The Stock Market and Investing

18788909293213

Comments

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,611
    Where were these people during the previous regime?
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,724
    >He seemed like an individual that is very much willing to compromise to get this done.

    Note that compromise was not allowed, even reading the darn bill wasn't allowed, for ObamaCare. Why should compromise with democrats occur now that the Dems want compromise. Or that Obama wants to paint himself as the great mediator--but never present a definite bill and definite numbers; it was when Obama moved the numbers on how much new revenue he would take that Boehner said it was over.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Where were these people during the previous regime?

    I think I addressed that in a prior post. First those candidates endorsed by the Tea Party and won this last election, were not part of the Congress that was spending out of control. The Tea Party was not even in existence in 2008 that I know of. It did not evolve until Obama started circumventing the Constitution. First by screwing over the bond holders at GM. Then pushing through the stimulus and Obamacare with no oversight. He had control of both houses and used it to the max. Thus the Tea Party was born. Comparing the spending from 2001 -2006 with the last 4 years is laughable. No comparison in any part of government including the military. Obama has willingly stretched the military even beyond what GW Bush did. Now we are stirring up China with recon flights over Chinese air space. That's real bright. What is not visible from our spies in the sky satellite surveillance?

    So those like Charlie that consider the Tea Party moronic can thank Obama and the Democrat controlled Congress up till 2010 for their existence. I kind of like them for the most part.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,724
    edited July 2011
    >I feel compelled to help those in need.

    I have to disagree:

    And that is a very good trait. Donate your money to whatever charities you feel will help people in need. Work at food kitchens, food pantries, etc. But don't feel free to donate my tax money.

    Indeed, I have watched the people who appear to be in need but never tried to do anything with their lives thrive in this area of W. Ohio. It's an industry to know how to get all kinds of assistance.

    And if the people in poverty were tabulated including the benefits they receive in their incomes, we have many fewer in need than appear to be in need.

    Now on the other hand there are people who truly have no way out of their problems: elderly, infirm, mentally handicapped, etc. But I'll take the Walmart first-of-the-month crowd here in this area and bet that 80% of them are NOT truly needy because they didn't have the opportunity for schooling in their public schools, etc.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,356
    You are right, and in retrospect it was not a good idea to sell. In effect, I outsmarted myself. I was in at $119. and sold at around $150. so I certainly did not get hurt, but it could have been much better.

    After that run up I thought the stock might waffle around for awhile and I could get back in...but I missed the boat. It is not the first mistake I have made and I am sure it won't be the last.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • cyclone4cyclone4 Member Posts: 2,302
    edited July 2011
    After watching both Obama and Boehner speak to the nation, I have come to the conclusion that Boehner or whoever wrote that speech is a lying SOB. I hope you were all watching MSNBC before and after the speeches. Chris Mathews who I believe is very neutral on politics, said that Boehner was being dishonest when he said that there was bipartisan acceptance of his plan recently.

    I felt that the President was in a very compromising mood and gave a great speech. But the Republicans (basically the Tea Party) say no to every compromise. They are the ones that are holding America hostage.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,611
    edited July 2011
    Did they say anything even if they weren't in congress? And what about the others? I still see loads of hypocrisy here.

    Maybe we are spying on fake Apple stores :shades: China, the land of capitalism, ethics, honesty, and justice.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    edited July 2011
    Charlie,

    I thought they were both awful. All I saw was finger pointing and I d'ont see anything fresh coming from Obama and he's the leader. Like it or not at least Boehner put forward an idea and Obama in criticizing a plan without revenue was actually criticizing the Harry Reid plan put forward today. That is very telling. And if I hear him say one more time he inherited a problem I'm going to be sick to my stomach. What President didn't inherit a problem? He says the same thing over and over. Boehner said in his interview with Chris Wallace that the $800bln revenue grand plan is on the table and that he never took it off. He said this on national TV only 24 hours ago. Why is Obama not jumping on that? I d'ont get it. The only thing it denies him is the $400mln extra he asked for which is a pittance, plus of course some of his pride. They had a deal, sign it and let's move on. And if Boehner wasn't sincere in what he said to Wallace and the national audience then Obama can call him out on it. It's right there in the Fox broadcast for him to make Boehner look like a fool if he now reneges.

