Politics & Economics Open Thread

Talk about politics and the global/national economy to your heart’s content, as much as it takes to get it out of your system so the rest of the site can stick to real estate and housing.

For previous political/economic open threads, click here.

As of 09/07/2010, global economic comments that do not directly relate to Seattle-area real estate go only in threads designated for this specific subject.

0.00 avg. rating (0% score) - 0 votes

About The Tim

Tim Ellis is the founder of Seattle Bubble. His background in engineering and computer / internet technology, a fondness of data-based analysis of problems, and an addiction to spreadsheets all influence his perspective on the Seattle-area real estate market. Tim also hosts the weekly improv comedy sci-fi podcast Dispatches from the Multiverse.

1,200 comments:

  1. 1001
    whatsmyname says:

    Scotty,

    Mitt says terrorists wouldn’t attack our embassy and kill 4 of us if Obama was tough and acted with resolve. What does it say about Republican resolve that terrorists would kill a thousand times as many in our own homeland under Cheney, Rumsfeld? Here’s Mitt frightening future terrorists with his own resolve:

    “It’s not worth moving heaven and earth, spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person.” —Mitt Romney, speaking in 2007 about killing Osama bin Laden

  2. 1002
    pfft says:

    By whatsmyname @ 97:

    RE: Scotsman @ 990
    Holy smokes, Obama is running the LA sheriff’s office now? He’s everywhere. Well, everywhere something is bad – because he is always to blame.

    People in the embassy put out a statement of respecting another religion? Well that’s not an American value. That is a magic statement direct from Obama to undermine free speech. Romney and Scotsman respect free speech for convicted felons; just not free speech for those who would respect freedom of religion or criticize an a-hole.

    Sheriff wants to talk with guy looks to have violated his terms of probation? No, it’s Obama on a personal vendetta.

    Welcome to the Costanza party: It’s not a lie, if you believe it.

    I for one am shocked that scotsman would mislead us.

  3. 1003
    pfft says:

    By whatsmyname @ 1:

    Scotty,

    Mitt says terrorists wouldn’t attack our embassy and kill 4 of us if Obama was tough and acted with resolve. What does it say about Republican resolve that terrorists would kill a thousand times as many in our own homeland under Cheney, Rumsfeld? Here’s Mitt frightening future terrorists with his own resolve:

    “It’s not worth moving heaven and earth, spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person.” â��Mitt Romney, speaking in 2007 about killing Osama bin Laden

    remember Bush gave up the hunt!

  4. 1004
    Scotsman says:

    Quick Notes About the Unemployment Rate

    •This month the number of people employed fell by 119,000.
    •In the last two months, the number of people employed fell by 314,000!
    •In the last year, the civilian population rose by 3,695,000. Yet the labor force only rose by 971,000.
    •This month the Civilian Labor Force fell by 368,000.
    •Last month, those “not” in the labor force increased by 348,000 to 88,340,000, another record high.
    •This month we set another record high with a whopping 581,000 dropping out of the labor force. If you are not in the labor force, you are not counted as unemployed.
    •In the last year, those “not” in the labor force rose by 2,723,000
    •Over the course of the last year, the number of people employed rose by 2,347,000

    Read more at http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/#kTrZrQHiedF34E5M.99

  5. 1005

    By pfft @ 91:

    By Scotsman @ 990:

    Obama should resign:

    http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/150781/

    I don’t click links for pajamas. care to quote or summarize?

    It’s about the authorities in this country going after the film maker who make the film causing the unrest in the middle east.

    I’m not sure exactly what they’re going after him for, or whether it’s legitimate or not, but I really doubt it whatever it is the authorities would have been paying attention to him but for the film and the outrage it caused.

    To quote (or paraphrase) The Clash: “You have the right to Free Speech, as long as you’re not dumb enough to actually try it.”

    Switching targets, I did see someone on TV trying to equate this movie with yelling fire in a theater because it causes unrest elsewhere in the world. So she would have no problem banning the movie or punishing the maker of the movie. I haven’t seen the movie, so I don’t know how disgusting it is or is not, but I have a huge problem with the standard for Free Speech being whether it causes unrest here or abroad. Just another example of how extreme liberals are attacking the Bill of Rights.

  6. 1006

    By Blurtman @ 93:

    RE: – Read the first which was ambiguous as to whether QE actually works. Buying paper from banks leaves them with more money to do what? To make more money. Not necessarily by adding jobs to the economy. The wealth effect via rising asset prices – great, if that means the 1% will employ an additonal butler or gardener, but of little consequence for the majority of Americans.

    You thought I insulted you before, comparing something you said to something pfft said, well you might want to sit down! ;-)

    Now you’re sounding like President Obama! His comments like that caused people in Las Vegas to lose their jobs because companies were afraid to hold events. As to your comment, believe me, the butlers, gardeners, Ferrari salespeople, contractors, designers, barbers, etc., all think that the money the 1% spend on their profession is important!

