The Stock Market is Racist

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]Bambi wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Bambi wrote:

[quote]dk44 wrote:

[quote]Bambi wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
I think we can all admire Obama for keeping his word. He said he was going to bring change and he did!
[/quote]

Do you believe that Obama had any major role in causing this rout? Please explain your reasoning.[/quote]

Do you believe he didn’t? Please explain your reasoning.

[/quote]

This is for Zeb as well

I asked because I am unaware of the intricacies of US fiscal policy - coverage here in the UK is simplistic, biased, and it is hard to find a reliable source. I do not think Obama has a clean pair of hands; on the contrary I think he is powerless. While his policies may have exacerbated a decline, I do not believe they are single-handedly responsible.

The reason? Look globally. All across the world this week there have been catastrophic falls in world stock market. In Germany, where they passed a stimulus package which helped small businesses and are generally considered to have the best economy in Europe, stocks are down massively. In the UK, where they passed a stimulus and have since then adopted stringent austerity policies - something many have since emulated - the FTSE is down 10%. This is true of countries all over the world with varying fiscal situations, who have had stimuli focusing on small business or no stimulus, who have passed austerity measures or not. Nowhere is a safe haven. Hell, Italy keeps passing austerity measures like they’re going out of fashion and it’s not doing anything. This is not just Europe, but the Asian markets. Hell, the Brazilian market on Thursday and South African markets had awful days.

What I’m saying is this is a global financial crisis, where many eurozone countries in particular, some with massive economies (Italy is the seventh biggest exporter in the world) are running the risk of default, which could help tip the economies back into recession. Added to the risk of countries, there is a fear of paralysis in the European bank markets (Lloyds TSB fell 10% yesterday and though I don’t have figures to hand of today, I’m sure they fell by a substantial margin again). And to expect the USA to ignore this and come out unscathed is extremely optimistic, to say the least regardless of the fiscal policies their government pursues.

There’s my reasoning[/quote]

The rest of the guys have refuted you nicely. I’ll just add that trying to let Obama out of his horrible fiscal policies by blaming the rest of the world is weak…Very WEAK.[/quote]

Where have I been refuted? I am not ‘letting him off’. If the Eurozone was booming, demand in Asia up and the USA slumping, I’d say yes, the USA is in its position as a result of Obama’s poor fiscal policies. But the Dow has slumped while more or less every financial market has done so as well.

Let me put it to you another way. The EU as a bloc exports more than any other country in the world, including China. Combined, its economies are greater than any other nation and it is currently undergoing a crisis unseen in the last 80 years of financial activity. Do you really think that the all-too-possible demise of its third largest member Italy, who, by itself, nearly exports half a trillion dollars worth of items per year, of whose banks most big European countries (UK France, Germany) and, of course the USA have sizeable holdings in debt will pass America by in some way? Do you not think that systemic financial paralysis of Europe, and the potential financial default of the world’s eighth and twelfth largest economies is affecting and will continue to affect America’s financial market at all?

[/quote]

So what you’re saying is that Obama’s policies have actually helped the US and there is nothing more he could have done. Right? Is that what you’re saying? Because if they didn’t help the US then you have to leave the door open that they’ve actually harmed us. And if one were to closely examine the stimulus package (for example) one would quickly see that it was NOT intended to stimulate as much as reward his backers. Want a break down of where the money went? If the voters actually knew they would not even consider reelecting this disgraceful man.

So, while I agree that there is a wide spread financial crisis, the world looks to the US to lead the way out of it, not to further the problem. And all Obama has done is FORCE through a national health care bill that the majority (by 70%) did not want. Attack people who actually move the economy by threatening higher taxes, and reward the left with give away programs at every level.

Obama is quite the leader for change isn’t he?

Maybe next time the press will actually vet a candidate before trying to sell that candidate to the voter. Oh wait no they won’t, the Main Stream Liberal Media think that they are doing their jobs in pushing far left Ivory tower ideologues.

42

Here’s an open challenge to any and all Obama supporters. Feel free to post anything in defense of Barrack Obama. Tell us all how his policies have helped move the economy in the right direction. And tell us why you are going to vote for him again.

