The way we were

or Register to post new content in the forum

122 RepliesJump to last post

 

Comments

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Oct 25, 2010 11:48 am

One week and one day to go before we flip control to the republicans in the House. Probably not a bad thing. Still, it's hard to understand why anyone would vote for the party that got us into this mess. And, has stood as rock in the road blocking getting us out.

Who was it that said  "Never under estimate the gullibility of the American public"

The tea baggers remain as confused as always. Less taxes, less government, but still inspect my food, protect my butt, and don't touch my medicare!! As sad as it is, it's good entertainment!

I'll vote for the repub for congress even though the former NFL player is as dumb as a stump. The dem choice is just too slimmy and by my figuring, with narrow repub house, and dem senate, what damage could this guy do in two years?

Oct 25, 2010 12:02 pm

Blaming one party for the mess we're in, is like assigning the blame for a failed marriage upon one spouse. Hardly...

If you believe that taking a Trillion dollars from the skin of the public, while creating zero jobs an accomplishment, you're much smarter than I am apparently.

Who's not to say that the voting public wasn't gullible in electing Obama, who had an extremely weak resume for the oval office?

Tea Baggers, ok, what makes you think that Federal Spending is so lean and mean, that it's beyond scrutiny? Our federal budget is incredibly bloated, doesn't take a rocket scientist to clearly see that, does it?

Interesting, maybe telling, that you'd vote for a Republican in this election. Imagine what all these 2-3 yr unemployed folks think about all this? Again, they're aware of massive federal spending, and they cannot even get a full time job as a greeter at Walmart?

What really gets me, is that California, with 12% unemployment, is going to most likely re elect the same group of folks yet again....The definition of insanity...

Oct 25, 2010 2:26 pm

[quote=BigFirepower]

Blaming one party for the mess we're in, is like assigning the blame for a failed marriage upon one spouse. Hardly...

The repubs controlled the house and Senate from 95 throufh 2007. They controlled the house senate and white house from 2001 through 2008. I've fingered the culprit.

If you believe that taking a Trillion dollars from the skin of the public, while creating zero jobs an accomplishment, you're much smarter than I am apparently.

Show me the money? If you mean the stim packege, much rev neutral and is in tax cuts. In fact 300 billion of the stim pack is in tax cuts. But don't tell any of this to the tea baggers. Appartently having to do math pisses them off. Just easier for them to rant.

Excluding tax cuts from obama the tea baggers are for tax cuts.

Who's not to say that the voting public wasn't gullible in electing Obama, who had an extremely weak resume for the oval office?

The gullibility of the american public can measured by those who think it is realistic that the economy turns on a dime. Just because Sarah Palin beleives that's the way it works doesn't make it so.

Tea Baggers, ok, what makes you think that Federal Spending is so lean and mean, that it's beyond scrutiny? Our federal budget is incredibly bloated, doesn't take a rocket scientist to clearly see that, does it?

I don't think it is lean and mean or should be beyond our scrutiny. But, for my entire adult life it has been beyond scrutiny. Most of that time a repub has been in the white house. No laying that on Obama.

How much of bloated budget is due to Iraq war debt?

Tea baggers want less spending but are clueless on what the actual spending is. The repubs, knowing economies don't turn on a dime are cashing in on the nations' pain because we are still feeling the effects of the crash. Political ads are running on every station that claim the bailouts are the problem. That, though the bailouts are over and proved to be rev neutral. The ads are dishonest. Yet, if the ads work, the dishonest will get into office. That's the type of thinking that got us into  this mess. The repubs are shameless at snookering their own faithful with this bullshit. "Tell em a lie, they're to stupid to figure it out for themselves.' And they are right.

 

Interesting, maybe telling, that you'd vote for a Republican in this election. Imagine what all these 2-3 yr unemployed folks think about all this? Again, they're aware of massive federal spending, and they cannot even get a full time job as a greeter at Walmart?

What massive fed spending? please expain in detail, including if spending will be money good at end.

What really gets me, is that California, with 12% unemployment, is going to most likely re elect the same group of folks yet again....The definition of insanity...