    Me, I don’t mind that John Edwards pays $500 for a haircut. It’s his money and that money is money that the barber will have and spend on something else. It’s better than the money just sitting in John Edwards’ pocket.

  7. 1007

    By pfft @ 3:

    By whatsmyname @ 1:

    Scotty,

    Mitt says terrorists wouldn’t attack our embassy and kill 4 of us if Obama was tough and acted with resolve. What does it say about Republican resolve that terrorists would kill a thousand times as many in our own homeland under Cheney, Rumsfeld? Here’s Mitt frightening future terrorists with his own resolve:

    “It’s not worth moving heaven and earth, spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person.” �Mitt Romney, speaking in 2007 about killing Osama bin Laden

    remember Bush gave up the hunt!

    I love the partisan spin on this. Let’s distort the effort was or was not spent catching one person, and give credit to one man totally ignoring the efforts of many who probably worked tirelessly for years.

    And while we’re focusing on distortion, let’s totally ignore the thousands of Americans in uniform that are dying for a very questionable cause. Fighting in Afghanistan because OBL once used it as a base to launch attacks on the US is like neutering one male dog in the neighborhood and thinking that will keep your bitch from getting pregnant. Afghanistan is going to be a mess going forward no matter what we do, because it has no port and its only major resource is the ability to grow poppies. And even if we did somehow magically “neuter” Afghanistan, there are going to be many other places just as bad in this world where terrorists can group together. But hey, if only there’d been some recent history to let us know that fighting in Afghanistan is not a good idea.

    Yep, clearly President Obama is on firm ground attacking Romney’s lack of foreign policy experience.

    Edit: Hey, the bad word converter de-sexed my comment about the female dog, but did recognize I was talking about a dog.

  8. 1008
    Blurtman says:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 1001 – Hey, Mitt’s service in Vietnam speaks for itself, pilgrim.

  9. 1009
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 98 – Wall Street gets cheap funds to speculate. Can the growing millions on food stamps borrow? The foreclosed upon? The jobless?

    I will say it once again, Obummer’s largest mistake was to not restore faith in the US financial and economic system. There is no trust. Even the guy on the street knows the financial system is crooked, there is no accountability for crimes, money can disappear and you don’t get it back.

    No, Bernanke is using half baked theory and shallow concern about the unemployed to continually reward the bankers. Obummer clearly signalled his intent with the appointment of Larry Summers and Tim Geithner. Obummer is the benevolent face of corporate ownership of America.

    Time to tear it all down.

  10. 1010
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 99 – OK. Let’s test your theory. Let’s monitor the increase in credit to the little guy going forward due to QE3.

  11. 1011
    Blurtman says:

    Foof for thought:

    “The banks are choosing not to reduce mortgage rates further. One reason: By keeping the rates elevated, they are able to earn much larger profits when they sell the mortgages into the bond market. If the level of profits on those sales stayed at recent average levels, borrowers might, for instance, pay $30,000 less in interest payments on a $300,000 mortgage, according to a recent New York Times analysis.

    Based on these practices, it seems as if the banks are an obstacle to the Fed’s latest efforts to generate economic growth. It’s almost impossible to imagine the Fed forcing banks to lower credit card rates, or take lower profits on their mortgage sales.

    Main Street may therefore have to wait a long time for the full effect of the Fed’s latest actions.”

    http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/09/14/how-much-does-the-feds-plan-really-help-main-street/

  12. 1012

    By whatsmyname @ 97:

    RE: Scotsman @ 990
    Holy smokes, Obama is running the LA sheriff’s office now?

    Actually, I think the feds probably do control the LA sheriff’s office. Or maybe that’s just the city police. I’m pretty sure they took over one just like they recently took over Seattle.

  13. 1013
    whatsmyname says:

    “Mitt says terrorists wouldn’t attack our embassy and kill 4 of us if Obama was tough and acted with resolve. What does it say about Republican resolve that terrorists would kill a thousand times as many in our own homeland under Cheney, Rumsfeld? Here’s Mitt frightening future terrorists with his own resolve:

    “It’s not worth moving heaven and earth, spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person.” �Mitt Romney, speaking in 2007 about killing Osama bin Laden

    remember Bush gave up the hunt!”

    I love the partisan spin on this. Let’s distort the effort was or was not spent catching one person, and give credit to one man totally ignoring the efforts of many who probably worked tirelessly for years.

    Partisan spin? I’m not sure if this was directed at pfft or at me, but look again at the argument. This is not about who got Osama. This is about Mitt’s new line that the Libya attack happened due to lack of “strength” and “resolve” a la Neocon foreign policy.

    1. A comparison of history and the hard facts on the two attacks show this proposition to be laughably absurd.

    2. Even if it had been true, Mitt’s quote shows that he has personally demonstrated less strength and resolve to terrorist than Obama. Obama is the better man by Mitt’s own standard.

