a free pass on his drunken sailor attitude. Rant Off
Reply to @JohnChisum: It's a bit disingenuous that you choose to selectively focus on the current administration. For a more evenhanded context, lets go back a bit. From Wickipedia:
In the early 21st century, debt relative to GDP rose again due in part to the Bush tax cuts and increased military spending caused by the wars in the Middle-East and a new entitlement Medicare D program. During the presidency of George W. Bush, debt held by the public increased from $3.339 trillion in September 2001 to $6.369 trillion by the end of 2008, In the aftermath of the Global Financial Crisis and related significant revenue declines and spending increases, the debt held by the public increased to $11.917 trillion by the end of July 2013 under the presidency of Barack Obama.
Debt relative to GDP rose due to recessions and policy decisions in the early 21st century. From 2000 to 2008 public debt rose from 35% of GDP to 40%, and to 62% by 2010.[24] During the presidency of George W. Bush, the gross public debt increased from $5.7 trillion in January 2001 to $10.7 trillion by December 2008, due to decreasing tax rates and two wars. Federal spending under President George W. Bush remained at around 40% of GDP during his two terms in office. Public debt increased in the aftermath of the global financial crisis and the late-2000s recession. Public debt increased to 63% of GDP by 2010, mainly due to decreased tax revenue, and the stimulus and tax cuts enacted by President Barack Obama. By February 2012, public debt had increased to $15.5 trillion.
It might also be illuminating to examine what each administration used the additional indebtedness for:
2001/2008- The major expenditures were for an unfunded and unnecessary war in Iraq, coupled with a simultaneous and unnecessary tax break for the wealthiest of Americans. And as a parting gift, a necessary commitment to borrow and spend to try and avert a second great depression. Now there's an example of stewardship!
2008/2013- One set of major expenditures continues: to wind down and hopefully exit from the unfunded wars helpfully left by the previous administration. The other major expenditure is to try and buy this country out of the second-worst depression in the history of the United States, also courtesy of the previous administration.
Do you understand the meaning of "a stacked deck"?? Do you even understand the meaning of "fairness"? How would you like to be president, inheriting a mess like that?
We can only hope! Senate Committee on the Budget - Patty Murray Chairman From her statement Oct 16th :...as part of the agreement to end this crisis, Republicans have now finally agreed to the budget conference committee that I have been asking for over the last six months. I am looking forward to the big challenge that bridging the significant differences between the House and Senate budgets presents, I am absolutely committed to finding common ground, and I hope Republicans are too."
Are their enough centrists anywhere? Representative Aaron Schock of Illinois said the lesson of the episode was that Boehner should cut out the far-right flank and work with centrist Democrats. http://www.nationalreview.com/node/361432/print
Shooting blanks?
After enduring weeks of barbs by Democrats and even some fellow Republicans for picking a fight with President Barack Obama over the health law, some of the assembled conservatives were eager to return fire. The Senate deal appears to guarantee more budget battles early next year because the government is only funded through mid-January and new borrowing authority ends early the following month. Questioned on what factors will be different next time, Mr. Jordan said, "The debt will be bigger and Obamacare will be more unpopular."
Asked if conservatives had formulated a strategy for future battles, Mr. Mulvaney quipped, "I didn't know what the strategy was the first time."
Well put Ted. Passive voice describes the process. A deal has been stumbled and bumbled into --- one very loud faction dragging their feet all the #*!#*! way.
Reply to @JohnChisum: Just for the record, your guy didn't exactly leave the new guy a piece of cake. Here's GWB at his final Presidential Press Conference, January 12, 2009.
"Now, obviously these are very difficult economic times. When people analyze the situation, there will be -- this problem started before my presidency, it obviously took place during my presidency. The question facing a President is not when the problem started, but what did you do about it when you recognized the problem. And I readily concede I chunked aside some of my free market principles when I was told by chief economic advisors that the situation we were facing could be worse than the Great Depression.
So I've told some of my friends who said -- you know, who have taken an ideological position on this issue -- why did you do what you did? I said, well, if you were sitting there and heard that the depression could be greater than the Great Depression, I hope you would act too, which I did."
Reply to @Old_Joe: Disingenuous? Reading your reply is the same thing from the opposite side.
I'm probably the only conservative on this site. If so, then there will be some interesting conversations going forward. I prefer not to have government interfere in my personal life. This 0-Care system will implode on its own and it has already started. There has been no effort to cut spending at all by this administration. To be fair, the Republicans haven't been eager to cut spending either.