    This stupid charade has gone too far now. In any negotiation you go back to what you were very close on. That's how you get the best deal done.
  • tagmantagman Member Posts: 8,441
    Charlie...

    I think there is MORE than enough blame to go around, frankly.

    If my crystal ball were polished up, I'd predict that we will see the compromise being no tax increases and the extension going past the elections. In the end that's not too bad, because we will not deal with Obama's tax increases, and there will be no default for a while longer.

    We'll see.

    TM
  • cyclone4cyclone4 Member Posts: 2,302
    The President admitted that there is blame on both sides.

    The Reid plan announced today is precicely what you are hoping for.
  • tagmantagman Member Posts: 8,441
    edited July 2011
    The Reid plan announced today is precicely what you are hoping for.

    Hard to say any of us are hoping for any of this, other than to finally get it all resolved for crying out loud, without any tax increases, and before the deadline. It's all a screwed up mess, AFAIAC. But I do think both sides should essentially be in agreement in terms of satisfying the date and the taxes, as I posted. (Yes, I am encouraged that there might not be any new taxes, of course, as I see taxes as counter-productive). All that said, I predict there could be one more attempt by the Republicans regarding the $$, and that would be the focus of a final compromise between both sides, and then it's a done deal.

    I got the sense by your post that you believe that the Republicans are more to blame than the Democrats, but I don't know about that after seeing Tim's weekend interview... it was revealing.

    And I think there are Republicans that are as ridiculously extreme on the right as Obama is on the left. It's all pathetic... IMHO.

    TM
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    edited July 2011
    There was a Senator on the news tonight who said the average time period interval for raising the debt ceiling is 7 months. I'm not sure what length of time he was measuring that over, 5 years, a decade or longer. But if it is something that has been repetitive over 7 month periods then why all of a sudden will a President say he's vetoing anything that doesn't carry past 18 months?
  • tagmantagman Member Posts: 8,441
    I saw that and thought the same thing. Frankly, none of the dates are making sense to me, other than to figure they are for political purposes and political posturing/negotiating.

    Like I posted above to Charlie, it's all been pathetic, IMHO.

    TM
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    The Reid plan announced today is precicely what you are hoping for.

    The Reid plan requires trust that the Democrats will carry through with cuts in spending. Reagan learned the hard way you cannot trust a Democrat. He signed the bill to raise taxes and Tip O'Neill screwed him on the cuts. So we ended up with a deficit and more waste in government. The Reid bill is the same kind of smoke and mirrors. Fortunately we have some people in the House now that see through the fog spread by the President and the Democrats in the Senate.

    You and I are just going to have to disagree. Our ideology is just about 180 degrees apart. Hopefully I can convince enough of my weak friends that voted for Obama in 2008 to get smart in 2012.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    The GOP sent a bill to raise the debt ceiling to Bill Clinton in 1997. He vetoed it. The debt ceiling did not get raised until 2002 by the GOP signed by GW Bush. Bill Clinton held out and we are still kind of solvent. I suppose Barry can do the same. Maybe visit the debt ceiling again in 2015.

    http://www.opencongress.org/articles/view/2295-A-Brief-History-of-Debt-Limit-Vot- es-in-the-House
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    edited July 2011
    Maybe we are spying on fake Apple stores

    It looks like the fake stores are selling genuine Apple products. Gray market electronics is an old business platform. The majors in Japan have allowed their stuff to be sold in the USA at big discounts without any warranty for decades. Looks like the only thing fake in hundreds of Chinese Apple Stores, is the look and feel of the store itself.

    According to the Dushi Shibao newspaper report, three additional stores were found to be using Apple’s logo without having a prior permission. When investigated these stores were found to have operating permits. Though all these stores were selling genuine Apple products, only two were told to close because they could not produce an official business license, a local government official said.

    http://www.usamarketnews.com/major-business-news/4455/number-of-fake-apple-store- s-jumps-in-china.html

    image
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Are You Better Off Today Than Jan. 20, 2009?

    Despite those hundreds of billions of blown stimulus dollars and almost as many upturn promises from Joe Biden, 82% of Americans still say their job market is struggling. Ninety percent rate the economy negatively, including half who give it the worst rating of "poor."

    A slim 15% claim to be "getting ahead financially," half what it was in 2006. Fully 27% say they're falling behind financially. That's up 6 points since February.

