What do you expect to happen in the next 4 years?
-
rmolin73
Sorry I didn't ask you. I'm still waiting on a link. You have to understand my lack of trust of you and your collective.QuakerOats;1316153 wrote:The two I saw today are major cutbacks at Boeing, and plants being idled by Caterpillar. -
QuakerOatsI could care less if you trust me. Look it up yourself.
And I'm sure the hundreds getting the pink slip are enamored about their chances of re-employment under another obama regime. -
rmolin73
I'm still waiting on a link. Your boy Quacker came up with two. Now that's a big ass list.fish82;1315779 wrote:The list of companies announcing mass layoffs is growing by the hour since yesterday. Good times ahead. -
gut
Dude, these guys don't read the business section.QuakerOats;1316172 wrote:I could care less if you trust me. Look it up yourself .
Anyway, I'm pretty sure Catepillar is old news. -
rmolin73
Yes we never ever read a businesses section. You guys are fun.
-
gut
Then why are you asking for links? If you read the newspaper you'd know this already.rmolin73;1316178 wrote:Yes we never ever read a businesses section. You guys are fun. -
BGFalcons82
In the next 4 years, we will have:
1. A recession. The economy is not anywhere near strong enough to grow through occasional setbacks. It will be blamed on Bush 43.
2. Further downgrading of our credit rating. There was an article today this is a certainty if the debt limit is raised again. Anyone think it won't be raised? It will be blamed on Bush 43.
3. The dollar will be deflated to its lowest level of all time. Bernacke will be praised for keeping interest rates low through QE-Infinity policies and continued borrowing from anyone and everyone. America is for sale to anyone whi wants to own our worthless currency.
4. Unemployment won't be below 7% for the next 4 years. Obama will be praised for such miraculous job creation.
5. Home values will finally rise to 2008 values in 2016. Obama will be praised for building back everything Bush 43 destroyed. 8 years of ostensibly 0% growth will be portrayed as worthy of Rushmore inclusion by the media.
6. Median income will continue its slide, exascerbated by the coming recession and job losses. Government will provide over 100 weeks unemployment benefits.
7. Foodstamp usage will increas by 1/3. It will be hailed as humanitarian and visionary.
8. California, Illinois and Michigan will apply for and receive a federal bailout for their malfeasance. Further, these states will see their population decrease as people flee for lower tax rates in the South.
9. Right to Work states will be sued ny Obama. Public unions rejoice and become larger.
10. Growth will average less than 2%. Bush 43 policies will be blamed by Obama and the media a full 8 years after Bush left office. Polls will show Americans agree that Bush 43 caused every down indicator.
There's 10 items and Obamakare will add even more misery. The solution proffered in the Fall of 2016 will be to spend even more and increase it to 27% of GDP. Only government can solve problems created by government...and, of course, George Bush. -
BoatShoes
When most of this is wrong like all of your other predictions have been are you going to change your beliefs about the world?BGFalcons82;1316221 wrote:In the next 4 years, we will have:
1. A recession. The economy is not anywhere near strong enough to grow through occasional setbacks. It will be blamed on Bush 43.
2. Further downgrading of our credit rating. There was an article today this is a certainty if the debt limit is raised again. Anyone think it won't be raised? It will be blamed on Bush 43.
3. The dollar will be deflated to its lowest level of all time. Bernacke will be praised for keeping interest rates low through QE-Infinity policies and continued borrowing from anyone and everyone. America is for sale to anyone whi wants to own our worthless currency.
4. Unemployment won't be below 7% for the next 4 years. Obama will be praised for such miraculous job creation.
5. Home values will finally rise to 2008 values in 2016. Obama will be praised for building back everything Bush 43 destroyed. 8 years of ostensibly 0% growth will be portrayed as worthy of Rushmore inclusion by the media.
6. Median income will continue its slide, exascerbated by the coming recession and job losses. Government will provide over 100 weeks unemployment benefits.
7. Foodstamp usage will increas by 1/3. It will be hailed as humanitarian and visionary.
8. California, Illinois and Michigan will apply for and receive a federal bailout for their malfeasance. Further, these states will see their population decrease as people flee for lower tax rates in the South.
9. Right to Work states will be sued ny Obama. Public unions rejoice and become larger.
10. Growth will average less than 2%. Bush 43 policies will be blamed by Obama and the media a full 8 years after Bush left office. Polls will show Americans agree that Bush 43 caused every down indicator.
There's 10 items and Obamakare will add even more misery. The solution proffered in the Fall of 2016 will be to spend even more and increase it to 27% of GDP. Only government can solve problems created by government...and, of course, George Bush. -
I Wear Pants
Hi there, I'd wager I read more business news and articles than everyone but a few here.gut;1316176 wrote:Dude, these guys don't read the business section.