The tax break for the wealthy? I got a tax break and most everyone I know that paid taxes got one. I don't consider myself wealthy but then again it all depends on what wealthy means. I don't mind paying taxes but what is a fair amount? The money today goes to social spending versus the days of old when it was for infrastructure. LBJ made the change to social spending with his War On Poverty which has not changed anything. Trillions of dollars spent and there are still poor people in America. That is something that will not change.
The biggest change has been the attitude of society that they have to take advantage of the situation when they can like getting SSD when you are not disabled. How many people are getting benefits that really do not need them. The truly poor are getting hurt by those scamming the government for their own benefit. We complain about the politicians and there is plenty to complain about. The politicians mirror society in personal greed.
The built in hatred for G.W. Bush continues long after he has left office. But as long as 0bama continues to throw money at the government dependent class, he is revered as king.
I leave it here as we are getting way off topic. I don't want to get on the bad side of the moderators.
Sir: I have cited specifics, and noted sources. You have chosen to reply with recycled Tea-Party cant, as opposed to reasoned argument.
Yes or No: Was the budget reasonably balanced when the administration of 2001 began?
Yes or No: Did the public debt essentially double under the presidency of GW Bush?
Yes or No: Was there a rational or justifiable reason for starting a war in Iraq?
Yes or No: Was that war in Iraq funded?
Yes or No: In light of the expenses involved in that war do you really believe that it was prudent to simultaneously diminish the federal tax base?
Yes or No: Did the economy drop off the cliff while the other party was running things?
Yes or No: Do you really believe that after 2008 our government should have just sat back and watched to see what might happen? That does, after all, seem to be the perspective of many partisans of the GOP. Especially of those who happen to be themselves financially secure- a position certainly not universal to the average citizen.
You will note that I have not suggested that the other party was responsible for the "great recession". I believe that there is plenty of blame to spread around with respect to the underlying causes. The question then becomes: What, if anything, are you prepared to do to attempt to stabilize the situation? At least Mr. Bush was able to understand that, and Mr. Obama attempted to continue in that regard.
As I recently observed in another thread I really prefer not to initiate discussions on MFO which have major political overtones. But I sure as hell am not going to sit here and let you people rant, rave and froth at the mouth without giving back as good as you dish out. The recent two weeks have pretty well laid out who is trying to do what to whom. Spin isn't going to cover that up.
There is certainly an observable consistency to this sort of thing: let's just say anything that we feel like and if we encounter resistance then claim that "we are getting off topic". WHO, sir, was the first to "get off topic"?
With respect to our moderators, by circumstance they are exceptionally well equipped to recognize propaganda when they see it. It is to their credit that they allow exchanges such as this: they obviously believe that the folks here on MFO are capable of sorting out facts for themselves. And we are.
So as not to disrupt the board further, I will back out for now. I apologize for derailing the thread. The old adage of not to talk politics at the dinner table still applies and there will never be any agreement in this polarized atmosphere we have now.
Between this and strong aftershocks rattling the house, my nerves are a bit frayed so best to take a break and stick to investing which seems to be a safer topic. We had a 7.2 earthquake here a couple of days ago and I am very close to the epicenter. I live on that same island in fact. Life goes on.
As a native San Franciscan, I can certainly empathize with frayed nerves and aftershocks. I was still a Public-Safety radio technician during our last big one; we also were close to the epicenter, and that was pretty interesting. Also quite familiar with the Philippines- spent a year there at Tarumpitao Point on Palawan Island when I was 19 or so, as a radio tech in the US Coast Guard. Isolated duty- 12 of us vs the jungle. One of my more remarkable life memories.
I think it's remarkable that people still keep talking about the tea party. You give legitimacy to a group that hadn't done anything and was barely in the news until this.
Another poster brought this up (sorry, I forget who - TSP?) and THIS should be wayyyy more concerning than the tea party.
You realize that these sort of lobbying groups - and one in this case run by some 31-year-old (I mean, holy ****)- are really running (or buying) the show across the board. The money flowing into politics from lobbyists and other special interests is to the point where it's very concerning.
Reply to @Old_Joe: "Yes or No: Do you really believe that after 2008 our government should have just sat back and watched to see what might happen? That does, after all, seem to be the perspective of many partisans of the GOP. Especially of those who happen to be themselves financially secure- a position certainly not universal to the average citizen."
It's not that they should have sat back and done nothing and not everything is so black or white. There should have been a major plan focused on the majority - spending on education, spending on infrastructure in order to keep us competitive and efficient (smart grid, high speed rail, among a gillion other things.) We sit down and figure out healthcare in a way that is acceptable and transparent and people understand WTF it means to them and that big pharma doesn't just win big again after years of doing so.