The problem in california is that the major repub candidates laid off a lot of people in their past lives as corp chieftains. That's just doesn't sit well. On a positive note for Californians, the Giants got past the Phillies. Californians should bask in that victory in the short time before they get crushed by Texas.   

[/quote]

Oct 25, 2010 2:04 pm

Wow BG, where to start? "The problem in California is that the major repub candidates laid off a lot of people in their past lives as corp chieftans" Are you serious?! I have family in California and I have spent a significant amount of time in that state and I can tell you that your statement doesn't even register on the scale when one is trying to determine the problems in California. California is a liberal test lab that is in meltdown. Here's a few for you: onerous taxes and regulation compared to other states, rampant spending (if spending were to be adjusted for population increases and inflation from the late 70's when prop 13 was passed the state would be running a surplus), and generous public employee pension benefits. Servicing the pensions and health benefits for a bloated public sector in California is going to eat up increasingly large amounts of the California state budget. You've got 3 police forces in San Diego: the current force, the one that just retired, and the one that retired before that. The pension benefits many of these middle-class employees receive are the equivalent of a worker in their mid 50's having a 1mm retirement plan.  This is unsustainable. Finally, my liberal friend, the story that ices the cake is what is happening with the water situation in the state. Farmers in the central valley are being devestated as water supplies are being cut off to save the poor delta smelt. Yes, the delta smelt, an unedible, ugly fish that is about as long as your middle finger.

Oct 25, 2010 2:32 pm

Bond Guy, if you take the most liberal voting cities in the USA, then look at their economies, quality of life, you see murder and mayhem simply rule the day. Fine, blame all the white folk for leaving places like Detroit, Philly, what have you, but those places HAVE INDEED been run into the ground by liberals. But hey, to each his own, and if it is any satisfaction to you, the liberals are winning the war on america. Pretty soon, we'll be just one big socialist happy family...

Oct 25, 2010 4:47 pm

[quote=BigFirepower]

Bond Guy, if you take the most liberal voting cities in the USA, then look at their economies, quality of life, you see murder and mayhem simply rule the day. Fine, blame all the white folk for leaving places like Detroit, Philly, what have you, but those places HAVE INDEED been run into the ground by liberals. But hey, to each his own, and if it is any satisfaction to you, the liberals are winning the war on america. Pretty soon, we'll be just one big socialist happy family...

[/quote]

Big, you didn't answer the question: Show me the money? You can't go around complaining about government spending without understanding just what is government spending. Well, that is unless you're a tea party candidate trying to get elected and your core voter is as dumb as you are.

Philadelphia has been run into the ground? Are you on drugs? Didn't you watch the Phillies eat it in the NLCS? Looking at that new stadium in Philadelphia, just how run into the ground did Philly look? Philly has the fourth highest GDP of any american city, behind NYC, LA, and Chicago. And, while race may be an issue for you it's not an issue in Philly where there has been no 'White Flight."

Big, where did you get this misinformation? Please tell me you are smarter than this.

Oh, and BTW, Philly's budget, balanced! And, balanced by a tough as nails black democrat mayor! Go figure!

Oct 25, 2010 4:55 pm

I'm not into this politics talk generally speaking, not here anyways. I'm here to discuss RR issues. It's the "as dumb as you are" type stuff I can do without.

Come on Bond Guy, don't resort to that stuff.

Anyways, enough politics...

Oct 25, 2010 5:03 pm

[quote=FA86]

Wow BG, where to start? "The problem in California is that the major repub candidates laid off a lot of people in their past lives as corp chieftans" Are you serious?! I have family in California and I have spent a significant amount of time in that state and I can tell you that your statement doesn't even register on the scale when one is trying to determine the problems in California. California is a liberal test lab that is in meltdown. Here's a few for you: onerous taxes and regulation compared to other states, rampant spending (if spending were to be adjusted for population increases and inflation from the late 70's when prop 13 was passed the state would be running a surplus), and generous public employee pension benefits. Servicing the pensions and health benefits for a bloated public sector in California is going to eat up increasingly large amounts of the California state budget. You've got 3 police forces in San Diego: the current force, the one that just retired, and the one that retired before that. The pension benefits many of these middle-class employees receive are the equivalent of a worker in their mid 50's having a 1mm retirement plan.  This is unsustainable. Finally, my liberal friend, the story that ices the cake is what is happening with the water situation in the state. Farmers in the central valley are being devestated as water supplies are being cut off to save the poor delta smelt. Yes, the delta smelt, an unedible, ugly fish that is about as long as your middle finger.