    A significant majority (54%) says they've been forced to change their lifestyle significantly as a result of the economic times -- and 60% of them are angry, up from 44%.


    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/07/obama-poll-jobs-democratic-ba- se-crumbling.html

    few people noticed what Vermont's Sen. Bernie Sanders said:

    "I think it would be a good idea if President Obama faced some primary opposition."


    image
  • cyclone4cyclone4 Member Posts: 2,302
    edited July 2011
    I got the sense by your post that you believe that the Republicans are more to blame than the Democrats, but I don't know about that after seeing Tim's weekend interview... it was revealing.

    There is NO question about it. The Democrats are conceding a lot and the Republicans are not willing to bend at all. You're damn right that I think the Republicans share more of the blame. And at least 67% of the U.S. population agree with me.

    I think it is the Republicans who are trying to prevent Obama from being re-elected by having this idiotic short term plan. Who wants to go through with this crap every 6 months? That's ridiculous.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    edited July 2011
    I think it is the Republicans who are trying to prevent Obama from being re-elected by having this idiotic short term plan. Who wants to go through with this crap every 6 months? That's ridiculous.

    Well most of the time passage of a new debt ceiling is automatic and if the Dems had held the House it'd be automatic right now. But the spending has reached unheard of levels and the government expansion is greater than ever so someone needs to stand up and demand change. We are reaching a point where we are starting to get divisions on the right and left and that's a good thing. In criticizing the Boehner plan last night for lack of new tax revs Obama also criticized Reid, who made a step in the right direction but who is not cutting enough real expenses. It's pretty easy to cut new budgeted expenses and from what I read that's what many of Reids cuts are. We need to cut into the heart on things already out there which is where Boehner is going. Boehner also in allowing a plan with new tax revs in negotiations with Geithner and Obama actually broke from many Reps. These opposite moves by Reid and Boehner are actually good things and maybe the only good thing I heard in this whole debacle. We need pushes toward moderation not extremes. I maintain a big factor in the middle of all this is Pelosi, who probably influences Obama more than anyone and who is your direct opposite of the Tea party.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,724
    edited July 2011
    >Chris Mathews who I believe is very neutral on politics,

    ROFLMAO. He's as democrat oriented as he could be!

    He's the one with the tingle running up his thigh as OBama was being elected in 08.

    >After watching both Obama and Boehner speak to the nation, I have come to the conclusion that Boehner or whoever wrote that speech is a lying SOB.

    I see just the reverse in who was lying. Obama even tried to cover up that he had to spent several trillion wasted on stimulus and pork: he called it things he had to do once he took office, again implying it were "Bush's fault" again. Will Obama grow up and take responsibility?

    Obama, who had no interest in discussion nor in compromise during his first two years, now wants to flaunt that compromise has to come from the other party. I loved it that someone is suggesting a primary candidate to run against Osama.

    Obama tried to blame the Republicans for kicking the can down the road? He's the one who wants any plan that puts the next increase after the 2012 election. I wonder why Obama doesn't want a six-month committee, bipartisan, bicameral to set a program?--he wants it after his 2012 election. He knows he's in trouble with his history.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • tagmantagman Member Posts: 8,441
    edited July 2011
    Guys,

    Ford is a looking attractive right at this moment, IMO. It broke under $13/share. You might have been concerned that you previously missed the opportunity for Ford... but here we are right after a reasonably good report, with good forward looking comments... and on a down day for the market, it seems to me that this is a pretty good time to buy some Ford, especially if you don't own any, and to add to your holdings today if you already do own some. If it continues to dip, accumulate it progressively. No reason to load up too heavy, but definitely F should be in the portfolio, IMO, and this looks like a good opportunity.

    I just bought some more shares myself.

    TM
  • cyclone4cyclone4 Member Posts: 2,302
    But the spending has reached unheard of levels and the government expansion is greater than ever so someone needs to stand up and demand change.

