With it looking very likely that Obama will be elected President, there is talk that the markets are fearful of having an extremely liberal President. Of course there are many other reasons why the markets are tanking but the looming election with Obama in the lead just might be contributing to it.
God help us if we elect the most liberal candidate ever and put in a liberal Congress. You can forget about a near-term expansion in the economy. They will try to regulate everything to the point that it prevents growth.
Hillary was the most liberal, before her Kerry was the most liberal... just an old Republican talking point
Obama is the most liberal. The guy has never seen a tax increase or a social spending plan that he didn't like. Hell, the guy wants to kill babies on the way out of the mother. Now he wants to tax the people who create jobs. I don't know a single poor man who has ever given anyone a job.
No, I'm targeting the white half of Obama to escape being labeled as racist.
I don't care what race he is, he's not the change we need. Just because you offer change doesn't mean it will be good change.
Oh, and let's add the clueless Congress with that 1 cent head Pelosi, and we have a even scarier future ahead.
Yep, we should let republicans run this country into the ground forever.
Dems have had control of Congress for two years, what have they accomplished?
Furthermore, it was the Clinton Administration who originally put pressure on lenders to make more subprime loans.
Um, as far as king of the left goes, the heavyweight champeen is still Roosevelt, Franklin, that is, and frankly, he was the man for the job at the time.
Smaug Wrote:Um, as far as king of the left goes, the heavyweight champeen is still Roosevelt, Franklin, that is, and frankly, he was the man for the job at the time.
Thanks for the start of US socialism FDR!! What a maroon.
How many jobs are the Bush tax cuts (signed in 2001, extended by TIPRA of 2005) creating right now? Will they counter the almost 700,000 new eBay reselling, street sweeping, and rock-kicking jobs that have been created this year?
BlazerUnit Wrote:How many jobs are the Bush tax cuts (signed in 2001, extended by TIPRA of 2005) creating right now? Will they counter the almost 700,000 new eBay reselling, street sweeping, and rock-kicking jobs that have been created this year?
I'll answer your questions with a question. Is raising taxes supposed to somehow allow people to hire more workers?
BlazerFan11 Wrote:You racists
Speaking of talking points...
Disagree with Obama? Can't be because of his political ideologies, of course, you must be a racist!
Um, the presidential race has nothing to do with what's going on in the market right now. The Dow has not dropped 40% in the past 52 weeks simply because Obama is ahead in the polls. To suggest so is just asinine.
dfarr Wrote:Smaug Wrote:Um, as far as king of the left goes, the heavyweight champeen is still Roosevelt, Franklin, that is, and frankly, he was the man for the job at the time.
Thanks for the start of US socialism FDR!! What a maroon.
Your sense of history is truly stunning.
FDR was president when America needed a little more socialism than it had. Not Bolshvism, mind you, just a little more.
TMcCarty Wrote:BlazerFan11 Wrote:You racists
Speaking of talking points...
Disagree with Obama? Can't be because of his political ideologies, of course, you must be a racist!
I don't think you're racists.
TMcCarty Wrote:BlazerFan11 Wrote:You racists
Speaking of talking points...
Disagree with Obama? Can't be because of his political ideologies, of course, you must be a racist!
I was being sarcastic, but I used quick reply so I couldn't use an emoticon.
mixduptransistor Wrote:Um, the presidential race has nothing to do with what's going on in the market right now. The Dow has not dropped 40% in the past 52 weeks simply because Obama is ahead in the polls. To suggest so is just asinine.
So you don't think that the fact that Obama has said he will raise the capital gains tax to "25%, 28%, whatever it takes" to make the market collapse is affecting the decision making of potential investors?
Smaug Wrote:dfarr Wrote:Smaug Wrote:Um, as far as king of the left goes, the heavyweight champeen is still Roosevelt, Franklin, that is, and frankly, he was the man for the job at the time.
Thanks for the start of US socialism FDR!! What a maroon.
Your sense of history is truly stunning.
