Double-dip recession imminent

Pages: 1 2 3 4 … 19

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
Double-dip recession imminent

2010-06-18 22:46:22

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6807|Global Command

Dilbert_X wrote:
.... and Reaganomics created colossal instability?

Yes.

The lie and deception of the republican party is, inadvertently given voice in your otherwise usually vacuous post.
Well done.

The fact is the the free market Reagan pushed failed to counter mans inherent greed. Supply side didn't trickle down. The rich got richer. Just like today.
In fact, Obama is a corporatist and he is content with whatever pittance trickles down to us small people. He is just like Reagan, but worse; he hates America.

2010-06-18 23:11:46

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,054|7050|PNW

Harmor wrote:
Even if enough conservatives get into the House and Senate Obama would surely veto an extension of the Bush Tax cuts.

Unless they have enough guys for a veto override. Seems like a pipe dream, though.

2010-06-18 23:12:36

Harmor: Error_Name_Not_Found; +605|6826|San Diego, CA, USA

https://img571.imageshack.us/img571/4025/212pxofficialportraitof.jpg

The Five Principles of Reaganomics are: 1) Growth; 2) the Entrepreneur; 3) Fair Government; 4) Competition; and 5) Dynamism.

1) The first principle is growth. It is a simple concept. It assumes that the economic activity of man can lead to more than an exchange or redistribution of existing resources and goods.

2) The second principle of Reaganomics is that the hero of the American economy is the entrepreneur. And it is the entrepreneur who is the engine of growth. It is the entrepreneur who works. long and hard,.who-finds the money for a risky investment, who breaks the rules. It is the entrepreneur who is the pioneer and the inventor. And it is the entrepreneur who knows how to transform a good idea into reality, who can take a good idea and make a new product or new technique.

3) The third principle of Reaganomics is Fair Government. During the 1980 presidential election campaign, Ronald Reagan often declared: Government is the problem, not the solution. The U.S. government is a problem when it places unfair heavy burdens on American economic activity. The heaviest burdens are government regulation and taxes.

4) The fourth principle of Reaganomics is competition. It is the pressure from competition which breeds creativity. Competition turns the marketplace into a battleground. The need to fight to win customers is what forces companies to find better ways of doing what they do.

5) The fifth principle of Reaganomics is dynamism. This is something which results from the four other principles. Growth, the entrepreneur, low taxes, and competition create a dynamic economy that is always changing and evolving.

Excerpts of the above were taken from this speach by Burton Yale of the The Heritage Foundation (Conservative Policy an Analysis group).

Source: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Lectur … s-in-China

---

We fell from grace. We lost our path. Its not that Reaganomics failed us is that we didn't implement it fully. And as a result the haters distorted history to blame Reaganomics.

If you believe that Obama's vision of larger government, higher taxes, and more regulation is a formula for success then there is a loony-bin that is missing their loony.

2010-06-18 23:17:10

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,054|7050|PNW

Its not that Reaganomics failed us is that we didn't implement it fully.

Not going to jump into the argument. I'd just like to point out the uncanny resemblance that statement has to similar ones used to lament the general downfall of communism.

2010-06-18 23:29:24

Harmor: Error_Name_Not_Found; +605|6826|San Diego, CA, USA

Good point. However, approaching Reaganomics purity raises all tides. As we see now as we approach Communistic purity with Obama our economic outlooks looks bleak.

Might I also add that because the Bush Tax cuts will be ending December 31, 2010 people and businesses are adjusting their purchases and investments to this year. This means that we'll see an artificial increase in economic activity before the end of the year, but once we go into 2011 it'll slow down into another recession.

I predict that we'll see a huge sell-off in the Stock market. Probably a 30-40% further down than we are now. As people sell stocks in 2010 so they avoid the Capital Gain tax increases.

And what's funny is that the press will blame it on the shift in Republicans in the House and Senate too. Just wait...it'll happen.