[/quote]

The Delta Smelt is an indicator speicies. Look it up. How the fish looks and it's size have nothing to do with the factors surrounding it's survival. Past that, california's problems, which i will agree are many, are not purely the making of liberal democratic lawmakers. That the repub drumbeat of "look at this mess" isn't working in california shouldn't surprise anyone. The electoriate is well educated and things have been a mess for a long time. So, less inclined to buy the lie. On top of that my point sits that rich woman who lay people off and get bonuses to do so isn't going to sit well in a state with 12% unemployment.

Oct 25, 2010 5:47 pm

You're attacking the least potent argument I make. And yes, California's problems - which can take bipartisan credit - are largely the result of a rubber stamp legislature and governorship. Take the parties out of it and it becomes more simple. Excessive spending and very poor assumptions made over the past few decades have made California a mess. It just so happens that the Republicans have got religion (i.e. are now self-proclaimed budget-hawks). I'll vote for that religion every time. The point of a well-educated electorate means nothing. Fact of the matter is California is a cesspool. I love many things about the state but at this point would not dream of moving my wife and I back there given the political/economic climate.

Oct 26, 2010 1:27 pm

[quote=BigFirepower]

I'm not into this politics talk generally speaking, not here anyways. I'm here to discuss RR issues. It's the "as dumb as you are" type stuff I can do without.

Come on Bond Guy, don't resort to that stuff.

Anyways, enough politics...

[/quote]

Big, i don't think you are dumb. I view you as a positive contributor. That said, for a guy who doesn't want to talk politics, you responded to a purely politcal thread.

Follow me here, and i'll explain dumb:

We, as in most financail advisors had a front row seat to the debacle two years ago. This special seating gave us a below deck look at the real damage done to the bond and credit markets. That view afforded us a view of reality that wasn't taking place top side in first class. While those people were vaguely aware of a problem they were not aware of how critically stricken we were. To top that off,  they were being told that those who knew the truth, that the ship was going to sink in very short order, were chicken littles. But, down in the bowls of the ship, we saw the damage and knew the truth. We knew past a miracle we were done! Life as we knew it was over. For that reason there are few advisors who will deny that the bailouts and stimulous were needed.

AS we move along the time line, low and behold, the bailouts worked! As it turns out they are largely revenue neutral, or close enough. Stimulous in the form of tax breaks, and credits have helped keep the economy from a full blown depression. Other stimulous has saved an estimated 1,000,000 jobs, which in turn pumps the economy. Taken in total, the stim package with bailout included have saved our collective butts from a lot of misery. And, they have turned out to be almost revenue neutral.

Again we move along the time line. We are in a deep recession or just climbing out of one. The nation is in pain. High unemployment, shuttered businesses, foreclosure nightmare. Lots of pain. Again, as students of economics, we as advisors know that economies don't turn on a dime, and don't heal over night. it can take two years to recover from a moderate recession. Deep recession could take four, five, or more years. We know this, as does every student of economics.

Move further along the time line. What is the messege of almost every tea party and republican attack ad? The messege is all the wastefull spending going on in Washington. The messege is the stimulous package IS the problem. The bailouts are the reason for the pain. Just listen to those ads. The Repubs and Tea Partiers have demonized the very programs that saved our butts. They've taken a positive and turned it into a negative. The people who voted for these programs did the right thing. Now, they are characterized as hurting us. The people who did the right thing and saved this country are going to get voted out of office. That's not right. These ads are lies. They are dishonest.