We figure out college. They have been skyrocketing and the idea that anyone can get a loan has lead to colleges realizing they can boost tuition however they like. How you fix that not something that I can think of as 6am, but one: you have people who are coming out of college with tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt and they both have difficulty paying it off and can't imagine doing things like buying a house. You have an increasing amount of defaults and other issues and many have called student loans the next subprime. It's not surprising that some banks have pulled back from offering student loans.
Interest rates low, but you have a government that comes out and says, we need to spend and we need to lift the whole country up. We have spent tons of money on various conflicts outside the country, we need to spend money on creating an environment in which everyone from those in the largest cities to the smallest town can have the tools to succeed (Big Moving Speech.) Agriculture is the one thing that we export a lot of, how can we upgrade our agricultural infrastructure? How can we encourage more modern forms of agriculture in major cities? It's amazing what people are doing in terms of urban ag these days.
We need to encourage technology in this country, possibly with a focus on specialized education and tax credits for startups, encouraging the creation of more than just one "Silicon Valley" in this country.
We need an energy policy. One that encourages safe exploration within this country and works with Canada, who is certainly a politically stable, friendly neighbor. Not everything can be green - there is a place for that but it cannot be everything. You have a ton of companies who are retrofitting their vehicles to run on nat gas (Waste Management) Are we encouraging that? Are we creating infrastructure (stations, etc) for that? Retail chains are putting solar panels on their roofs - how can we encourage that sort of large-scale (and straightforward and really not even particularly visible) adoption?
Maybe we could get a maple syrup pipeline made too. Instead of Keystone XL, it's Keystone DL (Delicious).
We need to spend money on security of important infrastructure and otherwise in this country instead of spending money on conflicts elsewhere around the world.
We sit down with other countries and create an atmosphere of "We're all in this together" cooperation rather than telling other countries what to do. Again, upgrade our infrastructure to encourage the smooth flow of goods/commerce/etc in/out of the country. How can we get goods to market here and abroad cheaper, faster?
We need a "Today's Deal" and you can call it "A New Dawn in America" or some other cheesy title, but it focuses on creating tangible benefits for even someone in the smallest rural town. The banks are not the sole focus, but they are certainly the focus of regulation so that we do not continue to hear about one legal issue after another that they are the focus of (manipulating energy prices, warehousing commodities, etc) AFTER WE JUST BAILED THEM OUT.
None of this has happened because no one can agree on anything and lobbyist/special interest money keep things from happening. You have senators who say, "Get to work, Mr. Bernanke", because they are not doing their job and seem as if they don't feel they really have to if the Fed does whatever it can think of. Asset prices have certainly done well with Fed action, but there are a remarkable amount of problems that haven't really been addressed at all.
Or we have gotten so bad with the tension between the two parties that one apparently doesn't know what to do aside from shut government down (which is a terrible tactic and I hope they see that they've accomplished zip.) We need to realize that this is a global economy and we need to encourage people to invest in the US, not make them think we've lost our minds with the way people act in government. Kicking the can down the road again and again isn't confidence-inducing, either.
What Jamie Dimon actually said on Bloomberg:
"Q. How worried are you that one morning the bond market has moved against the United States?
A. Its virtually assured, the question is when and how. I don't know if it will be two years of five years but it will happen. It is a matter of time, the United States cant borrow indefinitely. Over hundred years bankruptcies of country after country who thought they could get away with it because they had the reserve currency and the military power of the world. We are going to have fiscal discipline. Its imposed upon us or we do the right thing and do it to ourselves the right way.... America knows the way, it doesn't have the will."
Reply to @Old_Joe: I was a Coastie 1976-1980. I didn't know they had a station on Palawan. That is isolated indeed. Was that a LorSta? I do know they had a 180' buoy tender at Guam. I was at Kodiak for a spell on a 210 then the set of my tour at Newport Ore MLB station. Palawan is being promoted as a tourist destination now. They have some excellent beaches plus the underground river and other sites. There are some very nice resorts there now.
Yep the Bay area gets their fair share of shakes. I remember the Series quake from watching it on the television. Was that the one you were in?
Yeah, well. I guess. Obama wasn't going to give up any part of us baby and the Tea Party wing of the GOP in congress are mostly talking from safe gerry mandered seats so they really don't GAF . . . they're representing the folks that elected them.
In reading the discussion, what is curious is that there are people on this board that actually see a difference between republicans and democrats in washington. duh. Here's a clue peeps, there is no GD difference. None. Nada. There might be differences in their messages but absolutely none on their behavior and actions in washington.