2010-06-18 23:34:05

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6952|Canberra, AUS

Communistic purity with Obama

Please stop.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2010-06-18 23:54:38

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6807|Global Command

Harmor wrote:

---
Its not that Reaganomics failed us is that we didn't implement it fully.

lol.

Deregulation under Reagan was rife.
Corporations evolved to have the same rights as people.

Read;

BP, NAFTA and outsourcing.

That's Reaganomics bub.

2010-06-19 00:15:50

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,816|6384|eXtreme to the maX

Harmor wrote:
http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/4025 … raitof.jpg

The Five Principles of Reaganomics are: 1) Growth; 2) the Entrepreneur; 3) Fair Government; 4) Competition; and 5) Dynamism.

Deregulation and Cronyism are 1 and 2 actually.

Deregulation -> Instability.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2010-06-19 00:16:14)

Fuck Israel

2010-06-19 00:17:25

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,816|6384|eXtreme to the maX

ATG wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
.... and Reaganomics created colossal instability?
Yes.

The lie and deception of the republican party is, inadvertently given voice in your otherwise usually vacuous post.
Well done.

The fact is the the free market Reagan pushed failed to counter mans inherent greed. Supply side didn't trickle down. The rich got richer. Just like today.
In fact, Obama is a corporatist and he is content with whatever pittance trickles down to us small people. He is just like Reagan, but worse; he hates America.

Keep smoking that stuff.

Fuck Israel

2010-06-19 00:59:31

Karbin: Member; +42|6572

ATG wrote:
Harmor wrote:
http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/4025 … raitof.jpg

---
Its not that Reaganomics failed us is that we didn't implement it fully.
lol.

Deregulation under Reagan was rife.
Corporations evolved to have the same rights as people.

Read;

BP, NAFTA and outsourcing.

That's Reaganomics bub.

NAFTA (Please don't swear in this thread)

In 1996, the gasoline additive MMT was brought into Canada by an American company.
At the time, the Canadian federal government banned the importation of the additive.
The American company brought a claim under NAFTA Chapter 11 seeking US$201 million, and by Canadian provinces under the Agreement on Internal Trade ("AIT").
The American company argued that their additive had not been conclusively linked to any health dangers, and that the prohibition was damaging to their company.
Following a finding that the ban was a violation of the AIT, the Canadian federal government repealed the ban and settled with the American company for US$13 million.
Studies by Health Canada on the health effects of MMT in fuel found no significant health effects associated with exposure to these exhaust emissions.
Other Canadian researchers and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency disagree with Health Canada, and cite studies that include possible nerve damage.

So, boys and girls, if you add something to your product that is harmful and are told by the Government to stop, you can sue for the loss of not having that stuff in your product.

Kind a makes you wonder if we would have unleaded gas if NAFTA had been around at that time.

2010-06-19 05:14:39

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5636|London, England

ATG wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
.... and Reaganomics created colossal instability?
Yes.

The lie and deception of the republican party is, inadvertently given voice in your otherwise usually vacuous post.
Well done.

The fact is the the free market Reagan pushed failed to counter mans inherent greed. Supply side didn't trickle down. The rich got richer. Just like today.
In fact, Obama is a corporatist and he is content with whatever pittance trickles down to us small people. He is just like Reagan, but worse; he hates America.

When the rich get richer... they spend more money... both on goods and on salaries... it does trickle down... it's just not something you can hold in your hands like a stimulus check... it is... subtle but real.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2010-06-19 10:29:40

Harmor: Error_Name_Not_Found; +605|6826|San Diego, CA, USA

That phrase, 'The Rich keep getting richer." make no sense. If you had $1 million and put it in an account at 4% interest vs. someone with say $1,000 for the same interest rate the rich guy's principle is going to increase significantly faster.

And we're not even talking about inflation.

What we really need to look at is Purchasing Power. What can you buy with the same amount of cash.

--

Anyhow saw this here:
http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook … ng-revenue

https://img541.imageshack.us/img541/2733/growthfederalspendingre.jpg

Obama is not helping things with all this reckless spending. Soon interest rates will need to increase and when that happens the shit is really going to hit the fan.