Ok, gee, a dishonest politcal ad, dah!  What's the big deal? The big deal is this: Most advertising plays on human nature. That is, the trusting nature of most people to give you the benefit of a doubt. You say you won't raise taxes, OK,  i'll trust you at your word here's my vote. However, this year's crop of ads is different. How? They are playing on the uniformed non thinking way of the target audience. They are playing on the fact  most of their audience accepts their version of reality and why there is so much pain today. They know that most of their audience isn't paying attention and isn't thinking for themselves. it's a" we know the truth, but they don't, so the truth is what ever we tell them it is." And, the truth they are telling is a lie.

If you doubt this, when you hear the next attack ad today demonizing the bailouts and stimulous ask yourself this question: Who is the intended audience for that ad? Certainly not those who think for themselves. Certainly not the informed who saw life as they knew it pass before their eyes two years ago and know the truth. Who does that leave?

So, instead of counting on the good side of human nature to carry them to office, they are counting on their audience remaining a nation of sheep. They are playing on their stupidity. Regardless of your politcal leanings, that's just wrong.

Oct 26, 2010 1:53 pm

[quote=FA86]

You're attacking the least potent argument I make. And yes, California's problems - which can take bipartisan credit - are largely the result of a rubber stamp legislature and governorship. Take the parties out of it and it becomes more simple. Excessive spending and very poor assumptions made over the past few decades have made California a mess. It just so happens that the Republicans have got religion (i.e. are now self-proclaimed budget-hawks). I'll vote for that religion every time. The point of a well-educated electorate means nothing. Fact of the matter is California is a cesspool. I love many things about the state but at this point would not dream of moving my wife and I back there given the political/economic climate.

[/quote]

Being a budget hawk is the next new new thing. it's what's selling these days in the political marketplace. In my state it's the same messege. Yet, considering the repubs played at least an equal roll in my state for creating the budget probelm only those born yesterday are buying into that message.

We;'ve got the same probelms, pensions killing us, out of control state employee unions etc. To top it off we get to throw several billion down the toilet every year on a failed education plan. The state tried to back out and the courts said no. Taken together this gives us the highest property taxes in the nation. So, when it comes to waste cry me a river! Been there, done that, got the T shirt.

My original answer to you goes to why a rich, and well funded repub may not get the nod.

Oct 26, 2010 2:16 pm

BG, when you call someone dumb, you willingly give up your moral gravity.

Any party or discussion that ignores the fact that we are broke - is wasting precious energy.

The political establishment is about directing power and living in the big house. It will be positively influenced by the Tea Party, which will itself become corrupted by power and money.

Real wealth comes from empathy for others and doing a responsible job taking care of the people around you.

BG, since you are wealthy, you cannot separate the observer and the observed. Only poverty would give you objectivity. You can't "win" the debate. Your dog in the fight looks more like the Bill Gates foundation, which is itself distorting some private private economies. There is no end to the causality of big government, big business, big politics, big media, overpopulation ... conservative economics just gives us a little more dignity. Watch California melt down, and you'll see some real low class "liberal" "caring" behaviors - this is going to get ugly.

Oct 26, 2010 2:32 pm

[quote=BondGuy]

[/quote]

AS we move along the time line, low and behold, the bailouts worked! As it turns out they are largely revenue neutral, or close enough. Stimulous in the form of tax breaks, and credits have helped keep the economy from a full blown depression. Other stimulous has saved an estimated 1,000,000 jobs, which in turn pumps the economy. Taken in total, the stim package with bailout included have saved our collective butts from a lot of misery. And, they have turned out to be almost revenue neutral.

[/quote]

BondGuy, don't believe the Fed's line about them making money on the bailout and how it didn't "cost" anything. You know better than that. Of course it cost a ton, otherwise the Fed wouldn't being hiding the details of the purchases and gifts to Wall Street firms and banks.

Here's a VERY interesting article that'll take you to Bloomberg News http://www.businessinsider.com/banks-fed-appeal-document-release-high-court-bailout-2010-10.  Remember, Bloomberg sued the Fed under an FOIA request, wanting to know what the Fed paid for those MBS assets and all as part of the bailout. - This is the Fed saying a big F-You to Bloomberg and to the American public.