FDR was president when America needed a little more socialism than it had. Not Bolshvism, mind you, just a little more.
And if you will study your history, you will see that it did not work. All of his programs from 1933 on did not end the depression. Roosevelt is worshipped for doing something he didn't do- it is the greatest myth of all time. It was Hitler and Hirohito who ended the depression by thrusting the United States into a war which required enormous amounts of goods to be produced by the American people, thereby putting people to work. If Roosevelt's New Deal was so great the depression would have ended before 1942. That's just one man's opinion though.
As far as Obama goes, well, both these candidates suck big time. What drives me crazy is that in a primary debate the moderator asked Obama that, knowing an increase in capital gains tax rate leads to less money coming in to the treasury via the capital gains tax, would he still raise the rate. His answer, "Yes, just out of fairness." So, raising the rate 1. actually leads to less revenue for the government and 2. discourages investment in the middle of an economic crisis. That is just simply brilliant. Smartest thing I have ever heard in my life. Ever.
TMcCarty Wrote:Disagree with Obama? Can't be because of his political ideologies, of course, you must be a racist!
Then let me be on record to wholeheartedly deny alleging racism to any criticism of Barack Obama. Criticize his stances on this issues? Fair game, you're a critic. But if you criticism includes using moronic guilt-by-association talking points that have nothing to do with the real issues at hand (Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, ACORN, etc.), you cannot be declared a racist.
Instead, you are hereby declared a moron, and you have no intellectual justification for voting for anything more difficult than a new color for M&Ms candy.
(And in case anyone would like to ascribe this to anyone personally, I assure you it is not, nor toward the quoted poster.)
pot, meet kettle
BatesUAB Wrote:As far as Obama goes, well, both these candidates suck big time. What drives me crazy is that in a primary debate the moderator asked Obama that, knowing an increase in capital gains tax rate leads to less money coming in to the treasury via the capital gains tax, would he still raise the rate. His answer, "Yes, just out of fairness." So, raising the rate 1. actually leads to less revenue for the government and 2. discourages investment in the middle of an economic crisis. That is just simply brilliant. Smartest thing I have ever heard in my life. Ever.
Yeah, and McCain's going to increase spending and cut taxes even more to make up the deficit. And neither of them had a word to say about how the trillion plus dollars would affect their budget plans.
We're fooked.
BlazerFan11 Wrote:TMcCarty Wrote:BlazerFan11 Wrote:You racists
Speaking of talking points...
Disagree with Obama? Can't be because of his political ideologies, of course, you must be a racist!
I was being sarcastic, but I used quick reply so I couldn't use an emoticon.
mixduptransistor Wrote:Um, the presidential race has nothing to do with what's going on in the market right now. The Dow has not dropped 40% in the past 52 weeks simply because Obama is ahead in the polls. To suggest so is just asinine.
So you don't think that the fact that Obama has said he will raise the capital gains tax to "25%, 28%, whatever it takes" to make the market collapse is affecting the decision making of potential investors?
What are you talking about? Have you been paying any attention at all? The current market collapse is due to the complete seizure of the credit markets and the failure of banks around the world. I have never heard Obama say he would "raise capital gains taxes as high as it takes". And as high as it takes to do what?
mixduptransistor Wrote:BlazerFan11 Wrote:TMcCarty Wrote:BlazerFan11 Wrote:You racists
Speaking of talking points...
Disagree with Obama? Can't be because of his political ideologies, of course, you must be a racist!
I was being sarcastic, but I used quick reply so I couldn't use an emoticon.
mixduptransistor Wrote:Um, the presidential race has nothing to do with what's going on in the market right now. The Dow has not dropped 40% in the past 52 weeks simply because Obama is ahead in the polls. To suggest so is just asinine.
So you don't think that the fact that Obama has said he will raise the capital gains tax to "25%, 28%, whatever it takes" to make the market collapse is affecting the decision making of potential investors?