What's the saying? Chickens are coming home to roost?

2010-06-19 19:33:12

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,816|6384|eXtreme to the maX

If you actually look at the graph you'll see the disconnect began under Bush.

Fuck Israel

2010-06-19 19:40:32

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6952|Canberra, AUS

Dilbert_X wrote:
If you actually look at the graph you'll see the disconnect began under Bush.

There are many more things wrong with that post than that.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2010-06-19 19:56:29

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,816|6384|eXtreme to the maX

Spark wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
If you actually look at the graph you'll see the disconnect began under Bush.
There are many more things wrong with that post than that.

Then Obama must have travelled backward through time.

Fuck Israel

2010-06-19 20:10:43

Harmor: Error_Name_Not_Found; +605|6826|San Diego, CA, USA

I'm not defending Bush. When he left office he had a $400 billion deficit. I was vocal against all the RINOs and democrats spent like drunken soldiers.

I'm a Conservative first and foremost, not blind to Republicans' actions.

But there's no doubt that Obama accelerated during his administration (i.e. $1.5 TRILLION last year).

This video is a good explanation:

2010-06-19 20:21:27

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6952|Canberra, AUS

Dilbert_X wrote:
Spark wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
If you actually look at the graph you'll see the disconnect began under Bush.
There are many more things wrong with that post than that.
Then Obama must have travelled backward through time.

I meant wrong as in incorrect.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2010-06-19 20:43:29

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6683|North Carolina

It seems that the most powerful people in the world would prefer that we didn't have borders. Conspiracy theorists always talk about global governments, but there is some truth to that in the respect that borders hinder multinational corporations from doing business as efficiently as they'd like to.

Take for example our border situation with Mexico. We aren't really doing anything about illegal immigration because people value having cheap labor over having national security -- especially people running large companies that employ illegals.

How this applies to Reagan and American politics in general after the Reagan era is that free trade agreements bring us closer to the reality of not having borders. NAFTA only made illegal immigration more prevalent than before, and when you increase government spending faster than you increase government revenue, the resulting debt makes it easier to fathom dismantling the social safety net -- so that your country is better able to adapt to having completely open borders.

Basically, streamlining society into a Darwinian system where labor is easily replaceable is ultimately what big business wants. Given current trends, it looks like they'll get what they want very soon.

2010-06-19 21:58:54

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6807|Global Command

Foreclosures keep going up. Businesses keep closing down.
The recession is over if you work for a company that got bailout dollars or contracts.
Everybody else can eat cake.

I keep hearing people say " it can't get much worse, right? "
Yet it keeps getting worse. March was by far the worst month for my business, until June, which is shaping up to be worse than March.

This is reality inside the meat grinder.

2010-06-19 22:01:22

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5636|London, England

ATG, you're just in the wrong business. My girlfriend grew her section of the business she works in by 120% volume this year over last year with a 4% increase in profit per unit sold.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2010-06-19 22:03:04)

2010-06-19 22:05:14

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6807|Global Command

Good for her. See the link?
62 years in business.

My " green " orientated business is flat lined as well.

JG, did you know I own three small businesses?

They are all in the gutter. EVERYBODY I know who has a small business tells me they should have closed it a year ago but do not because, what jobs are there to go get?

Every 90 seconds a home is foreclosed on ( and that is just freddie and fannie loans ) and banks are folding at a rate double last years.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industrie … 2009_N.htm

Are there exceptions? Sure.

But this country is doomed bro. We are going down.

Last edited by ATG (2010-06-19 22:11:11)

2010-06-19 22:24:20

Harmor: Error_Name_Not_Found; +605|6826|San Diego, CA, USA

What this country needs is a good dose of Reaganomics right about now.

Instead of increasing unemployment benifits how about making permanent the Bush Tax cuts?

Instead of bailing out AIG how about removing the requirement that banks need to loan to people who are not qualified or able to pay for a home?

Instead of Obamacare how about making health insurance portable across state lines?