It's easy to make up results (the bailout didn't cost anything) when there is no transparency, or honesty.

I'd be called a skeptic, except the things I'm skeptical about being crooked, are.

Oct 26, 2010 3:16 pm

[quote=BBQ]

[quote=BondGuy]

[/quote]

AS we move along the time line, low and behold, the bailouts worked! As it turns out they are largely revenue neutral, or close enough. Stimulous in the form of tax breaks, and credits have helped keep the economy from a full blown depression. Other stimulous has saved an estimated 1,000,000 jobs, which in turn pumps the economy. Taken in total, the stim package with bailout included have saved our collective butts from a lot of misery. And, they have turned out to be almost revenue neutral.

[/quote]

BondGuy, don't believe the Fed's line about them making money on the bailout and how it didn't "cost" anything. You know better than that. Of course it cost a ton, otherwise the Fed wouldn't being hiding the details of the purchases and gifts to Wall Street firms and banks.

Here's a VERY interesting article that'll take you to Bloomberg News http://www.businessinsider.com/banks-fed-appeal-document-release-high-court-bailout-2010-10.  Remember, Bloomberg sued the Fed under an FOIA request, wanting to know what the Fed paid for those MBS assets and all as part of the bailout. - This is the Fed saying a big F-You to Bloomberg and to the American public.

It's easy to make up results (the bailout didn't cost anything) when there is no transparency, or honesty.

I'd be called a skeptic, except the things I'm skeptical about being crooked, are.

[/quote]

The total cost of the bailouts is about 60 billion. That's with a some money still on the streets. The lawsuit is about the mechanics of the bailouts, who got what, when, not the total cost.

The point is the bailouts saved us from a depression. The people in office who did the right thing and voted for the bailouts are now going to get voted out based on a lie. How does that sit with you? Those who will replace them will be there because they misled their core supporters. How's that sit with you?

That being the case, i don't blame you for being a skeptic.

Oct 26, 2010 3:31 pm

BG - I agree with most of what you said about the bailouts/stimulus.  They were necessary and the people who voted for them did the right thing.  Mostly. 

I typically find myself agreeing in theory to most of what the Tea Party stands for, but I find myself recently getting frustrated that their arguments, like that of Glenn Beck and Fox News, are so blatantly one sided.  I think it's a dangerous thing to have one party in control of everything.  We just keep swinging that pendulum too far back and forth for my tastes. 

With that said, I believe you are incorrect in your assumption that the people who voted for the stimulus need to stay in office.  It's not just the stimulus bills that upset the average Tea Party or conservative voter.  It's the billions upon billions of dollars spent in ways that they think the federal government really shouldn't be spending money.  Their views are that the federal government should be limited in scope.  They want the power to go back to the individual states and local governments.  Why is it the federal government's job to make sure that we all have health care?  Why is it the federal government's job to make sure there is clean energy?  Why is it the federal government's job to make sure there's a chicken in every pot?  The constitution gives very limited authority to the Congress and even less to the Senate.  We've gotten well past that limited authority. 

It seems to me that the folks in Washington right now aren't really concerned about what the federal government's job really should be.  They're concerned with trying to make sure that more and more people are sucking at the federal teat and making sure that those people believe that the only place they can go for "help" is back to that federal teat.  And whose money are they using to "help" those folks? 

That's what pisses off so many Tea Party and conservative voters.  The current legislators don't have a clue how much money they're spending,  where it's coming from, or in the end where it's going.  The only recourse they have is to vote out those people who they perceive as guilty, whether by association or not, and vote in those candidates who they believe have the country's best interest at heart.  Time will tell whether they voted correctly or not. 

Oct 26, 2010 6:17 pm

The Republicans who voted for it probably won't get voted out.

Oct 27, 2010 11:25 am

Space - that's a good post. And, i agree with much about what you're saying regarding DC's spending. The problem is, the hole we now find ourselves in took almost a decade to dig. Most of that hole was dug by the republican controlled house, senate, and white house. In fact very little has been dug by the current congress. They didn't create the problem. Yet, they are getting the blame.