GW1 blew up the deficit and Bubba fixed it and GW2 blew it up again. Obama is perhaps the biggest warmongering whore to ever be elected (oh, and I voted for hime twice). Bubba gave away the store to wall street which resulted in the meltdown of 2007/8. feh. Oh, and next we're getting Hillary and she'll be as bad (and I'll still probably vote for her).
Folks- politics is very similar to following the stock market. Remember what Gary Smith told us about 10 years ago? He never listens to CNBC but watches it without the volume. That way he reads the ticker tape and ignores the talking heads. With politics I would suggest everyone do the same thing . . . watch what they do NOT what they say.
"Folks- politics is very similar to following the stock market. Remember what Gary Smith told us about 10 years ago? He never listens to CNBC but watches it without the volume. That way he reads the ticker tape and ignores the talking heads. With politics I would suggest everyone do the same thing . . . watch what they do NOT what they say."
Thank you, exactly.
Additionally, dollar index breaking below 80 this morning. Just sayin'.
Since the shut down and debt ceiling are less likely to be used in the future (I think) they are going to have to negotiate. So what does that mean it means there is either going be more government spending or tax increases coupled with cuts or the gov. shuts down again.
Reply to @Hogan: "Since the shut down and debt ceiling are less likely to be used in the future (I think) they are going to have to negotiate"
They are? What about what just happened makes you think that these people are going to "play nice" and work together like adults? All this whole thing has accomplished is that we are going to have this whole discussion yet again first thing next year. El-Erian said it well: we did not come to a "grand bargain" of any sort. Nothing fundamentally changed politically in this country as a result of this.
We did this in 2011, we did this in 2013 and we will continue to do this again and again and again. We will govern this country from crisis to crisis because we have a government incapable moving beyond politics and lobbyists to making actual decisions about how to best move this country forward.
Fed gov Fisher - a hawk for years - now saying that "taper" possibilities have been swamped by the political situation.
And seriously, if CNBC figures a way to add "Rise Above" (well, gee, if moron CNBC anchors are saying it, maybe politicians will listen) into one more sentence I'm going to throw my TV out the window.
Reply to @scott & Hogan The Idealist in me says It depends a lot on "How it plays in Peoria." That's because generally in a Democracy politicians wish to remain in power. The Pragmatist in me, however, says Rono's less optimistic point of view is correct because many of these die-hards are entrenched in secure seats due to gerrymandering.
Years ago I was taught that our stable federal government was due largely to a strong two-party system, amenable to compromise. Whereas, at the time, many parliamentary governments in Europe were fractured into multi-party systems with resultant chaos. This is not without importance here, as some pundits have recently speculated we now have, in effect, a three party (and inherently less stable) system.
To the extent the second point is valid, it's likely associated with the general proliferation of "news" outlets thru radio, TV, the Internet, and even sites like this. These mediums are able to tap into powerful underlying human emotions in a way the older broad-stream outlets could not for fear of alienating other viewers and listeners. Strong-held personal beliefs and powerful emotions like fear, frustration, anger, envy, love and hate can when successfully "tapped" through a narrowly focused medium be channeled into powerful action (or in this case inaction).
In his 1964 study "Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man", media scholar Marshall McLuhan noted cryptically that '"The medium is the message." At the time the thesis was hotly debated. I suspect today it would meet a milder reception.
Note to Old Joe and John Chisum: I wouldn't worry too much about the Moderator here for reasons OJ stated. (But I would worry very much about TED - as we be way off topic:-)
Reply to @JohnChisum: Yes indeed to both questions: a LorSta on Palawan, and the Loma Prieta quake here in SF. Both very interesting experiences, to put it mildly. The CG and SF Public Safety were two really great jobs: a real sense of providing necessary and appreciated public service.
I absolutely loved Tarumpitao. Pristine beaches, beautiful reef snorkeling, great swimming, extremely friendly and helpful native folk. Our station looked right out on the South China Sea. To contrast the difference between Tarumpitao and any of the more populated areas, we didn't even have to lock the station nor stand sentry duty at night. We did our best to help the locals, and they certainly reciprocated. They lived in a small village about a half mile from the station. We all survived one major typhoon during the year that I was out there.
There were no roads out there at the time- the only way in or out was either by boat or by our 2-engine "gooney bird", which needed JATO bottles to assist on takeoff from our very short grass "runway". We generated all of our own electricity 24/7, using scruffy old generators which the Air Force sold the CG for $1.00 each. And they were worth every penny.