What are you talking about? Have you been paying any attention at all? The current market collapse is due to the complete seizure of the credit markets and the failure of banks around the world. I have never heard Obama say he would "raise capital gains taxes as high as it takes". And as high as it takes to do what?
Where in the world did I say what did or didn't cause the market to go down recently in my last post? Please show me. Did you seriously not know Obama wanted to raise the capital gains tax? As for what he meant by his "whatever it takes" quote, I would guess he meant "to get elected."
Not that I like Obama, but if the rout last week was because of his lead, what happened today? The current market problems have to do with fundamentals...like a negative savings rate, laxed lending standards, redemptions in hedge/mutual funds, and a higher than expected default rate on loans. The GOP talking point that it is because of Obama's lead is just sad, and pathetic.
If the current market problems had to do with fundamentals the market would not have lost 21% last week.
STLouis Blazer Wrote:If the current market problems had to do with fundamentals the market would not have lost 21% last week.
And if the market was really down because of Obama's lead in the polls it wouldn't have railed 930pts on Monday.
STLouis Blazer Wrote:If the current market problems had to do with fundamentals the market would not have lost 21% last week.
No one said it had anything to do with fundamentals, but it's just stupid to suggest it's because Obama is in the lead.
dfarr Wrote:Smaug Wrote:Um, as far as king of the left goes, the heavyweight champeen is still Roosevelt, Franklin, that is, and frankly, he was the man for the job at the time.
Thanks for the start of US socialism FDR!! What a maroon.
FDR bacame President at a time when many "right wingers" admired Adolf Hitler and were interested in having a similar "conservative" to lead America. The largest "Nazi Bunds" outside of Germany were in the USA. They held "standing room only" Bund meetings in the Boston Garden and New York's Madison Square Garden in the 30s. The KKK was a version of Brown Shirts under white sheets. We still have the swastikas on the front (21st Ave side) portico of the Jeffco Court House.
Many others wanted to import Soviet style Communism to America at that same time. The Communist Party of America was the ONLY political party actively opposing the lynchings of Black Americans and the suppression of working people across America. Paul Robeson and many others joined the Party for that reason during that time.
FDR was able to steer a middle course that used much of the free enterprise system combined with some government management to do things for ordinary Americans that the Robber Barons of industry opposed, but would not try to do themselves. Several of those "New Deal" agencies are still around today, but most ended when WWII ended high unemployment in 1940.
STLouis Blazer Wrote:With it looking very likely that Obama will be elected President, there is talk that the markets are fearful of having an extremely liberal President. Of course there are many other reasons why the markets are tanking but the looming election with Obama in the lead just might be contributing to it.
God help us if we elect the most liberal candidate ever and put in a liberal Congress. You can forget about a near-term expansion in the economy. They will try to regulate everything to the point that it prevents growth.
This has nothing to do with banks not lending to one another which is the main problem with the market right now. If you don't think that Wall Street needs more regulation than you need to open your eyes. Pure greed by the banking system is the reason we are in the position we are in right now. That and the gov't not stepping up to help Lehman before they announced bankruptcy.
I for one want a long-term steady expansion, not a flash in the pan.
STLouis Blazer Wrote:With it looking very likely that Obama will be elected President, there is talk that the markets are fearful of having an extremely liberal President. Of course there are many other reasons why the markets are tanking but the looming election with Obama in the lead just might be contributing to it.
God help us if we elect the most liberal candidate ever and put in a liberal Congress. You can forget about a near-term expansion in the economy. They will try to regulate everything to the point that it prevents growth.
Maybe they will regulate it to the point that it doesn't destroy ordinary person's wealth and retirement planning by it's self-serving pursuit of greed. In the past, the usual way Congress "saves" money on legislative programs is to "cut to the bone" all regulatory staffing (like auditors) who might pick up on the devious shenanigans of business leaders--CEOs, CFOs, Bds of Directors, etc. who have run so many good businesses into the ground while walking away with 7 to 9 figure "parachutes". The history of business in America has been that every time business goes unregulated for very long, it runs itself OUT OF BUSINESS.
it's quite apparent, some people don't know
about business
Quote:No one said it had anything to do with fundamentals, but it's just stupid to suggest it's because Obama is in the lead.