Come on we all need a good laugh!

43

The healthcare policy is a straw man. Bush’s invasion of Iraq has had far more ramifications for U.S debt and policy than Obama’s healthcare. It’s not the policies, but the manner in which they are debated in passed, or rather, in the current climate, interminably argued over.

Don’t believe me?

Let’s just read what S+P’s reasoning is for the downgrade of US credit rating

from the BBC website:

S&P said in a report issued late on Friday that the US budget deficit reduction plan passed by Congress on Tuesday did not go far enough.

It also said “the political brinkmanship” over the debt reduction plan showed that “the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened”.

Read between the lines. The policies that the USA pursues are irrelevant, short of sliding into an authoritarian dictatorship. The reason for the downgrade of debt is that policymaking has been reduced to two sides shouting at each other. If that brinksmanship is not a thinly veiled reference to certain elements within the republican party and their refusal to compromise in any way then I’ll buy you a steak dinner any time you wish to come to Scotland.

Some of Obama’s policies - the bombing of Libya - have been awful. Some - the attempt for healthcare, and I know you’ll disagree with me but this is only my opinion - are laudable in theory but the end result is yet to be seen (if you want to debate the merits of healthcare as a right, start a new topic, I’ll be more than happy to engage). But against a house that wishes for spending cuts, while ignoring a bloated military budget and resisting any tax rises, I fail to see what he can do.

44

[quote]Bambi wrote:
The healthcare policy is a straw man. Bush’s invasion of Iraq has had far more ramifications for U.S debt and policy than Obama’s healthcare. It’s not the policies, but the manner in which they are debated in passed, or rather, in the current climate, interminably argued over.

Don’t believe me?

Let’s just read what S+P’s reasoning is for the downgrade of US credit rating

from the BBC website:

S&P said in a report issued late on Friday that the US budget deficit reduction plan passed by Congress on Tuesday did not go far enough.

It also said “the political brinkmanship” over the debt reduction plan showed that “the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened”.

Read between the lines. The policies that the USA pursues are irrelevant, short of sliding into an authoritarian dictatorship. The reason for the downgrade of debt is that policymaking has been reduced to two sides shouting at each other. If that brinksmanship is not a thinly veiled reference to certain elements within the republican party and their refusal to compromise in any way then I’ll buy you a steak dinner any time you wish to come to Scotland.

Some of Obama’s policies - the bombing of Libya - have been awful. Some - the attempt for healthcare, and I know you’ll disagree with me but this is only my opinion - are laudable in theory but the end result is yet to be seen (if you want to debate the merits of healthcare as a right, start a new topic, I’ll be more than happy to engage). But against a house that wishes for spending cuts, while ignoring a bloated military budget and resisting any tax rises, I fail to see what he can do. [/quote]

How about offer real spending cuts for increased tax revenue? Like, form Medicare and SS.

“Republicans and Democrats have only been able to agree to relatively modest savings on discretionary spending while delegating to the Select Committee decisions on more comprehensive measures. It appears that for now, new revenues have dropped down on the menu of policy options. In addition, the plan envisions only minor policy changes on Medicare and little change in other entitlements, the containment of which we and most other independent observers regard as key to long-term fiscal sustainability”

45

The demagoguery over SS and Medicare has to stop. The left has hammered the right year in and year out for even modest proposals. “Starve the elderly!” Blah, blah, blah. A tax raise without first actually cutting medicare and SS through reforms which actually make it long term solvent? Who is that stupid?

46

[quote]Bambi wrote:
The healthcare policy is a straw man.[/quote]

What did they put in your baby formula little Bambi? The healthcare policy that Obama crammed down the throats of Americans who didn’t want it is the biggest give away of freedom and the larges expenditure of capital in the history of the country.

Look if you don’t understand American government no problem, just read the threads and remain silent.