One amusing story: you will recall that the Coast Guard was originally founded to suppress smuggling (and tax evasion!) back in our early days. A small colony of smugglers lived a few miles away from us- they ran stuff mostly between Borneo and Palawan. They were our suppliers of charcoal for our weekend barbecues, and also our primary suppliers of liquor of varying description and quality. If I recall it was made by the Tanduay distillery, and almost everything they made tasted pretty much the same. Our San Miguel beer was actually legit- it was delivered by our supply plane, which came once every two weeks. If you remember the movie Mr. Roberts, we were pretty close.
Of course we reciprocated favors for the smugglers- we had the only repair facilities within at least a hundred miles for their little one-cylinder boats. A few of their boats received a makeshift repair or re-weld at our station. Of course "management" (a new and green lt. jg just out of the academy) knew exactly when to turn a blind eye to the activity. Live and let live... usually works just fine.
Comments
(sarcasm) So....I'm confused. What did the republicans get after all that? (/sarcasm)
Also - and this is sorta neither here-nor-there - I'm even less confident the much debated Keystone pipeline happens after this (as well as the Tesoro spill in a ND wheat field - http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/oct/10/north-dakota-tioga-tesoro-oil-spill)
Immigration reform is up next. It all depends on what the meaning of reform is.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/obama-says-push-immigration-fiscal-crisis-over-013802515.html
Take good care –
Kp http://www.kennypolcari.com/2013/10/16/morning-thoughtstwitter-calls-nyse-home-try-the-greek-style-slow-cooker-roast-turkey-breast/
No one can tell me what I'm saying is a conspiracy theory. Fact of the matter is, these guys DID vote rules are different for them. So THAT is a conspiracy.
REgards,
Ted
The only thing these politicians know how to do is spend taxpayers money, and they are not very good at that. Most of them couldn't get a real job. Notice that most at the end of their time in politics go to think tanks or other fluff positions?
In the end however, all this spending of money will have consequences. To think that our country accumulated $7 trillion of debt in all the previous administrations and now this one has the debt up to near $17 trillion shows that they don't care about consequences. Both sides are guilty. But it would be nice to have a President that would demand some control on the spending side. People were squawking that Bush spent so much, yet the 0 gets a free pass on his drunken sailor attitude. Rant Off
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/17/stock-act-change-insider-trading_n_3100115.html
And if I ever go to a shrink, he will have to pay me. Psychobabble is not free.
2001/2008- The major expenditures were for an unfunded and unnecessary war in Iraq, coupled with a simultaneous and unnecessary tax break for the wealthiest of Americans. And as a parting gift, a necessary commitment to borrow and spend to try and avert a second great depression. Now there's an example of stewardship!
2008/2013- One set of major expenditures continues: to wind down and hopefully exit from the unfunded wars helpfully left by the previous administration. The other major expenditure is to try and buy this country out of the second-worst depression in the history of the United States, also courtesy of the previous administration.
Do you understand the meaning of "a stacked deck"?? Do you even understand the meaning of "fairness"? How would you like to be president, inheriting a mess like that?
Senate Committee on the Budget - Patty Murray Chairman From her statement Oct 16th
:...as part of the agreement to end this crisis, Republicans have now finally agreed to the budget conference committee that I have been asking for over the last six months. I am looking forward to the big challenge that bridging the significant differences between the House and Senate budgets presents, I am absolutely committed to finding common ground, and I hope Republicans are too."
Senate Budget Chairwoman Patty Murray, D-Wash., and House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., were scheduled to meet for breakfast Thursday morning to begin the talks.
Give Ms Murray and Mr Ryan some advise!!
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?scp=1&sq=deficit puzzle&st=cse&_r=0
http://www.usdebtclock.org/index.html#
Are their enough centrists anywhere?
Representative Aaron Schock of Illinois said the lesson of the episode was that Boehner should cut out the far-right flank and work with centrist Democrats.
http://www.nationalreview.com/node/361432/print
Shooting blanks?
After enduring weeks of barbs by Democrats and even some fellow Republicans for picking a fight with President Barack Obama over the health law, some of the assembled conservatives were eager to return fire.
The Senate deal appears to guarantee more budget battles early next year because the government is only funded through mid-January and new borrowing authority ends early the following month. Questioned on what factors will be different next time, Mr. Jordan said, "The debt will be bigger and Obamacare will be more unpopular."
Asked if conservatives had formulated a strategy for future battles, Mr. Mulvaney quipped, "I didn't know what the strategy was the first time."
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304384104579139932536420554
"Now, obviously these are very difficult economic times. When people analyze the situation, there will be -- this problem started before my presidency, it obviously took place during my presidency. The question facing a President is not when the problem started, but what did you do about it when you recognized the problem. And I readily concede I chunked aside some of my free market principles when I was told by chief economic advisors that the situation we were facing could be worse than the Great Depression.