I suggest you read and pay attention to what I post before you criticize what you think I said.
There is nowhere in this thread where I said the markets are tanking because(as your post implies "only because") of Obama. I suggested that on top of the very obvious reasons that Obama in the lead may be part of it. It may be outlandish but I've heard it thrown out there by people in the industry.
Quote:This has nothing to do with banks not lending to one another which is the main problem with the market right now. If you don't think that Wall Street needs more regulation than you need to open your eyes. Pure greed by the banking system is the reason we are in the position we are in right now.
No, we do not need more regulation and banks are not the only guilty party. Do some research on what happens with a mortgage from top to bottom and then get back to me.
There is a lot of blame to go around and very few, if any, innocent parties. Its just convenient to attack the rich men/women at banks because tha is what the media is feeding you.
Here is what I can't seem to figure out. The people on capital hill who are screaming for more regulation are in large part the same people who voted for this bailout package which will ultimately lead to the federal government owning equity in the banks. How is it that you can regulate an entity that you simultaneously own a stake in and that not be a conflict of interest?
STLouis Blazer Wrote:Quote:No one said it had anything to do with fundamentals, but it's just stupid to suggest it's because Obama is in the lead.
I suggest you read and pay attention to what I post before you criticize what you think I said.
There is nowhere in this thread where I said the markets are tanking because(as your post implies "only because") of Obama. I suggested that on top of the very obvious reasons that Obama in the lead may be part of it. It may be outlandish but I've heard it thrown out there by people in the industry.
I haven't been to work in 3 weeks and I've been watching CNBC the entire time. Not a single minute has anyone suggested that the market is down because Obama is up in the polls. There have been discussions on which sectors would do better under each candidate, however no one--not one single person--has suggested on air that the possibility of Obama winning has ANYTHING at all to do with the downturn in the market. Regardless, last week was the Dow's best week since the 30's, and today as I type this the Dow is up another 265 points.
Just because its not on TV doesn't mean its not getting talked about. Oh, and I have heard it mentioned on CNBC but it was from Gasparino so I didn't put much thought into it.
If you don't think Obama's lead in the polls is forcing business people to rethink the way they are using their money right now, you are crazy.
Wayne Huizenga to sell Dolphins
This move will probably save him tens of millions of dollars.
What's funny (and very, very sad) is that while I looked at this page, there was a banner ad showing a cartoon of Obama ripping apart his shirt to reveal a Superman-like blue shirt with an O on it instead of an S. Wow.
STLouis Blazer Wrote:Quote:No one said it had anything to do with fundamentals, but it's just stupid to suggest it's because Obama is in the lead.
I suggest you read and pay attention to what I post before you criticize what you think I said.
There is nowhere in this thread where I said the markets are tanking because(as your post implies "only because") of Obama. I suggested that on top of the very obvious reasons that Obama in the lead may be part of it. It may be outlandish but I've heard it thrown out there by people in the industry.
Quote:This has nothing to do with banks not lending to one another which is the main problem with the market right now. If you don't think that Wall Street needs more regulation than you need to open your eyes. Pure greed by the banking system is the reason we are in the position we are in right now.
No, we do not need more regulation and banks are not the only guilty party. Do some research on what happens with a mortgage from top to bottom and then get back to me.
There is a lot of blame to go around and very few, if any, innocent parties. Its just convenient to attack the rich men/women at banks because tha is what the media is feeding you.
I don't need to do research on mortgages, CDOs, tranching, PSA, inverse floaters, yada yada yada. I am living this everyday.
Let me know about the CDS market while you are at it. Tomorrow will be one of the largest transfers of wealth in the history of financial markets when the CDS contracts for Lehman expire. This is completely unregulated part of the market which is now being investigated.
That part of the market I agree needs oversight/clearing much like the OCC provides for options.