    As to one man taking all the credit. This is blatantly false. Obama fully credited the seal team on day one, and has often said that “we” (the country) got Bin Laden. That is how it should be. But since you bring it up, why must all good things be distanced from the top man, but all negative things (let’s say unauthorized quotes from officials 3 times removed from the president) become his direct and personal actions/speech? (and that, distorted)

    I agree we shouldn’t be in Afghanistan. But it’s been far fewer deaths than Iraq for which there wasn’t even a link to the Taliban, and we have taken out quite a few Taliban leaders. Remember the Taliban? They killed thousands of American civilians on real US soil. -Also the Afghanistan program will likely fewer American deaths than the Iran war that the Republicans have already got planned out.

  14. 1014

    By whatsmyname @ 1013:

    Partisan spin? I’m not sure if this was directed at pfft or at me, but look again at the argument. This is not about who got Osama. This is about Mitt’s new line that the Libya attack happened due to lack of “strength” and “resolve” a la Neocon foreign policy.

    . . .

    As to one man taking all the credit. This is blatantly false. Obama fully credited the seal team on day one, and has often said that “we” (the country) got Bin Laden. .

    As to the first part, by partisan spin I’m not just focusing on people here. I’m talking across the country.

    As to Romney, I think he’s taking the wrong approach. A better approach would have been to point out that President Obama having “lead from behind” caused a lot of resentment. We would have a lot more support there if the US planes had not backed off from their attacks and defense of the insurgents, and instead left Nato to take the lead. The people on the ground at risk remembered that.

    Similarly, as to one man taking the credit, that was not my statement. My statement was giving one man the credit. It’s about how partisan Democrats give President Obama all the credit for that result, not that President Obama is claiming he was solely responsible.

    On that topic, if W had faced the same circumstances I suspect he would have made the same decision to go (interesting that Biden wouldn’t have). I don’t have a clue what Romney would have done.

  15. 1015

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 28:

    By Jonness @ 27:

    In truth, home prices in the Seattle area have decreased over the last 7 year period. China is slowing, Europe is imploding, and the U.S. economy is so wrecked that Bernanke is fabricating $40 billion per month out of thin air and dumping it into the U.S. housing market.. . .

    The Federal government borrows more money per year, and dumps it into the economy, than the entire U.S. individual income taxes and corporate taxes combined. .

    All excellent points. But some people in this country do not realize that things are not going well. The money spent has bought complacency.

    Jonness’ post (and hopefully my response), from the Trulia thread, really points out that having Air Force One and every other advantage that an incumbent President has really isn’t that important in the scheme of things. What’s really important is having the government spend billions (trillions?) of dollars so that people won’t mind that unemployment is over 10% in California. They’ll vote for you anyway!

    Is it no wonder that so many years of the past 40 have been years with deficits?

  16. 1016
    Scotsman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1005

    The movie has been available for 6 months. It is not the issue- it is the distraction.

  17. 1017

    RE: Scotsman @ 16 – Who knows when the nutcases first saw it. But again, I’m not convinced this isn’t related to the 9/11 anniversary. Incredible coincidence if it’s not.

    I would agree with those that say the movie was the spark, but another spark would have likely caused similar results.

  18. 1018
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 1009:

    RE: pfft @ 98 – Wall Street gets cheap funds to speculate. Can the growing millions on food stamps borrow? The foreclosed upon? The jobless?

    no but when the economy gets a boost those people get jobs.

    Why Bernanke’s Plan Will Work
    http://www.businessinsider.com/why-ben-bernankes-plan-will-work-2012-9

    if the banks don’t think it won’t work they’ll just buy treasuries, they won’t gamble with it. in order to gamble with it they must thing that QE will work and buy stocks or commodities. they have to believe there will be real demand though.

  19. 1019
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 10:

    RE: pfft @ 99 – OK. Let’s test your theory. Let’s monitor the increase in credit to the little guy going forward due to QE3.

    why not do it for QE? in the last 2 years almost 5 million jobs have been added.

  20. 1020
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 16:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1005

    The movie has been available for 6 months. It is not the issue- it is the distraction.

    why did you mislead us with the pajamas link? why are you not giving us the whole story?

  21. 1021
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 1019 – Increase in credit was the topic at hand. Further, ex-student loan debt. Getting nervous?

  22. 1022
    Scotsman says:

    “QE does little to promote job growth. QE1 cost $1.7 trillion. QE2 cost $600 billion. Using Bernanke’s math, it cost the Fed $2.3 trillion to create two million jobs. The average annual salary in the U.S. for 2010 was $41,674. By the math given to us by Bernanke himself, each job created by QE has cost the Fed $1,150,000.”

    http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2012-09-16/there-she-blowsevil-plan-830-bdi-slope-hope

  23. 1023
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 1021:

    RE: pfft @ 1019 – Increase in credit was the topic at hand. Further, ex-student loan debt. Getting nervous?

    volcker is for stimulus is for QE

  24. 1024
    pfft says:

    POLITICO: Mitt Romney’s Campaign Is In Complete Shambles

    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/politico-mitt-romney-campaign-stumbles-2012-9#ixzz26hC1DEjp

    4 more years!