So what you’re saying is that it cost a lot to invade and occupy Iraq. Right? And you are saying that since Bush did this it’s okay for Obama to give us government health care? Tell me oh illogical one, what does one have to do with the other? Are you trying to convince me that Bush was a bad President too? Ha ha…

[quote]S&P said in a report issued late on Friday that the US budget deficit reduction plan passed by Congress on Tuesday did not go far enough.

It also said “the political brinkmanship” over the debt reduction plan showed that “the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened”.[/quote]

That tells me that we have lousy leadership in Obama. If we had a good President there would have been good measures in place to deal with the debt problem. Which, by the way Obama virtually created. Check how much debt the US had BEFORE Obama ran it up to almost 15 TRILLION

You know we started talking about his economic policies and one forgets that he’s just as awful a foreign policy President. Thanks for reminding me. Obama bows to our enemies and turns his back on Isreal. And…okay that’s all for another thread. He is absolutely passing Jimmy Carter as the second worst modern day President.

It’s horrible relative to the amount of power given the the federal government and the total cost in larger government. No need to debate who deserves free health care, no one does. No more than they deserve a free house, car or food. Simple. This is America BUB.

LOL bloated military budget. LMAO…We’re in two wars and a third one could break out any minute with Iran or N. Korea. I know you don’t like America bombing the bad guys. But before you go to bed tonight you should thank God that America is here and doing what it’s doing. It’s the only reason why the bad guys don’t take over your two bit country and make you their man servant.

:slight_smile:

47

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Bambi wrote:
The healthcare policy is a straw man.[/quote]

What did they put in your baby formula little Bambi? The healthcare policy that Obama crammed down the throats of Americans who didn’t want it is the biggest give away of freedom and the larges expenditure of capital in the history of the country.

Look if you don’t understand American government no problem, just read the threads and remain silent.

So what you’re saying is that it cost a lot to invade and occupy Iraq. Right? And you are saying that since Bush did this it’s okay for Obama to give us government health care? Tell me oh illogical one, what does one have to do with the other? Are you trying to convince me that Bush was a bad President too? Ha ha…

[quote]S&P said in a report issued late on Friday that the US budget deficit reduction plan passed by Congress on Tuesday did not go far enough.

It also said “the political brinkmanship” over the debt reduction plan showed that “the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened”.[/quote]

That tells me that we have lousy leadership in Obama. If we had a good President there would have been good measures in place to deal with the debt problem. Which, by the way Obama virtually created. Check how much debt the US had BEFORE Obama ran it up to almost 15 TRILLION

You know we started talking about his economic policies and one forgets that he’s just as awful a foreign policy President. Thanks for reminding me. Obama bows to our enemies and turns his back on Isreal. And…okay that’s all for another thread. He is absolutely passing Jimmy Carter as the second worst modern day President.

It’s horrible relative to the amount of power given the the federal government and the total cost in larger government. No need to debate who deserves free health care, no one does. No more than they deserve a free house, car or food. Simple. This is America BUB.

LOL bloated military budget. LMAO…We’re in two wars and a third one could break out any minute with Iran or N. Korea. I know you don’t like America bombing the bad guys. But before you go to bed tonight you should thank God (unless you’re one of those powerful 20 something’s that doesn’t believe in God:) that America is here and doing what it’s doing. It’s the only reason why the bad guys don’t take over your two bit country and make you their man servant.

48

[quote]Sloth wrote:
The demagoguery over SS and Medicare has to stop. The left has hammered the right year in and year out for even modest proposals. “Starve the elderly!” Blah, blah, blah. A tax raise without first actually cutting medicare and SS through reforms which actually make it long term solvent? Who is that stupid?[/quote]

But we truly cannot payments made to the elderly. The answer is to raise the age of retirement from 62 to at least 68 on a graduated basis.

49

The social security act was signed in 1935 under FDR.
US life expectancy in 1935 was 61.7 years.
Today, US life expectancy is about 78 years.
Most people start collecting social security at age 65, sometimes a bit earlier.
In the original program, most people would not live long enough to collect social security.
If we wanted to adjust it, we could say that we are honoring FDR’s wishes by raising the collection age to 81 years. Think about how much we would save.