Anyway, I'm pretty sure Catepillar is old news. -
BGFalcons82
Yeah, my bad. I should cease and decist reading. I should just believe that our government really does know how to control people and business so that everything results in fairness for all. It's worked so often in the history of the planet.BoatShoes;1316247 wrote:When most of this is wrong like all of your other predictions have been are you going to change your beliefs about the world?
Your team won on Tuesday. Better get crackin on solving everything cuz y'all got the answers. We are anxiously awaiting for your utopia. I can't wait. -
believer
BGFalcons82;1316275 wrote:Yeah, my bad. I should cease and decist reading. I should just believe that our government really does know how to control people and business so that everything results in fairness for all. It's worked so often in the history of the planet.
Your team won on Tuesday. Better get crackin on solving everything cuz y'all got the answers. We are anxiously awaiting for your utopia. I can't wait.
It's simple....tax the eeeeeeevil rich, introduce more wasteful Federal bureaucracy, and print more phony money. Problem solved. -
isadore
tax the rich, increase regulation of predatory financial institutions and corporations, more expansive monetary policy, sounds good to me.believer;1316310 wrote:It's simple....tax the eeeeeeevil rich, introduce more wasteful Federal bureaucracy, and print more phony money. Problem solved. -
I Wear Pants
The debt ceiling will only negatively affect our credit rating if it's held hostage again. S&P said they lowered it because of that, not because the limit was raised.BGFalcons82;1316221 wrote:In the next 4 years, we will have:
1. A recession. The economy is not anywhere near strong enough to grow through occasional setbacks. It will be blamed on Bush 43.
2. Further downgrading of our credit rating. There was an article today this is a certainty if the debt limit is raised again. Anyone think it won't be raised? It will be blamed on Bush 43.
3. The dollar will be deflated to its lowest level of all time. Bernacke will be praised for keeping interest rates low through QE-Infinity policies and continued borrowing from anyone and everyone. America is for sale to anyone whi wants to own our worthless currency.
4. Unemployment won't be below 7% for the next 4 years. Obama will be praised for such miraculous job creation.
5. Home values will finally rise to 2008 values in 2016. Obama will be praised for building back everything Bush 43 destroyed. 8 years of ostensibly 0% growth will be portrayed as worthy of Rushmore inclusion by the media.
6. Median income will continue its slide, exascerbated by the coming recession and job losses. Government will provide over 100 weeks unemployment benefits.
7. Foodstamp usage will increas by 1/3. It will be hailed as humanitarian and visionary.
8. California, Illinois and Michigan will apply for and receive a federal bailout for their malfeasance. Further, these states will see their population decrease as people flee for lower tax rates in the South.
9. Right to Work states will be sued ny Obama. Public unions rejoice and become larger.
10. Growth will average less than 2%. Bush 43 policies will be blamed by Obama and the media a full 8 years after Bush left office. Polls will show Americans agree that Bush 43 caused every down indicator.
There's 10 items and Obamakare will add even more misery. The solution proffered in the Fall of 2016 will be to spend even more and increase it to 27% of GDP. Only government can solve problems created by government...and, of course, George Bush.
As for your issue of states getting money. Why do you not have a problem with the vast majority of states receiving more federal aid than they pay in being Republican dominated states? -
fish82
Sorry to keep you waiting, Tiger. Glad I checked back before you got really persnickety.rmolin73;1316173 wrote:I'm still waiting on a link. Your boy Quacker came up with two. Now that's a big ass list.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/charlie-gasparino-obama-win_n_2089268.html
http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/grusbf5/good-morning-america-heres-those-layoffs-you-voted
http://www.humanevents.com/2012/11/08/forward-to-mass-layoffs/
Quacker isn't my boy. But of course, you already knew that. :rolleyes: -
I Wear PantsHere's what happened. Wall St. wanted less regulation, they were given this. They abused this greatly and it lead to far reaching consequences for all of us. So some regulations were put into place (not all of which are necessarily good ideas or the perfect way to deal with the situation) and Wall St. is throwing a hissy fit hoping we'll get rid of them again.
We won't and shouldn't. -
Classyposter58
The regulations they put into place in the 90s were taken advantage of. Subprime loans were a government idea and the reason the recession essentially happened. But yes the US will be at unemployment similar to what it was when Carter was in office which was 12%.I Wear Pants;1316327 wrote:Here's what happened. Wall St. wanted less regulation, they were given this. They abused this greatly and it lead to far reaching consequences for all of us. So some regulations were put into place (not all of which are necessarily good ideas or the perfect way to deal with the situation) and Wall St. is throwing a hissy fit hoping we'll get rid of them again.
We won't and shouldn't.
Job growth will be non-existant, heck I'm hearing there's a good chance I lose my health insurance over this or at least the great benefits I get. Bottomline is if you do well, you're screwed -
I Wear Pants
The 90s saw us strip away a ton of regulations on wall street. Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act being one of those:Classyposter58;1316335 wrote:The regulations they put into place in the 90s were taken advantage of. Subprime loans were a government idea and the reason the recession essentially happened. But yes the US will be at unemployment similar to what it was when Carter was in office which was 12%.