    And the Dems I think are bending a lot on the spending portion. Hell, the Reid plan does not even raise taxes. So what do you want, blood? Yes Obama spoke about a balanced plan of cutting spending and and raising the tax a bit and eliminating loopholes for wealthy and the huge corporations. But he also supports the Reid plan and he will vote for it even though he will take a lot of heat from his Party.
  • cyclone4cyclone4 Member Posts: 2,302
    edited July 2011
    Look, I'll make it very simple for you. I DISAGREE and I am insulted with everything you say. Perhaps you are a Tea Party member, but if not, I suggest you join them.
  • laurasdadalaurasdada Member Posts: 5,224
    Regarding the Sox, Charlie: Wicked pissah!

    Thanks for the compliments, things are Ok here. Hopefully with you and yours, too.

    Bruins with the Cup, Sox win the World Series and the Pats finally win the Super Bowl they should have these past few years. It's going to be a good sports year (Celts, too?) for Boston. We'll have to raise the trophy ceiling...

    My son told me to buy Apple when it was down around $325. Unfortunatley, he wouldn't give me the money to do so. :sick:

    '21 Dark Blue/Black Audi A7 PHEV (mine); '22 White/Beige BMW X3 (hers); '20 Estoril Blue/Oyster BMW M240xi 'Vert (Ours, read: hers in 'vert weather; mine during Nor'easters...)

  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    edited July 2011
    From everything I read I liked that balanced plan. It's a shame Obama rose the ante on it by $400mln. I could live with that tax increase. The problem I have is when Obama quantifies $250K earners as millionaires and billionaires. He should be limiting the taxes to $750K and up and preferrably $1mln and up. The $250K-$500K crowd and somewhat above is where you'll find a lot of small business and a significant amount of their income is paper to them as they need that money for further investing and usually for loan paydowns. And as I've said many times higher taxes impacts the most important bank loan covenant ratio that exists - the FCC - or fixed coverage charge ratio. Increase taxes on the small business owner and you put them closer to defaulting on that ratio or at a minimum too uncomfortably close to it to hire new employees or invest. Worse is that in these economic times banks are much tougher on the FCC ratio than ever. Wells Fargo actually had one as high as 1.50 which is incredible coverage, so high a coverage ratio that a business probably needs little or no borrowing. In better times it is as low as 1.05 and usually 1.10-1.20 today by banks that are more agressive. So your cash flow has to be at least 120% of your committed payments which include taxes or in the case of an LLC or subchapter S, your tax distributions to the owners. Default language in a loan allows a bank to either close it out (most will never do that to a good loan though) or raise the interest rate. So you get a double whammy, extra interest and extra taxes. This is why jobs are penalized.

    Anyway I looked over the Reid and Boehner plans in todays NY times. They are actually pretty close and both sides should find compromise and agreement in both of them. This story in the Times is one of the better ones I read and it's a rare one where a Times reporter is allowed to criticize Obama.

    Excerpt:

    Third, the president lost his cool. Obama never should have gone in front of the cameras just minutes after the talks faltered Friday evening. His appearance was suffused with that “I’m the only mature person in Washington” condescension that drives everybody else crazy. Obama lectured the leaders of the House and Senate in the sort of patronizing tone that a junior high principal might use with immature delinquents. He talked about unreturned phone calls and being left at the altar, personalizing the issue like a spurned prom date.

    Obama’s Friday appearance had a gigantic unintended consequence. It brought members of Congress together. They decided to take control. The White House is now on the sidelines. Democratic and Republican Congressional leaders are negotiating directly with one another.


    Link;

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/26/opinion/26brooks.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Congress%2- - - - - - - 0in%20the%20lead&st=cse
  • slorenzenslorenzen Member Posts: 694
    Gosh, we sure DON'T want to have fiscal responsibility, do we? :sick:

    Here is yet ANOTHER reason why Obama is so poorly suited.

    Even the DEMS are against this!

    http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/07/26/democrats-oppose- -obama-un-gun-control-treaty
  • tagmantagman Member Posts: 8,441
    edited July 2011
    Yes Obama spoke about a balanced plan of cutting spending

    Charlie,

    I don't mean anything here to upset you, but Obama has TALKED a lot about a lot of things... many of which are not represented by his actual behavior. If there is a LAW that REQUIRES him to cut spending, then I expect he might do so... hopefully.

    But, he is like a heroin addict when it comes to spending... promising to quit, but his addiction to spending has already irreversably gone down in history as perhaps the MOST out-of-control LARGEST increase in deficit spending in the history of mankind. That's his legacy.