Just wanted to pitch this in, really great thread!

50

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Bambi wrote:
The healthcare policy is a straw man.[/quote]

What did they put in your baby formula little Bambi? The healthcare policy that Obama crammed down the throats of Americans who didn’t want it is the biggest give away of freedom and the larges expenditure of capital in the history of the country.

Look if you don’t understand American government no problem, just read the threads and remain silent.

So what you’re saying is that it cost a lot to invade and occupy Iraq. Right? And you are saying that since Bush did this it’s okay for Obama to give us government health care? Tell me oh illogical one, what does one have to do with the other? Are you trying to convince me that Bush was a bad President too? Ha ha…

[quote]S&P said in a report issued late on Friday that the US budget deficit reduction plan passed by Congress on Tuesday did not go far enough.

It also said “the political brinkmanship” over the debt reduction plan showed that “the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened”.[/quote]

That tells me that we have lousy leadership in Obama. If we had a good President there would have been good measures in place to deal with the debt problem. Which, by the way Obama virtually created. Check how much debt the US had BEFORE Obama ran it up to almost 15 TRILLION

You know we started talking about his economic policies and one forgets that he’s just as awful a foreign policy President. Thanks for reminding me. Obama bows to our enemies and turns his back on Isreal. And…okay that’s all for another thread. He is absolutely passing Jimmy Carter as the second worst modern day President.

It’s horrible relative to the amount of power given the the federal government and the total cost in larger government. No need to debate who deserves free health care, no one does. No more than they deserve a free house, car or food. Simple. This is America BUB.

LOL bloated military budget. LMAO…We’re in two wars and a third one could break out any minute with Iran or N. Korea. I know you don’t like America bombing the bad guys. But before you go to bed tonight you should thank God (unless you’re one of those powerful 20 something’s that doesn’t believe in God:) that America is here and doing what it’s doing. It’s the only reason why the bad guys don’t take over your two bit country and make you their man servant.

[/quote]

Well, if we can give the tub-thumping military jingoism a rest for a second, let’s look at this honestly.

The USA’s defense budget is $700 billion give or take a few billion . That’s 40% of world military spending. By contrast China doesn’t spend 20% as much. You honestly think there’s no waste that could be shed, at the very least no sacrificial bone that could be cut? None at all? And please spare me the ‘US is the world policeman on your behalf’ crap. It didn’t wash with the world when the British Empire called it the ‘white man’s burden’ and it won’t wash now. Where were you when a brutal Argentine dictatorship invaded the Falkland Islands, a territory of the British Isles? The USA exists to protect its own interests, and if we run contrary to your plans, tough cheese for us. The idea the USA supports the UK on a purely altruistic ‘world policeman’ ideal as you have insinuated is asinine.

Moving on…

What I was saying that the response to downgrade the credit rating is not based on Obama’s social policies, such as his healthcare program as he suggested. I’m saying if that were the case that credit rating is up or downgraded based on social and foreign policy then Bush’s invasion of Iraq would have no doubt caused a credit downgrade as well, or Obama’s bombing of Libya. This downgrade cannot be traced to healthcare. It is NOT the policies, but the way in which policies are debated, in which the showmaship of the governmental system in both March and July risked lockdown and default, and the blase manner in which politicians either do not seem aware of this and do not care, do not compromise, and generally make the USA look a laughing stock.

You attribute that to Obama’s lack of leadership, but ignore the recklessness of people within the Republican party, who enjoy a majority in Congress. Again if that report citing the ‘brinkmanship’ for the downgrade is not pointing fingers at the republican party I’ll eat a succession of items of my clothing. You blame Obama for riding up the debt to $15 trillion, while totally ignoring the absolutely ruined financial legacy he inherited from his predecessor. This is NOT passing the buck to Bush, but merely accepting the context in which Obama took power. Obama didn’t just start writing blank cheques the moment he got into office. He had to deal with a situation that in October 2008 almost crashed the world financial system as we know it, which we are still paying the price for. To insinuate he did so out of a spending spree is simply wrong.