So I've told some of my friends who said -- you know, who have taken an ideological position on this issue -- why did you do what you did? I said, well, if you were sitting there and heard that the depression could be greater than the Great Depression, I hope you would act too, which I did."
Complete Transcript President George W. Bush, Final Press Conference, January 12, 2009: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/12/us/politics/12text-bush.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Closing numbers on Inauguration Day Jan. 20, 2009
S&P 500 Index: 805.22 ..... Dow Jones Industrial Average: 7949
I'm probably the only conservative on this site. If so, then there will be some interesting conversations going forward. I prefer not to have government interfere in my personal life. This 0-Care system will implode on its own and it has already started. There has been no effort to cut spending at all by this administration. To be fair, the Republicans haven't been eager to cut spending either.
The tax break for the wealthy? I got a tax break and most everyone I know that paid taxes got one. I don't consider myself wealthy but then again it all depends on what wealthy means. I don't mind paying taxes but what is a fair amount? The money today goes to social spending versus the days of old when it was for infrastructure. LBJ made the change to social spending with his War On Poverty which has not changed anything. Trillions of dollars spent and there are still poor people in America. That is something that will not change.
The biggest change has been the attitude of society that they have to take advantage of the situation when they can like getting SSD when you are not disabled. How many people are getting benefits that really do not need them. The truly poor are getting hurt by those scamming the government for their own benefit. We complain about the politicians and there is plenty to complain about. The politicians mirror society in personal greed.
The built in hatred for G.W. Bush continues long after he has left office. But as long as 0bama continues to throw money at the government dependent class, he is revered as king.
I leave it here as we are getting way off topic. I don't want to get on the bad side of the moderators.
Sir: I have cited specifics, and noted sources. You have chosen to reply with recycled Tea-Party cant, as opposed to reasoned argument.
Yes or No: Was the budget reasonably balanced when the administration of 2001 began?
Yes or No: Did the public debt essentially double under the presidency of GW Bush?
Yes or No: Was there a rational or justifiable reason for starting a war in Iraq?
Yes or No: Was that war in Iraq funded?
Yes or No: In light of the expenses involved in that war do you really believe that it was prudent to simultaneously diminish the federal tax base?
Yes or No: Did the economy drop off the cliff while the other party was running things?
Yes or No: Do you really believe that after 2008 our government should have just sat back and watched to see what might happen? That does, after all, seem to be the perspective of many partisans of the GOP. Especially of those who happen to be themselves financially secure- a position certainly not universal to the average citizen.
You will note that I have not suggested that the other party was responsible for the "great recession". I believe that there is plenty of blame to spread around with respect to the underlying causes. The question then becomes: What, if anything, are you prepared to do to attempt to stabilize the situation? At least Mr. Bush was able to understand that, and Mr. Obama attempted to continue in that regard.
As I recently observed in another thread I really prefer not to initiate discussions on MFO which have major political overtones. But I sure as hell am not going to sit here and let you people rant, rave and froth at the mouth without giving back as good as you dish out. The recent two weeks have pretty well laid out who is trying to do what to whom. Spin isn't going to cover that up.
There is certainly an observable consistency to this sort of thing: let's just say anything that we feel like and if we encounter resistance then claim that "we are getting off topic". WHO, sir, was the first to "get off topic"?
With respect to our moderators, by circumstance they are exceptionally well equipped to recognize propaganda when they see it. It is to their credit that they allow exchanges such as this: they obviously believe that the folks here on MFO are capable of sorting out facts for themselves. And we are.
Between this and strong aftershocks rattling the house, my nerves are a bit frayed so best to take a break and stick to investing which seems to be a safer topic. We had a 7.2 earthquake here a couple of days ago and I am very close to the epicenter. I live on that same island in fact. Life goes on.
Good luck - stay safe.
Another poster brought this up (sorry, I forget who - TSP?) and THIS should be wayyyy more concerning than the tea party.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2458372/Michael-Needham-The-31-year-old-Stanford-grad-planned-government-shutdown.html
You realize that these sort of lobbying groups - and one in this case run by some 31-year-old (I mean, holy ****)- are really running (or buying) the show across the board. The money flowing into politics from lobbyists and other special interests is to the point where it's very concerning.
It's not that they should have sat back and done nothing and not everything is so black or white. There should have been a major plan focused on the majority - spending on education, spending on infrastructure in order to keep us competitive and efficient (smart grid, high speed rail, among a gillion other things.) We sit down and figure out healthcare in a way that is acceptable and transparent and people understand WTF it means to them and that big pharma doesn't just win big again after years of doing so.