    (Given his out-of-control spending... just imagine his taxation goals!)

    TM
  • tagmantagman Member Posts: 8,441
    edited July 2011
    The problem I have is when Obama quantifies $250K earners as millionaires and billionaires.

    Yeah, just think about all those corporate jets those $250K earners will have to give up.

    Brilliant Obama... brilliant... NOT!

    Edit: Frankly, I think if everyone had a corporate jet, it would represent an amazing healthy economy. The more the better... think about it!

    TM
  • cyclone4cyclone4 Member Posts: 2,302
    Too bad about last night. They gave the game away. 3 times they had a man on 3rd with one out and they failed to score in the 9th, 12th, and 13th innings. That failed suicide bunt (Scutaro missed the sign) was atrocious.

    But they will probably win the next 3 against the Royals starting tonight.
  • cyclone4cyclone4 Member Posts: 2,302
    Len, COMPROMISE is indeed the way to get this done. And, I think the Dems have compromised quite a bit. Hopefully, cooler heads will prevail and we see this come to a successful conclusion.

    I want to make it clear that I have no problem with folks like you and TM here on this forum since you are perhaps only just to the right of center (if not right at the center), but I have a huge problem with some people here that are total right wingers and I find it very difficult to keep my sanity with these people.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,724
    >I DISAGREE and I am insulted with everything you say.

    You are welcome to disagree, but you don't have to be DISAGREEABLE.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,724
    edited July 2011
    >Hell, the Reid plan does not even raise taxes.

    Does the Reid plan include cuts in the increases projected to get to the measured level of "savings" or does it actually cut from the current level of spending. I heard someone say that part of Reid is just those imaginary future increases that are being "saved" and very little in real cuts.

    I think most of us are in favor of saving money from the _current_ spending levels.

    Edit: I did find a source that says $400 billion of $2.7 trillion/10yr is in cuts in interest on _future_ spending cuts.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-25/republicans-push-dueling-plans-with-dem- ocrats-for-raising-u-s-debt-limit.html

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,611
    Have you cried for the opponent to "take responsibility"? How responsible has the GOP been in the past 30 years? It never ceases to amaze me the screaming I am seeing right now that I did not see during the previous regime, when so many sheeple thought the false boom was more than a mirage perpetrated by our criminal financial leadership for their own undeserved gain.

    Regarding the 250K business in other discussions, it is too low and should be something like 750K or more...but there will be screams about that too, from those who believe they are on the border of becoming a tycoon and that such policy will stop their success. Trickle down and all.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,724
    edited July 2011
    >but his addiction to spending has already irreversably gone down in history as perhaps the MOST out-of-control LARGEST increase in deficit spending in the history of mankind. That's his legacy.

    Because of his lack of ability to compromise on the ObamaCare spending that kicks in mostly in 2014 with taxes and yet wanting compromises from the Republicans now, is it time to move out of the stock markets in the next day to avoid the downturn from the brinksmanship he has played with the ceiling?

    I never have seen Obama present a definite plan with numbers. He just played the spoiler with the idea he'd critique whatever the Republicans brought without ever committing to a definite plan of his own.

    Obama couldn't even take ownership for the huge increases he has cost in the debt in his speech last night--he could only blame Bush for the costs. Yet Obama spent huge amounts in two years. He continued the two wars and opened a third when he was going to get us out of the wars upon election. He should have gotten us out of the wars. That was a campaign promise. If Bush were so wrong, he had his chance to correct Bush's errors.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,611
    1 in 5 unemployed? I don't know if even I can buy that one. Does this include 16 year olds and 75 year olds?

    Only a chosen few were "getting ahead" in 2006. We will never move forward until the lie of the economics of those years is admitted.