  25. 1025
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 22:

    “QE does little to promote job growth. QE1 cost $1.7 trillion. QE2 cost $600 billion. Using Bernanke’s math, it cost the Fed $2.3 trillion to create two million jobs. The average annual salary in the U.S. for 2010 was $41,674. By the math given to us by Bernanke himself, each job created by QE has cost the Fed $1,150,000.”

    http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2012-09-16/there-she-blowsevil-plan-830-bdi-slope-hope

    instead of buying short-term debt the fed just bought long-term debt. There was no spending of money that otherwise wouldn’t be spent. the fed had to buy something with it’s money.

    your first mistake was reading zerohedge.

    why did you mislead us earlier?

  26. 1026
    ChrisM says:

    Anyone old enough to remember when we used to mock the Soviet Union for their demands for identification?

    http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?llr=9ta5jwdab&v=001-9B9G95DKurqati2PlRu4w2UGkPS46X-MbFX4eTAUVLCjOa5IDOTw3KDWktpwgttx5bnHnC3kB9Lu5siupXpM_6FjSiVBvADOdBJO8zTdnw%3D

    “As a precautionary measure, NYPD will establish check points throughout Lower Manhattan. It is important that employees and students carry Pace ID cards in order to gain access through these checkpoints.”

  27. 1027
    ChrisM says:

    RE: pfft @ 24 – Are you kidding?

    Initially I thought that Romney had sufficiently pissed off the Ron Paul voter that Obama had a clear victory, but Obama so completely botched Libya that now the unemployment at 8+% coupled with general disgust now ensures an Obama defeat.

    With unemployment at 8% and *complete bungling* of Middle East, a dead body would gain more votes than Obama.

    You’re probably too elitist to understand how damaging (via humiliation) the Libya actions can be presented to a high-school graduate who never attended college (who votes).

    It’s all about demographics.

    Perhaps the cynical calculus is that Americans wouldn’t vote against a President in a time of war, but geeze, didn’t that just happen the last cycle???

  28. 1028
    One Eyed Man says:

    RE: Scotsman @ 1022

    Perhaps one should argue that at current lower interest rates the paper bought during prior QE is more valuable now than when it was originally purchased by the Fed, thus resulting in the conclusion that the Fed has actually made money by creating jobs. That’s the conclusion which one would reach based upon “mark to market” which all good Ayn Rand lemmings know is the true believer’s way to follow the wisdom of the market (even though such an appraisal of value uses the marginal price of current sales to unreasonably value a huge block of the commodity at issue). The conclusion would be equally as absurd as that opined by Zerohedge which places the value of the QE purchased securities at Zero(hedge).

    The true cost will likely be the discounted value of the QE paper when it is sold back into the market at interest rates that will likely be well above current rates. The question I have is whether the member banks will eventually bear that cost as some form of decrease in the value of their capital reserves with the Fed or if that cost just leaks out to the public or private sector in some weird way.

    (Liked your post the other day, Late Lament is one of my favorite poems.)

  29. 1029
    One Eyed Man says:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 1

    As a result of the CIA assassinating the Iranian Premier in 1953 because he had nationalized the Iranian oil industry and was considered a “communist”, the Iranian’s took the US embassy staff hostage when they dethroned the Shaw in late 1979, arguably as a means of insuring that the US wouldn’t interfere again. Being a tough guy or a thug might in the short term limit the violence through fear of retribution, but it doesn’t necessarily insure respect or a lasting peace. If it did, we’d still be supporting Sadam and a host of other petty dictators (-Oh- that’s right, we do still support a host of petty dictators because they keep the non-christian third world riff raff in line for us and we don’t really believe that the third world is ready for democracy – my mistake for trying to be a non-hypocritical political idealist).

  30. 1030
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 1023 – Volcker would jail the banksters.

    Remember the serious pushback that William K. Black faced when he began investigatinf criminal banksters in thye S&L crisis? Senators and congressman werre trying to shut him down.

    I could not imagine Eric Place Holder inevestigating Enron as was done under W. Those were the days. What a great president!

  31. 1031
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 6 – You are right. Trickle down has been shown to work. Convincingly.

    When it all goes down, man, we are coming for you. :>)

  32. 1032

    RE: ChrisM @ 1027 – I have no idea what you’re basing that on, but the main reason President Obama likely will win is that the United States is mainly made up of partisan Democrats and partisan Republicans, and there are more of the former than the latter. There are far too few people willing to consider which candidate is actually the best candidate.

    In addition, the method of picking the candidates sucks, in that they are decided by the partisans of each particular party, or by default in the case of an incumbent President. We’re actually lucky that Romney is the choice on the Republican side, because there could have been much worse choices. Imagine if you wanted to buy a car relying on two advisers, and one was very pro-GM and the other very pro-Chrysler. Would that likely help you find the best car? No, and our primary system is basically that when it comes to picking presidential candidates.