Instead of blaming BP for the oil spill (lawyers will figure all that out later), how about lifting the Jones Act and giving Governors control over the cleanup?

Instead of putting a 6-month moratorium on drilling (that'll put 100,000 people out of work), why not lift restrictions on domenstic production and exploration (especially some of the arcane EPA requirements Solar plants here in California - fucking turtles).

If instead of spending $2 TRILLION dollars so far, I bet the economy would be doing alot better if we were to keep 15% more of our income right about now.

If you think this is bad, wait till 2011...

EDIT: Oh, and clean up the Minerals and Management agency that oversees oil companies...that thing is ripe with corruption.

Last edited by Harmor (2010-06-19 22:26:08)

2010-06-19 22:29:59

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5636|London, England

Harmor wrote:
What this country needs is a good dose of Reaganomics right about now.

Instead of increasing unemployment benifits how about making permanent the Bush Tax cuts?

Instead of bailing out AIG how about removing the requirement that banks need to loan to people who are not qualified or able to pay for a home?

Instead of Obamacare how about making health insurance portable across state lines?

Instead of blaming BP for the oil spill (lawyers will figure all that out later), how about lifting the Jones Act and giving Governors control over the cleanup?

Instead of putting a 6-month moratorium on drilling (that'll put 100,000 people out of work), why not lift restrictions on domenstic production and exploration (especially some of the arcane EPA requirements Solar plants here in California - fucking turtles).

If instead of spending $2 TRILLION dollars so far, I bet the economy would be doing alot better if we were to keep 15% more of our income right about now.

If you think this is bad, wait till 2011...

EDIT: Oh, and clean up the Minerals and Management agency that oversees oil companies...that thing is ripe with corruption.

I feel like I just read two years of Fox News condensed into a few paragraphs. Thanks for the summation, most of it is wrong, but that's fine.

2010-06-19 22:36:06

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,816|6384|eXtreme to the maX

Harmor wrote:
What this country needs is a good dose of Reaganomics right about now.

Insert facepalm gif.

Instead of increasing unemployment benifits how about making permanent the Bush Tax cuts?

Er, you know thats why the govt has a deficit right?

Instead of bailing out AIG how about removing the requirement that banks need to loan to people who are not qualified or able to pay for a home?

How about just make companies responsible for their mistakes?

Instead of Obamacare how about making health insurance portable across state lines?

Don't tell companies what to do.

Instead of blaming BP for the oil spill (lawyers will figure all that out later), how about lifting the Jones Act and giving Governors control over the cleanup?

Pretty sure BP would be glad to hand it over.

Instead of putting a 6-month moratorium on drilling (that'll put 100,000 people out of work), why not lift restrictions on domenstic production and exploration (especially some of the arcane EPA requirements Solar plants here in California - fucking turtles).

Because, as we've seen with BP, Transocean and Halliburton, they don't have a plan B if there is a leak > Big donfckn oil spill.
They need at least six months to figure one out.

If instead of spending $2 TRILLION dollars so far, I bet the economy would be doing alot better if we were to keep 15% more of our income right about now.

Govt spends $2trillion, people spend $2trillion, whats the difference? It all circulates in the economy.
Let people keep money and they spend it on imported goods, plasma tvs and graphics cards - ask lowing.

If you think this is bad, wait till 2011...

Why, is Obama planning to start another two unwinnable fronts in the war of terror?

Oh, and clean up the Minerals and Management agency that oversees oil companies...that thing is ripe with corruption.

Just make corruption a crime.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2010-06-20 00:38:07)

Fuck Israel

2010-06-19 23:13:13

Reciprocity: Member; +721|6859|the dank(super) side of Oregon

I think living in California screws up your perception of reality.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 … 19

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
Double-dip recession imminent

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums Double-dip recession imminent

Dilbert_X wrote:

Harmor wrote:

Harmor wrote:

Harmor wrote:

ATG wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

ATG wrote:

Harmor wrote:

ATG wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Spark wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Spark wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Harmor wrote:

Harmor wrote:

Board footer