    The Billary pic is funny anyway.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,611
    Probably pilfered by corrupt officials, the same types who are coming to the west on shopping trips for ill gotten undeserved toys and property. You don't succeed in China via any kind of honesty or ethics, nor without towing the party line. Our capitalist free trade globalist traitors need to admit that China is not their capitalist baby, but a bizarre mix of Soviet Russia and [non-permissible content removed] Germany.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    edited July 2011
    The Reid plan and the Boehner plan are mainly cuts from discretionary spending by $1-1.2 trillion. Reid then uses spending that will naturally come out, Afghanistan and Iraq, as part of the future spending cuts along with other modest cuts in the future. What they are remain hazy. Boehner says that the military cuts are a natural bonus in savings and wants to identify an additional $2trillion of current spending to find in the next 6 monts. He also wants a balanced budget proposal which, AMZINGLY, the Dems and Obama find irresponsible, and refuse to vote on Imagine a balanced budget being tabled in the Senate. Well you d'ont have to imagine it because it was. But IMO if Boehner really wants a balanced budget he has to be realistic on some tax revenue increases at least to folks above $500K. I d'ont know of any way you can identify a small business owner who earns $250-500K from a W2 earner. The small business owner is very likely to have such earnings more on paper than in real cash in his bank account. The W-2 earner has the real cash in hand. If you have to pay higher taxes on cash you earned but either re-invested or paid down loans on then you need to find savings somewhere else, which is usually non-hiring, reduced expansion or cut existing employees. Just about every small business acts responsibly so unlike our government it doesn't have trillions of dollars in descretionary spending to cut from.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,724
    edited July 2011
    >Reid then uses spending that will naturally come out, Afghanistan and Iraq, as part of the future spending cuts along with other modest cuts in the future.

    The cuts in Afghanistan and Iraq costs are probably part of what the other person included as costs that were already going to be cut, therefore they weren't truly new, additional cuts.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,724
    >Imagine a balanced budget being tabled in the Senate. Well you d'ont have to imagine it because it was. But IMO if Boehner really wants a balanced budget he has to be realistic on some tax revenue increases at least to folks above $500K.

    Calls to a congressional office were heavily in favor of the balanced budget concept, at least before today. The Cap, Cut, and Balance was a good one.

    And indeed there do need to be loopholes filled and some tax rates looked at. BUT our major problem is not the 50% who don't pay taxes at all, it's that they are getting money back from all kinds of credits even though they paid NO taxes--earned income tax credit and on and on. There's even an industry build about helped get those payouts for people who own no taxes. I noticed starting a few years back there are billboards all around the low income/no income areas of Dayton promising refund checks from Uncle Sam, that's from you and me.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    edited July 2011
    That's the problem with the Reid plan. He's also probably calculating interest savings from the war costs into his $2.7 trillion. It's as if you and I count a savings from an expiring mortgage in the next 5 years as a spending cut. It's not. It's a ntaural expiring expense. The only thing the Reid plan really says is that Dems will not match it with a new replacement expense. Believe me if left to themselves they would. But to me not only is it not a real cut but what if something else unexpected comes up? That's why Boehner's plan makes so much more sense to me. He wants to identify and cut real things that the Government is wasting away right now. The Dems simply d'ont want that other than the $1.2trillion in descretionary items. Descretionary in my book means unneeded in the first place so the initial cuts by both Boehner and Reid should be easy. But after that Reid walks away and Boehner says let's get serious. One major criticism I have of Boehner and Reps is that neither wants to tax the excess unneeded cash of the real rich (and certain corps - Apple $76bln growing 8-10bln a quarter that has no value to investors valuation of the company - let's get real here) and that to me is as equally stupid as the Dem position on looking for real cuts. It seems Boehner himself is not against this but that he may not be able to sell it to his party. No Dem has - IMO - stepped out against their party in identifying real LT cuts so they are at a less advanced position than Boehner is on compromise, IMO. Of course a liberal media spins it totally different and puts full blame on Reps.
  • tagmantagman Member Posts: 8,441
    edited July 2011
    I want to make it clear that I have no problem with folks like you and TM here on this forum since you are perhaps only just to the right of center (if not right at the center)

    I appreciate that Charlie.

    But, I think Obama is quite a bit left of center, and in the same way that those that are quite a bit right of center can be frustrating to you, the same is true for those of us that are quite frustrated by Obama's policies.

    Frankly, the whole notion that $250K represents Obama's tax target is just plain destructive and downright wrong. It begs the question as to why he would be sooooo far off the target of the truly wealthy (those that actually can and do own corporate jets) and instead target the marginally successful. Something is horribly wrong here with his thinking. And it forces one to consider the consequences of his tax goals... which could be very dangerous... and could lead to a two class society in which one class is wealthy and pays all the taxes, while the other class is struggling and pays no taxes or near-zero taxes and receives entitlements. Many of those marginally successful folks would eventually be forced into the lower bracket due to the excessive burden upon them individually and in terms of their businesses, because so many of those in that bracket are small business owners. Another burden on business in America is the LAST thing that America needs.