BlazerFan11 Wrote:If you don't think Obama's lead in the polls is forcing business people to rethink the way they are using their money right now, you are crazy.
Wayne Huizenga to sell Dolphins
This move will probably save him tens of millions of dollars.
What's funny (and very, very sad) is that while I looked at this page, there was a banner ad showing a cartoon of Obama ripping apart his shirt to reveal a Superman-like blue shirt with an O on it instead of an S. Wow.
+1.
Dan Rooney has long been talking about buying out his brother's shares in the Steelers. With Obama's proposed capital gains tax increases you could see the process occur much faster. If they do it before Obama becomes President they could save around 80 million!
Link
tceaz Wrote:BlazerFan11 Wrote:If you don't think Obama's lead in the polls is forcing business people to rethink the way they are using their money right now, you are crazy.
Wayne Huizenga to sell Dolphins
This move will probably save him tens of millions of dollars.
What's funny (and very, very sad) is that while I looked at this page, there was a banner ad showing a cartoon of Obama ripping apart his shirt to reveal a Superman-like blue shirt with an O on it instead of an S. Wow.
+1.
Dan Rooney has long been talking about buying out his brother's shares in the Steelers. With Obama's proposed capital gains tax increases you could see the process occur much faster. If they do it before Obama becomes President they could save around 80 million!
Link
You guys act like the day Obama is inaugurated he will sign a decree increasing all taxes immediately. You should really chill out.
mixduptransistor Wrote:tceaz Wrote:BlazerFan11 Wrote:If you don't think Obama's lead in the polls is forcing business people to rethink the way they are using their money right now, you are crazy.
Wayne Huizenga to sell Dolphins
This move will probably save him tens of millions of dollars.
What's funny (and very, very sad) is that while I looked at this page, there was a banner ad showing a cartoon of Obama ripping apart his shirt to reveal a Superman-like blue shirt with an O on it instead of an S. Wow.
+1.
Dan Rooney has long been talking about buying out his brother's shares in the Steelers. With Obama's proposed capital gains tax increases you could see the process occur much faster. If they do it before Obama becomes President they could save around 80 million!
Link
You guys act like the day Obama is inaugurated he will sign a decree increasing all taxes immediately. You should really chill out.
With a likely dem controlled congress they would start in 2010.
any transaction such as this will have to be done quickly,
since the last time a dem was elected POTUS the tax increases were made retroactive.
mixduptransistor Wrote:You guys act like the day Obama is inaugurated he will sign a decree increasing all taxes immediately. You should really chill out.
You bring up a good point. I would like one of the polling groups to do a poll of how many people in this country are so infatuated with Obama that they would be willing to grant him that kind of power. I would be willing to bet the number would be around 25-30%.
BatesUAB Wrote:mixduptransistor Wrote:You guys act like the day Obama is inaugurated he will sign a decree increasing all taxes immediately. You should really chill out.
You bring up a good point. I would like one of the polling groups to do a poll of how many people in this country are so infatuated with Obama that they would be willing to grant him that kind of power. I would be willing to bet the number would be around 25-30%.
And I could probably come up with a poll for 25-30% support for instituting the Bible as supreme law or shipping all Mexicans out of the country, legal or not.
mixduptransistor Wrote:BatesUAB Wrote:mixduptransistor Wrote:You guys act like the day Obama is inaugurated he will sign a decree increasing all taxes immediately. You should really chill out.
You bring up a good point. I would like one of the polling groups to do a poll of how many people in this country are so infatuated with Obama that they would be willing to grant him that kind of power. I would be willing to bet the number would be around 25-30%.
And I could probably come up with a poll for 25-30% support for instituting the Bible as supreme law or shipping all Mexicans out of the country, legal or not.
And you know what the difference is? I've got enough objectivity to say that both groups are wrong, and if you had made your point first I would have said they are wrong and not tried to justify their position by giving an example of equal yet opposite stupidity.
Quote:shipping all Mexicans out of the country, legal or not.
If they want to stay here illegally then they should pay taxes like the rest of us.