Job growth will be non-existant, heck I'm hearing there's a good chance I lose my health insurance over this or at least the great benefits I get. Bottomline is if you do well, you're screwed
[video=youtube;OvnO_SH-4WU][/video] -
Cleveland Buck
Wall Street loves regulations. It eliminates their competition. They already own politicians, borrow money at 0%, and bankroll the federal government with that free money. They love Obama just as much as they love Romney, so save the populist rhetoric mixed with fascist solutions.I Wear Pants;1316327 wrote:Here's what happened. Wall St. wanted less regulation, they were given this. They abused this greatly and it lead to far reaching consequences for all of us. So some regulations were put into place (not all of which are necessarily good ideas or the perfect way to deal with the situation) and Wall St. is throwing a hissy fit hoping we'll get rid of them again.
We won't and shouldn't. -
I Wear Pants
Except they hated regulations like Glass-Steagal and hate Dodd-Frank and a whole bunch of other regulations. And they don't love Obama as much as Romney as noted by 8 out of the 10 top companies who's employees donated to Romney were banksCleveland Buck;1316355 wrote:Wall Street loves regulations. It eliminates their competition. They already own politicians, borrow money at 0%, and bankroll the federal government with that free money. They love Obama just as much as they love Romney, so save the populist rhetoric mixed with fascist solutions.
And how is not letting banks fuck us over with incredibly risking gambles which then require bailouts to avoid even more massive economic damage a fascist viewpoint? -
Cleveland Buck
That was the only one. And it had almost zero effect on the financial crisis. Ask Alan Greenspan wha drove the crisis. Or better yet, ask the guy who explained what would happen 7 years before it happened.I Wear Pants;1316344 wrote:The 90s saw us strip away a ton of regulations on wall street. Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act being one of those:
[video=youtube;IHNp1wf1T_k][/video] -
Cleveland Buck
Those same banks were on Obama's list too, and those were his leading donors 4 years ago.I Wear Pants;1316359 wrote:Except they hated regulations like Glass-Steagal and hate Dodd-Frank and a whole bunch of other regulations. And they don't love Obama as much as Romney as noted by 8 out of the 10 top companies who's employees donated to Romney were banks
And how is not letting banks fuck us over with incredibly risking gambles which then require bailouts to avoid even more massive economic damage a fascist viewpoint?
Assuming you know the meaning of the word fascism, you can surely see how vowing to steal money from the people to give it to private banks when they need it would fit the bill.
Nothing requires bailouts. If banks fail, others emerge. They would be far less likely to fail or act recklessly if they knew they weren't going to be bailed out. Trying to plug a volcano filled with red hot Federal Reserve credit by filling it with government concrete is a waste of our time, money, and freedom. -
I Wear Pants
I would rather the banks not be allowed to engage in such obviously risky behavior. Our difference in opinion here is you appear to think that laissez-faire is a perfect method or that it is appropriate for every industry. I don't, I think there are places where the consequences of companies or industries failing have serious and far reaching complications which are too grave to allow the inevitable failure of them due to risky/bad/greedy business decisions.Cleveland Buck;1316364 wrote:Those same banks were on Obama's list too, and those were his leading donors 4 years ago.
Assuming you know the meaning of the word fascism, you can surely see how vowing to steal money from the people to give it to private banks when they need it would fit the bill.
Nothing requires bailouts. If banks fail, others emerge. They would be far less likely to fail or act recklessly if they knew they weren't going to be bailed out. Trying to plug a volcano filled with red hot Federal Reserve credit by filling it with government concrete is a waste of our time, money, and freedom.
And yes they were his top donors four years ago and he is not free from blame in the "who lets Wall St. do tons of shady shit" game. I was just saying that your statement that they like him equally well as Romney is false. They like him, just not as much as Romney. -
Cleveland Buck
It wasn't risky at the time. The Fed, bankers, and government thought they could keep housing prices climbing forever, as though they are exempt from economic laws. The buying and selling of mortgages and mortgage backed securities were unaffected by Clinton's "deregulation" of the banks. If you insist on keeping the central bank to fuel the bubbles, they will always come. No regulation will ever prevent that, short of outlawing banking in this country.I Wear Pants;1316368 wrote:I would rather the banks not be allowed to engage in such obviously risky behavior. -
I Wear Pants
It was definitely risky.Cleveland Buck;1316372 wrote:It wasn't risky at the time. The Fed, bankers, and government thought they could keep housing prices climbing forever, as though they are exempt from economic laws. The buying and selling of mortgages and mortgage backed securities were unaffected by Clinton's "deregulation" of the banks. If you insist on keeping the central bank to fuel the bubbles, they will always come. No regulation will ever prevent that, short of outlawing banking in this country.