We figure out college. They have been skyrocketing and the idea that anyone can get a loan has lead to colleges realizing they can boost tuition however they like. How you fix that not something that I can think of as 6am, but one: you have people who are coming out of college with tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt and they both have difficulty paying it off and can't imagine doing things like buying a house. You have an increasing amount of defaults and other issues and many have called student loans the next subprime. It's not surprising that some banks have pulled back from offering student loans.
JP Morgan to stop offering student loans: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/05/us-jpmorgan-studentloans-idUSBRE9840QJ20130905
Mark Cuban's excellent discussion of the issue: http://blogmaverick.com/2012/05/13/the-coming-meltdown-in-college-education-why-the-economy-wont-get-better-any-time-soon/
Interest rates low, but you have a government that comes out and says, we need to spend and we need to lift the whole country up. We have spent tons of money on various conflicts outside the country, we need to spend money on creating an environment in which everyone from those in the largest cities to the smallest town can have the tools to succeed (Big Moving Speech.) Agriculture is the one thing that we export a lot of, how can we upgrade our agricultural infrastructure? How can we encourage more modern forms of agriculture in major cities? It's amazing what people are doing in terms of urban ag these days.
We need to encourage technology in this country, possibly with a focus on specialized education and tax credits for startups, encouraging the creation of more than just one "Silicon Valley" in this country.
We need an energy policy. One that encourages safe exploration within this country and works with Canada, who is certainly a politically stable, friendly neighbor. Not everything can be green - there is a place for that but it cannot be everything. You have a ton of companies who are retrofitting their vehicles to run on nat gas (Waste Management) Are we encouraging that? Are we creating infrastructure (stations, etc) for that? Retail chains are putting solar panels on their roofs - how can we encourage that sort of large-scale (and straightforward and really not even particularly visible) adoption?
Maybe we could get a maple syrup pipeline made too. Instead of Keystone XL, it's Keystone DL (Delicious).
We need to spend money on security of important infrastructure and otherwise in this country instead of spending money on conflicts elsewhere around the world.
We sit down with other countries and create an atmosphere of "We're all in this together" cooperation rather than telling other countries what to do. Again, upgrade our infrastructure to encourage the smooth flow of goods/commerce/etc in/out of the country. How can we get goods to market here and abroad cheaper, faster?
We need a "Today's Deal" and you can call it "A New Dawn in America" or some other cheesy title, but it focuses on creating tangible benefits for even someone in the smallest rural town. The banks are not the sole focus, but they are certainly the focus of regulation so that we do not continue to hear about one legal issue after another that they are the focus of (manipulating energy prices, warehousing commodities, etc) AFTER WE JUST BAILED THEM OUT.
None of this has happened because no one can agree on anything and lobbyist/special interest money keep things from happening. You have senators who say, "Get to work, Mr. Bernanke", because they are not doing their job and seem as if they don't feel they really have to if the Fed does whatever it can think of. Asset prices have certainly done well with Fed action, but there are a remarkable amount of problems that haven't really been addressed at all.
Or we have gotten so bad with the tension between the two parties that one apparently doesn't know what to do aside from shut government down (which is a terrible tactic and I hope they see that they've accomplished zip.) We need to realize that this is a global economy and we need to encourage people to invest in the US, not make them think we've lost our minds with the way people act in government. Kicking the can down the road again and again isn't confidence-inducing, either.
What Jamie Dimon actually said on Bloomberg:
"Q. How worried are you that one morning the bond market has moved against the United States?
A. Its virtually assured, the question is when and how. I don't know if it will be two years of five years but it will happen. It is a matter of time, the United States cant borrow indefinitely. Over hundred years bankruptcies of country after country who thought they could get away with it because they had the reserve currency and the military power of the world. We are going to have fiscal discipline. Its imposed upon us or we do the right thing and do it to ourselves the right way.... America knows the way, it doesn't have the will."
Yep the Bay area gets their fair share of shakes. I remember the Series quake from watching it on the television. Was that the one you were in?
Semper Paratus.
Yeah, well. I guess. Obama wasn't going to give up any part of us baby and the Tea Party wing of the GOP in congress are mostly talking from safe gerry mandered seats so they really don't GAF . . . they're representing the folks that elected them.
In reading the discussion, what is curious is that there are people on this board that actually see a difference between republicans and democrats in washington. duh. Here's a clue peeps, there is no GD difference. None. Nada. There might be differences in their messages but absolutely none on their behavior and actions in washington.