 The  cry from the Tea Party is decidedly partisan. Only the dems are to blame. You point to Beck as one example.  Of course, the TP had to target some repubs earlier in the year to gain access to the national election. You will note they didn't target any dems in the primarys. That's because the dems are at the center of their bullseye.

The reason the dems are center of the target  is that this election isn't about money/spending/deficits or anything else. It's about power. Republican power. The means to an end- cashing in the nation's pain by fraudulently  framing the bailouts and stimulous AS the root of the problem. They are hitting the hot button in peoples lives and selling them a bag of lies.

The TP is playing the public like they're suckers. Glen Beck is one of the master manipulators.

And, it's working.

The liars will in control in January 2011. How does that make you feel about the direction of the country? People who played you for a mope running the country?

Regardless of whether you believe the dems should stay in power or not, that should give you pause.

Oct 27, 2010 11:45 am

Well, in the end, we have elections. Unfortunately, who knows how honest these elections will be.

Illinois is trying to screw overseas military ballots, the SEIU is in charge of voting machines in Nevada, a relative of Reid is in charge of elections, his name seems to be a default when voters show up, in other places the ballot is popping up straight dem ticket, and then of course we have the Dems doing everything possible to deter laws that require voters show ID or prove citizenship...

I'd love to see a liberal spin the last part. How on earth can any honest person be opposed to voters proving that they are eligible to vote?? I have to show ID to buy alcohol or tobacco, but in most places it is ILLEGAL to ask for id or proof of citizenship.

America has seen the true Democrat party, just like they did under Jimmy Carter. Democrats are essentially Euro type Socialists, that believe no problem cannot be solved without the heavy hand of the Federal Government. Well, sometimes folks need to be reminded, and now they have. So, the party of lesser evil will be voted back into power, and the GOP gets a chance to redeem themselves. The GOP needs to address illegal aliens, vote fraud, and ensure that America allows its own citizens the ability to create and grow small business. 

The GOP will not take the Senate, there simply aren't enough contests being run. But they should pick up a majority of Gov offices, and the House of reps. Several states should swing hard right. No matter how successful the GOP is on Tuesday, you can be 100% sure that it will be spun as some sort of loss by the big media.  

Oct 27, 2010 11:55 am

It may be comforting for you to keep the debate focused on the right-left dynamic, but the real issues are things like entitlements, debt, regulations and the obstacles to innovation (for example, change in education in the public schools).

Tea Partiers are sick of corruption, big government, sending tax money to government union pension funds, obstacles to expanding small business.

You keep trying to define the playing field in terms of traditional politics, but there is a fundamental shift and resentment about things like: government jobs can pay better than private (if you can even get a private sector job), taxes are a huge percentage of gross income ( property taxes too high as a percentage of mortgage payments), it costs too much to add another employee, personal health care premiums just increased 18%, with another huge increase slated for January, in response to the new requirements.

These considerations are far removed from the sheltered luxury of your comfortable Wall Street financed magnanimous perch. You don't really know what's going on out in the trenches, you come off as being sheltered and aloof, like O's army of overeducated and soft handed theorists. You like to argue the details, and ignore the hard facts like: people need to work longer, government unions need to take pension cuts, the private sector needs to increase while the public decreases,  health care costs need to be controlled by allowing more private competition and reducing entitlements ( not popular with broke baby boomers).

Oct 27, 2010 12:11 pm

Times7, very well stated. 

Our country needs to head into the direction of less regulation, less nanny state, smaller government. Good Americans are tired of picking up the tab when it comes to pitiful Americans that don't work, criminals, do drugs, no taxes, live irresponsible lives. This new Healthcare Government Take Over, is basically the biggest federal heist of all time, in the history of the world.  Unchallenged, it will make our health care WORSE, and bankrupt us even faster than what we're doing right now. The UK has just cut substantially into their Federal Budget, it's high time we do this as well.