    Finally, people are stupid. Very stupid. That’s why the election has been mainly about some really stupid topics (e.g. Romney’s dog on top of his car and President Obama eating dog as a child). The average person doesn’t have a clue about any economic issues. They don’t even understand the economic data in even an incorrect way. The average person doesn’t even think at all about Afghanistan, or mid-east policy.

    It’s a hell of a way to pick the leader of a country. Unfortunately it also seems to be one of the best ways to pick a leader, based on the lack of other good alternatives elsewhere.

  33. 1033

    By Blurtman @ 1031:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 6 – You are right. Trickle down has been shown to work. Convincingly.

    When it all goes down, man, we are coming for you. :>)

    LOL. I’ll hide! ;-)

    Trickle down is one of those terms that is used when you want to convey a result without any thought or analysis. Clearly trickle down works to some extent. Those earning below a median income do not employ many people at all, except indirectly.

  34. 1034
    David Losh says:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 1013

    We just killed Al Queda’s second in command while he was in Yemen.

    Obama has done a great job in the war on terror.

    What I really liked is that Obama sent a rescue into Somalia. That was a blow to terrorists everywhere. If we can go in, and get out, of the strongest of terror nations we can go anywhere.

    This idea that we can beef up the military in a show of strength is absurd. In face to face combat it makes no difference how many bombs that you have.

    On another note Israel, and Netanyahu have become a huge election year problem. If we invade Iran with Israel, Israel will be gone. There will be no coming back for Israel. Unless they find some diplomatic ground they will be lost.

  35. 1035
    pfft says:

    By ChrisM @ 1027:

    RE: pfft @ 24 – Are you kidding?

    Initially I thought that Romney had sufficiently pissed off the Ron Paul voter that Obama had a clear victory, but Obama so completely botched Libya that now the unemployment at 8+% coupled with general disgust now ensures an Obama defeat.

    yeah I am going to have to go ahead and disagree with that Peter. That was an Office Space reference.

    Romney Camp Won’t Offer Specifics On New Pledge To Provide Specifics
    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/09/romney-camp-promises-more-specifics-while-offering-no-more-specifics.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

    More good news. Elizabeth Warren is in the lead.

  36. 1036
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 30:

    RE: pfft @ 1023 – Volcker would jail the banksters.

    Remember the serious pushback that William K. Black faced when he began investigatinf criminal banksters in thye S&L crisis? Senators and congressman werre trying to shut him down.

    I could not imagine Eric Place Holder inevestigating Enron as was done under W. Those were the days. What a great president!

    that’s about the only thing good W did.

  37. 1037
    Scotsman says:

    RE: One Eyed Man @ 1028

    “whether the member banks will eventually bear that cost ”

    Nah, they will be passed around/off to other banks and held as reserves, at purchase value, until paid off. More magic accounting. They can always change the rules as needed to insure survival on an accounting basis. Now balanced cash flow, that’s a bitch.

  38. 1038
    pfft says:

    oh mittens.

    Romney Claims Obama Voters All Depend On Government Checks In Unearthed Video
    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/09/romney-hidden-video-fundraiser-47-percent.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

    No republican gets social security, medicare or any other government program?

    Mittens is wrong anyway, almost every worker pays taxes to the feds, just not necessarily income tax.

    The bush tax cuts dropped almost 8 million from the tax rolls…

    Bush Tax Cuts Erased Income Tax Burden for 7.8 Million Families
    http://taxfoundation.org/article/bush-tax-cuts-erased-income-tax-burden-78-million-families

  39. 1039

    RE: pfft @ 1038 – Get your spin here, get your spin here. /pfft

    Getting a welfare check is not depending on the government. Taking advantage of Obamacare by having your 20 year old kid insured under your policy would be an example.

  40. 1040

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 39:

    Getting a welfare check is not the only way of depending on the government. Taking advantage of Obamacare by having your 20 year old kid insured under your policy would be an example.

    Should have read.

  41. 1041
    pftt says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 1039:

    RE: pfft @ 1038 – Get your spin here, get your spin here. /pfft

    Getting a welfare check is not depending on the government. Taking advantage of Obamacare by having your 20 year old kid insured under your policy would be an example.

    so no Republican takes advantage of this?

    now I know why I don’t read your posts anymore.

  42. 1042
    Blurtman says:

    QE a failure?

    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?get_gallerynr=3510

    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=211566

    “There have been no jobs created, net of working-age population increases, since QE-anything began.”

    “QE has been an abject and objective failure.

    Period.

    The real reason for QE is that the banks are still ridiculously levered compared to both historical norms and sustainable levels.”

    Doh!