GW1 blew up the deficit and Bubba fixed it and GW2 blew it up again. Obama is perhaps the biggest warmongering whore to ever be elected (oh, and I voted for hime twice). Bubba gave away the store to wall street which resulted in the meltdown of 2007/8. feh. Oh, and next we're getting Hillary and she'll be as bad (and I'll still probably vote for her).
Folks- politics is very similar to following the stock market. Remember what Gary Smith told us about 10 years ago? He never listens to CNBC but watches it without the volume. That way he reads the ticker tape and ignores the talking heads. With politics I would suggest everyone do the same thing . . . watch what they do NOT what they say.
and so it goes,
peace,
rono
"Folks- politics is very similar to following the stock market. Remember what Gary Smith told us about 10 years ago? He never listens to CNBC but watches it without the volume. That way he reads the ticker tape and ignores the talking heads. With politics I would suggest everyone do the same thing . . . watch what they do NOT what they say."
Thank you, exactly.
Additionally, dollar index breaking below 80 this morning. Just sayin'.
They are? What about what just happened makes you think that these people are going to "play nice" and work together like adults? All this whole thing has accomplished is that we are going to have this whole discussion yet again first thing next year. El-Erian said it well: we did not come to a "grand bargain" of any sort. Nothing fundamentally changed politically in this country as a result of this.
We did this in 2011, we did this in 2013 and we will continue to do this again and again and again. We will govern this country from crisis to crisis because we have a government incapable moving beyond politics and lobbyists to making actual decisions about how to best move this country forward.
Fed gov Fisher - a hawk for years - now saying that "taper" possibilities have been swamped by the political situation.
And seriously, if CNBC figures a way to add "Rise Above" (well, gee, if moron CNBC anchors are saying it, maybe politicians will listen) into one more sentence I'm going to throw my TV out the window.
Years ago I was taught that our stable federal government was due largely to a strong two-party system, amenable to compromise. Whereas, at the time, many parliamentary governments in Europe were fractured into multi-party systems with resultant chaos. This is not without importance here, as some pundits have recently speculated we now have, in effect, a three party (and inherently less stable) system.
To the extent the second point is valid, it's likely associated with the general proliferation of "news" outlets thru radio, TV, the Internet, and even sites like this. These mediums are able to tap into powerful underlying human emotions in a way the older broad-stream outlets could not for fear of alienating other viewers and listeners. Strong-held personal beliefs and powerful emotions like fear, frustration, anger, envy, love and hate can when successfully "tapped" through a narrowly focused medium be channeled into powerful action (or in this case inaction).
In his 1964 study "Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man", media scholar Marshall McLuhan noted cryptically that '"The medium is the message." At the time the thesis was hotly debated. I suspect today it would meet a milder reception.
Note to Old Joe and John Chisum: I wouldn't worry too much about the Moderator here for reasons OJ stated. (But I would worry very much about TED - as we be way off topic:-)
I
Reply to @scott: Ted October 15 FlagReply
Scott: Time to turn off the TV !
Regards,
Ted
I absolutely loved Tarumpitao. Pristine beaches, beautiful reef snorkeling, great swimming, extremely friendly and helpful native folk. Our station looked right out on the South China Sea. To contrast the difference between Tarumpitao and any of the more populated areas, we didn't even have to lock the station nor stand sentry duty at night. We did our best to help the locals, and they certainly reciprocated. They lived in a small village about a half mile from the station. We all survived one major typhoon during the year that I was out there.
There were no roads out there at the time- the only way in or out was either by boat or by our 2-engine "gooney bird", which needed JATO bottles to assist on takeoff from our very short grass "runway". We generated all of our own electricity 24/7, using scruffy old generators which the Air Force sold the CG for $1.00 each. And they were worth every penny.
One amusing story: you will recall that the Coast Guard was originally founded to suppress smuggling (and tax evasion!) back in our early days. A small colony of smugglers lived a few miles away from us- they ran stuff mostly between Borneo and Palawan. They were our suppliers of charcoal for our weekend barbecues, and also our primary suppliers of liquor of varying description and quality. If I recall it was made by the Tanduay distillery, and almost everything they made tasted pretty much the same. Our San Miguel beer was actually legit- it was delivered by our supply plane, which came once every two weeks. If you remember the movie Mr. Roberts, we were pretty close.
Of course we reciprocated favors for the smugglers- we had the only repair facilities within at least a hundred miles for their little one-cylinder boats. A few of their boats received a makeshift repair or re-weld at our station. Of course "management" (a new and green lt. jg just out of the academy) knew exactly when to turn a blind eye to the activity. Live and let live... usually works just fine.
Semper Paratus, indeed!