    I keep saying that the president of the United States needs to create an environment for business expansion and business establishment right here in the USA. It is imperative that the president understands this, but Obama is the opposite of this. We need to create a climate for business that is irresistable and compelling, and would result in a near wild-fire of business expansion. The resulting employment and tax revenues would sky-rocket. The economy would flourish.

    But, instead we have Obama's extreme left view, and it is equally frustrating for many.

    TM
  • cyclone4cyclone4 Member Posts: 2,302
    How responsible has the GOP been in the past 30 years? It never ceases to amaze me the screaming I am seeing right now that I did not see during the previous regime, when so many sheeple thought the false boom was more than a mirage perpetrated by our criminal financial leadership for their own undeserved gain.

    Thank you fintail!
  • cyclone4cyclone4 Member Posts: 2,302
    Only a chosen few were "getting ahead" in 2006. We will never move forward until the lie of the economics of those years is admitted.

    Thank for a second time!!
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    edited July 2011
    Yeah - I didn't post this last night or earlier because I knew it would aggravate Charlie. But last night Obama was so deceiving in his talk. Never did he say that the Government had the cash to keep paying social security and mandatory items well beyond August 2nd. He presented that August 2nd and a non-vote of acceptance meant that Social security payments would not go out. This is a downright lie and the intention is to scare social security recipients and that voting class. Than he moves on to say that his tax increases would be on the wealthy that have yachts, private jets and the like or who are very wealthy hedge fund managers. In a disconnected sentence he says no one under $250K would be taxed more. Heck 50% of the American public is untaxed and most of the American public in the $250-500K bracket is the small business he needs for jobs but he'll never say that. He puts them in the class of yacht and private jet owners instead when maybe .001 of them, if that is one. So he is a liar and deceiver as well and what's worse than anything to me is he's still acting like a campaigner rather than a leader. Again that is where his comfort range is. In his speeches he doesn't come across to me a Presidential at all. He comes across a lecturer and there is no bigger turn off than that. We have a ridiculous Congress but as JFK said in the recent mini-series when Bobby wanted him to talk down to them. JFK - "I cant do that, these are men that have sacrificed their lives to serve the US".
  • cyclone4cyclone4 Member Posts: 2,302
    But, instead we have Obama's extreme left view, and it is equally frustrating for many.

    I honestly do not believe that he is anywhere near the extreme left in this issue. How is that possible when he offered deep spending cuts of $4 trillion?
  • cyclone4cyclone4 Member Posts: 2,302
    Never did he say that the Government had the cash to keep paying social security and mandatory items well beryond August 2nd. He presented that August 2nd and a non-vote of acceptance meant that Social security payments would not go out. This is a downright lie and the intention is to scare social security recipients and that voting class.

    Len, what difference does it make if it's August 2nd or September 2nd? The truth is that Social Security payments will eventually stop if we don't get a deal done. Btw, I am one of those that started receiving Social Security checks recently. However, I am MUCH more concerned about those that totally rely on this payment.
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,356
    "Just pass a law that says anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of the GDP, all sitting members of congress are ineligible for re-election".

    Problem solved.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • tagmantagman Member Posts: 8,441
    I honestly do not believe that he is anywhere near the extreme left in this issue. How is that possible when he offered deep spending cuts of $4 trillion?

    He can talk and offer until he is blue in the face. It's in stark contrast to his actual record.
    Charlie, this president is a classic extreme taxaholic / spendaholic. It's his legacy... and it is definitely far left of center.

    TM
  • tagmantagman Member Posts: 8,441
    edited July 2011
    Consider Ford tomorrow. Price is even better than when I mentioned it this morning.

    Solid long-term.

    EDIT: There were some negative remarks on Ford on CNBC's Fast Money today. Concerns over labor union and the need to think very long-term. Possible more price declines ahead, and if so, be patient, and we might be able to pick up Ford for an even BETTER price per share. IOW, the time to buy may be just a little further down the road.

    TM
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,356
    I've had Ford for a while. In at $12.80.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

Sign In or Register to comment.

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.