  43. 1043
    whatsmyname says:

    By Scotsman @ 1004:

    Quick Notes About the Unemployment Rate

    �Over the course of the last year, the number of people employed rose by 2,347,000

    Read more at http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/#kTrZrQHiedF34E5M.99

    I don’t know if jobs gained or lost is a perfect comparison for the delta of people employed, but during the last presidential election year in 2008, the number of jobs lost was 2.6MM. Sure, it’s a negative number, but it’s a bigger number, right?

    read more at
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/09/business/worldbusiness/09iht-jobs.4.19232394.html?_r=0

  44. 1044
    whatsmyname says:

    Wow. Romney finally provides some specifics:

    Romney confronted a new headache Monday after a video surfaced showing him telling wealthy donors that almost half of all Americans “believe they are victims” entitled to extensive government support. He added that as a candidate for the White House, “my job is not to worry about those people.”

    http://seattletimes.com/html/politics/2019181472_apusromney.html

  45. 1045
    pftt says:

    By Blurtman @ 1042:

    QE a failure?

    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?get_gallerynr=3510

    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=211566

    “There have been no jobs created, net of working-age population increases, since QE-anything began.”

    “QE has been an abject and objective failure.

    Period.

    The real reason for QE is that the banks are still ridiculously levered compared to both historical norms and sustainable levels.”

    Doh!

    so w/o QE things would be even worse? thanks!

  46. 1046
    Scotsman says:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 1043

    The only number worth following, and one that can’t be easily manipulated, is the percentage of the population employed. That number equates to the available tax base. And as you know its been trending down for a decade or more. Not much to debate, eh?

  47. 1047
    pftt says:

    By Scotsman @ 1046:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 1043

    The only number worth following, and one that can’t be easily manipulated, is the percentage of the population employed. That number equates to the available tax base. And as you know its been trending down for a decade or more. Not much to debate, eh?

    meaning?

    also do you know that that is because the population is aging. Do you know what group Romney is overwhelming winning? those 65+. in other words the people who are on medicare and SS whom Romney just said were mooching off of “strivers.” most people on welfare are white. mitt will win a majority of the white vote…

  48. 1048
    whatsmyname says:

    RE: Scotsman @ 1046
    The percentage of the population employed is a nice enough number, but it doesn’t account for demographic shifts…. kind of like the way the mix affects median housing prices. Perhaps that is why your source didn’t include it.

    I personally couldn’t quickly find the number of persons employed in 2008 which is why I settled for jobs gained/jobs lost. I will grant you some imprecision, and even perhaps some manipulation may have affected those numbers. But starting from a 4.9MM Obama jobs advantage – there seems to be plenty of cushion.

  49. 1049

    RE: One Eyed Man @ 1029
    Mossadegh, the democratically elected Iranian PM overthrown in 1953 was not assassinated. He lived another 14 years under house arrest. We did assassinate Allende in Chile, one of the South Vietnamese PMs, and the dude in Guatemala. But in the case of Iran, the CIA, in co-ordination with the Brits, chose not to create a martyr.

  50. 1050
    Scotsman says:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 1048

    “In 2000, the nation had roughly the same number of children and non-working adults. Since then, the population of non-working adults has grown 27 million while the nation added just 3 million children under 18.”

    “Economist Eileen Applebaum of the liberal Center for Economics and Policy Research says the real problem is a lack of jobs. Another 25 million people would work in a healthy economy”

    Plus a cool inter-active chart that shows the percentage of total population that is working in each state, as well as a three decade trend down. That’s not just Bush’s fault:

    http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/employment/2011-04-13-more-americans-leave-labor-force.htm

  51. 1051
    One Eyed Man says:

    RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 1049

    Thanks Ira – In the immortal words of Steve Martin, “I forgot.”

  52. 1052

    RE: whatsmyname @ 44 – You and pfft need to quote what he actually said. He’s right, IMHO.

    “There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it. That that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what,” Romney said.
    Romney added: “My job is is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives. What I have to do is convince the 5-10 percent of people who are independents, that are thoughtful, that look at voting one way or the other depending upon, in some cases, emotion, whether they like the guy or not.”

    http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/17/13926387-romney-secretly-recorded-remarks-not-elegantly-stated?lite

    And no pfft, it doesn’t mean that no Republicans take advantage of those things. That’s not the argument, but nice spin. What he’s saying is that 47% of Americans like big government that spends more than it takes in, for one reason or another. And he’s right that the voters that matter are the independents.

    What he didn’t say is that the other side is just as bad, if not worse. There’s probably 30% of voters who won’t vote for President Obama because they think he wasn’t born in the U.S., or because they think he’s a “Muslin.” You also have people who won’t vote for President Obama because of his race, and people who won’t vote for Romney because of his religion.

    It’s a comment about the voters! I said it even worse yesterday. Most people are stupid. Really stupid. That’s the typical voter.