Now you can go ‘well I don’t care what you think because you’re a jonny foreigner’ but these agencies care, because the USA deals with its financial situations in such a reckless way then why should they have their credit ratings at AAA?

Policies are neither here nor there. It’s intemperate ideological bent of some of the people who are debating these policies that is alarming some people.

51

[quote]Bambi wrote:
It is NOT the policies, but the way in which policies are debated, in which the showmaship of the governmental system in both March and July risked lockdown and default, and the blase manner in which politicians either do not seem aware of this and do not care, do not compromise, and generally make the USA look a laughing stock.

[/quote]

It is the policies. The “showmanship” only highlighted the fact that we aren’t ready to deal with entitlements/policies that are structurally a ticking time bomb…

“In addition, the plan envisions only minor policy changes on Medicare and little change in other entitlements, the containment of which we and most other independent observers regard as key to long-term fiscal sustainability”

52

Oh, and we can stop muddying up the debate with talk of military spending? Can we find some pretty decent savings? We could and should. Does cutting the military do anything whatsoever to solve the structural problems? Not a damned thing.

53

[quote]dcolacu1 wrote:
The social security act was signed in 1935 under FDR.
US life expectancy in 1935 was 61.7 years.
Today, US life expectancy is about 78 years.
Most people start collecting social security at age 65, sometimes a bit earlier.
In the original program, most people would not live long enough to collect social security.
If we wanted to adjust it, we could say that we are honoring FDR’s wishes by raising the collection age to 81 years. Think about how much we would save.

Just wanted to pitch this in, really great thread![/quote]

And that is really the only legitimate conclusion. But watch how slow our politicians are to implement such a change.

54

[quote]Bambi wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Bambi wrote:
The healthcare policy is a straw man.[/quote]

What did they put in your baby formula little Bambi? The healthcare policy that Obama crammed down the throats of Americans who didn’t want it is the biggest give away of freedom and the larges expenditure of capital in the history of the country.

Look if you don’t understand American government no problem, just read the threads and remain silent.

So what you’re saying is that it cost a lot to invade and occupy Iraq. Right? And you are saying that since Bush did this it’s okay for Obama to give us government health care? Tell me oh illogical one, what does one have to do with the other? Are you trying to convince me that Bush was a bad President too? Ha ha…

[quote]S&P said in a report issued late on Friday that the US budget deficit reduction plan passed by Congress on Tuesday did not go far enough.

It also said “the political brinkmanship” over the debt reduction plan showed that “the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened”.[/quote]

That tells me that we have lousy leadership in Obama. If we had a good President there would have been good measures in place to deal with the debt problem. Which, by the way Obama virtually created. Check how much debt the US had BEFORE Obama ran it up to almost 15 TRILLION

You know we started talking about his economic policies and one forgets that he’s just as awful a foreign policy President. Thanks for reminding me. Obama bows to our enemies and turns his back on Isreal. And…okay that’s all for another thread. He is absolutely passing Jimmy Carter as the second worst modern day President.

It’s horrible relative to the amount of power given the the federal government and the total cost in larger government. No need to debate who deserves free health care, no one does. No more than they deserve a free house, car or food. Simple. This is America BUB.

LOL bloated military budget. LMAO…We’re in two wars and a third one could break out any minute with Iran or N. Korea. I know you don’t like America bombing the bad guys. But before you go to bed tonight you should thank God (unless you’re one of those powerful 20 something’s that doesn’t believe in God:) that America is here and doing what it’s doing. It’s the only reason why the bad guys don’t take over your two bit country and make you their man servant.

[/quote]

Well, if we can give the tub-thumping military jingoism a rest for a second, let’s look at this honestly.[/quote]

No we can’t. It’s because of the US military that someone doesn’t walk into Scotland and rip your 20 year old ass from your computer and put you in a labor camp. You don’t understand that do you junior? You have to know that Scotlands military couldn’t stop an armed Boy Scout Troop. And because of this the rest of your post should be in a category saved for kids who have no clue. Comparing US military spending to China’s? Do you understand the difference between China and the US? The geo political struggle has gone right over your head. LOL…please just go away.