  53. 1053

    By whatsmyname @ 44:

    Wow. Romney finally provides some specifics:

    Romney confronted a new headache Monday after a video surfaced showing him telling wealthy donors that almost half of all Americans “believe they are victims” entitled to extensive government support. He added that as a candidate for the White House, “my job is not to worry about those people.”

    http://seattletimes.com/html/politics/2019181472_apusromney.html

    Read your link. Try to find where it says he’s talking about not worrying about those people voting for him, as opposed to not worrying about them in the broader context. And then try to think why you read such a biased piece of trash. And then try to think why you posted such a biased piece of trash.

    Seriously. Why do you try to mis-state what Romney said? What purpose does that serve you? Are you trying to deceive everyone here? That’s what it takes to support President Obama. He’s a failure, but his supporters try to deny that and try to misdirect the average voter. That’s all they can do when they can’t point to his record of failure.

  54. 1054

    You really have to love our press coverage on Romney “gaffes.”

    He goes to London and expresses the same concern that the press had been for weeks about whether they were ready, and he’s supposedly created an international incident. But of course, Romney wouldn’t know anything at all about the difficulties of putting on an Olympics and the problems that can be faced. /sarc

    He says the same thing everyone has been saying about this election for a year, that the important voters are the very small group of independents, and suddenly he doesn’t care an any way at all about those who vote democratic.

    Sort of makes you wonder how those members of the press will vote, right? /sarc

  55. 1055

    Apparently the tape was released partly due to the involvement of one of Jimmy Carter’s relatives.

    http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/18/13938614-how-the-romney-video-leaked-for-carters-it-was-personal?lite

    I’d probably be upset too if Romney were comparing the failures of President Obama to one of my relatives! ;-)

  56. 1056
    Scotsman says:

    Recent polls suggest Romney is getting a bump from this. The base is fired up. And that wins elections.

  57. 1057
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 1049 – The Terminator is a non-flying drone. We are the evil empire.

  58. 1058
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pftt @ 45 – Yes, it is a great dodge. What, I dropped a nuke on New York? Well, if not for that, things would be worse.

    How could it be worse? I am about to be stoned to death. Jehovah! Jehovah!

  59. 1059
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Scotsman @ 46 – More precisely, it is the labor force participation rate, which measures 16-65, thus removing the retiring baby boomer skewing. It is horrendous under Obummer, but, without him, you know it would only be worse. /snark/

    Let’s try that with George W. Why, if we didn’t invade Iraq, things would have been worse. Hmmmmm…. Works for Obummer. Works for W.?

  60. 1060
    Blurtman says:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 44 – It’s the Free Shyte Army versus The Wall Street Crime Family. Grab a seat and watch it.

  61. 1061

    By Scotsman @ 1056:

    Recent polls suggest Romney is getting a bump from this. The base is fired up. And that wins elections.

    I doubt any polls have been released that were polled before this was news.

    Still, it really does contrast President Obama and Romney well, along the lines of President Obama’s “You didn’t build it” comment. Big government versus limited government. Some people will vote for big government and spending that can’t be afforded right up until the end, even if it’s completely unaffordable. That was proven in Greece.

    And as a reminder, I didn’t mind the stimulus 3+ years ago, but at some point enough is enough, and at some point, prior debt makes it not prudent. 3+ years ago I was pointing out that the stimulus could have been even larger, but for our then existing debt. That debt is now much larger. If we couldn’t afford more then, we can’t afford more now.

  62. 1062

    Now we know why there was a hidden camera in the room. ;-)

    http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/09/romney-secret-video-marc-leder-sex-parties

    Hey, the bad word converter doesn’t affect the operation of the link!

  63. 1063
    One Eyed Man says:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 1044

    If I were writing copy for the Big “O” after the Mother Jones story, my next 30 second national spot would read something like this:

    A young sergeant standing at Arlington Cemetary or in front of one of the memorials:

    “I’m a sergeant in the United States Army. My wife is a homemaker and takes care of our 2 young children. As a pay grade E-5 with 4 years of experience I make $33,000 per year. I come from a middle class American family. I’m well train, work hard, and spend long hours away from home. I don’t consider myself or my family to be “entitled” or reliant on government entitlements. I have aspirations and goals, but I’m currently in the bottom half of American wage earners. I answer the call when the Commander-in-Chief needs me because America and what it stands for are important to me. I hope that America and hard working American families in all economic brackets are important to you when you cast your vote this November.”

    Then either leave it at that or perhaps too be extra cheezy cut to a scene of a young family in the distance placing flowers on an Arlington grave site with the audio at low volume playing Romney saying he doesn’t worry about the 47%. Then cut to the Big “O” saying:

    “I approve this message.”

  64. 1064
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 1050:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 1048
    “Economist Eileen Applebaum of the liberal Center for Economics and Policy Research says the real problem is a lack of jobs. Another 25 million people would work in a healthy economy”

    That’s not just Bush’s fault:

    bush left the economy in shambles. keep trying. maybe you can speak at a romney fundraiser?