55

Sadly, it will take tax hikes to help clean up this mess. Meaningful SS and medicare reform will not be possible without a trade off, anyways. But, imagine where we’d be right now had these programs been dealt with in the past. Would we have to face tax hikes in the near future, had the whole ‘old people eating cat food’ crap not been a go to tactic of the left, cutting off any real attempt?

So yeah, unfortunately, we’ll have tax hikes to get real spending cuts, because we put this off for far too long. And, most likely they all won’t fall on the rich. Tax rates can be revisited later, just get the needed reforms asap. But, not a dang penny in new taxes until there is some ironclad efforts at cutting Medicare, SS, and other entitlements. We’ll end up with tax hikes and minimum cuts, kicking the cost of these programs down the road just a bit longer. To heck with that.

56

[quote]ZEB wrote:

No we can’t. It’s because of the US military that someone doesn’t walk into Scotland and rip your 20 year old ass from your computer and put you in a labor camp. You don’t understand that do you junior? You have to know that Scotlands military couldn’t stop an armed Boy Scout Troop. And because of this the rest of your post should be in a category saved for kids who have no clue. Comparing US military spending to China’s? Do you understand the difference between China and the US? The geo political struggle has gone right over your head. LOL…please just go away.
[/quote]

LOL… firstly it’s the BRITISH armed forces, and they’re not exactly boy scouts. And why is not pointing out that the USA’s vast defense spending outstrips your nearest rival by nearly six times not a valid argument when we are talking about overspending?

57

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Sadly, it will take tax hikes to help clean up this mess. Meaningful SS and medicare reform will not be possible without a trade off, anyways. But, imagine where we’d be right now had these programs been dealt with in the past. Would we have to face tax hikes in the near future, had the whole ‘old people eating cat food’ crap not been a go to tactic of the left, cutting off any real attempt?

So yeah, unfortunately, we’ll have tax hikes to get real spending cuts, because we put this off for far too long. And, most likely they all won’t fall on the rich. Tax rates can be revisited later, just get the needed reforms asap. But, not a dang penny in new taxes until there is some ironclad efforts at cutting Medicare, SS, and other entitlements. We’ll end up with tax hikes and minimum cuts, kicking the cost of these programs down the road just a bit longer. To heck with that.[/quote]

There has to be reform of stuff like the retirement age in conjunction with increase in taxes. I agree with you that issues like the growing cost of Social Security need to be tackled. We’re doing it in the UK now and the reaction isn’t exactly pretty - but at least we have a government willing to make necessary cuts with few sacred cows (apart from blithely ignoring foreign aid, much of which goes to India - which has its own space program. But I digress)
However, I’m pointing out that the original point of this thread - that Obama is directly responsible for a 9 day fall on the Dow and this is directly due to his policies - cannot be taken seriously with regard to what is happening in other markets, most obviously the Eurozone.

58

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Sadly, it will take tax hikes to help clean up this mess.[/quote]

Tell me one time in the past 40 years where raising taxes cleaned up a mess? When they take your money they find new places to spend it. There is enough cuts to make in our incredibly bloated government where we don’t need new taxes.

59

[quote]Bambi wrote:
And why is not pointing out that the USA’s vast defense spending outstrips your nearest rival by nearly six times not a valid argument when we are talking about overspending?[/quote]

Because the USA keeps the bad guys at bay. Got it kid? What does China do with their military? Stop asking questions that you should have learned two years ago when you were in High School.

60

[quote]ZEB wrote:

LOL bloated military budget. LMAO…We’re in two wars and a third one could break out any minute with Iran or N. Korea. I know you don’t like America bombing the bad guys.
[/quote]

And the good guys, the mediocre guys that just happened to be around, wedding parties, Canadian soldiers…

Dont forget, according to the DoD its is around 6-7 of those out of every 10 guys you kill.

Nevermind though, “Gott mit uns” and whatnot.

And yes, spending more than any other nation combined is kind of bloated, unless you expect that Al Quaeda is operating from Alpha Centauri.