  65. 1065
    pfft says:

    By Scotsman @ 56:

    Recent polls suggest Romney is getting a bump from this. The base is fired up. And that wins elections.

    have you made plans for not posting on SB in Nov. Did you plan a hike? the romney campaign is collapsing.

  66. 1066
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 60:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 44 – It’s the Free Shyte Army versus The Wall Street Crime Family. Grab a seat and watch it.

    it’s not the free shyte army. just about everyone pays taxes. you may need a student loan while I may need unemployment insurance. that is the way the world works.

  67. 1067
    David Losh says:

    RE: Scotsman @ 1056

    The base is backing away from Romney.

    Romney is coming across as an elitist on the economy, and bumbler on foreign policy.

    The remarks Romney made about Israel, and the Palastinians, upset a lot of the base Republicans. You won’t be able to ignore Israel, or the Middle East.

    As much as we may fear Islamists, some conservatives fear Israel.

    Romney is getting to be his own worst enemy.

  68. 1068
    whatsmyname says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 1053:

    By whatsmyname @ 44:

    Wow. Romney finally provides some specifics:

    Romney confronted a new headache Monday after a video surfaced showing him telling wealthy donors that almost half of all Americans “believe they are victims” entitled to extensive government support. He added that as a candidate for the White House, “my job is not to worry about those people.”

    http://seattletimes.com/html/politics/2019181472_apusromney.html

    Read your link. Try to find where it says he’s talking about not worrying about those people voting for him, as opposed to not worrying about them in the broader context. And then try to think why you read such a biased piece of trash. And then try to think why you posted such a biased piece of trash.

    Seriously. Why do you try to mis-state what Romney said? What purpose does that serve you? Are you trying to deceive everyone here? That’s what it takes to support President Obama. He’s a failure, but his supporters try to deny that and try to misdirect the average voter. That’s all they can do when they can’t point to his record of failure.

    I half agree with your first statement, but the percentage drops rapidly from there.

    I read the (now much edited) article, and posted before hearing the tape. Yes, there were definite problems of context about “caring”. Although, frankly 47% goes way beyond welfare and special help. Is he including social security and medicare recipients? Government employees? Does he really have no voter support there? Are they all aggrieved whiners? Is a man who speaks contemptuously of half the American people really fit to be president?

    I am not sure that the Seattle Times (formerly considered this town’s Republican newspaper) truly qualifies as trash.

    No attempt by, or need for, me to intentionally misrepresent what Romney said. But since you bring it up Why did Republicans and Romney (personally) misrepresent Obama’s words in “you didn’t build that”, adopting that as a theme for the convention? Why did Romney misrepresent an embassy statement of conciliation worded as religious tolerance as Obama apologizing for American free speech? Talk about misdirection. You didn’t howl then. Sorry Mr. Pot, but I am not Mr. Kettle.

    Finally, the “failure” thing is a great piece of name-calling. What are the standards for success? No President has ever got us out of a hole the size the Bush left in only 4 years. That’s history, baby.

  69. 1069
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 1066 – Romney was targeting the parasites who leech off the system, taking out more than they put in. I would have thought he would want the support of the banking community, but I guess not.

  70. 1070

    By pfft @ 64:

    By Scotsman @ 1050:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 1048
    “Economist Eileen Applebaum of the liberal Center for Economics and Policy Research says the real problem is a lack of jobs. Another 25 million people would work in a healthy economy”

    That’s not just Bush’s fault:

    bush left the economy in shambles. keep trying. maybe you can speak at a romney fundraiser?

    Just curious. If Obama wins and the economy still sucks in 2016, will you still be supporting the Democratic candidate and blaming Bush? No need to answer–we all know the answer to that one.

    The real question is do you think President Obama is responsible at all for anything bad that happened during his tenure, or does he just get credit and no blame? Wait. No need to answer that either. We all know the answer to that too.

    Yes Bush left the economy in shambles. That doesn’t mean it was his fault, but even assuming it was, candidate Obama promised to fix the economy, and he failed.

  71. 1071

    By pfft @ 66:

    By Blurtman @ 60:

    RE: whatsmyname @ 44 – It’s the Free Shyte Army versus The Wall Street Crime Family. Grab a seat and watch it.

    it’s not the free shyte army. just about everyone pays taxes. you may need a student loan while I may need unemployment insurance. that is the way the world works.

    You need to think of secondary effects.

    Student loans make tuition rates go up for everyone. What’s the net effect of that?

    Unemployment insurance, particularly allowing it for longer terms, makes people less likely to spend as much effort looking for work.

    Of the two, it is easier to deal with the secondary effects of unemployment insurance. Student loans on the other hand are pure evil, leaving many students with damaging debt and the others (or their families) with fewer resources moving forward. It’s not even clear they lead to more people being educated.

  72. 1072

    By David Losh @ 67:

    RE: Scotsman @ 1056

    The base is backing away from Romney.

    Romney is coming across as an elitist on the economy, and bumbler on foreign policy.

    As opposed to President Obama who came up with the idea of a surge in Afghanistan (how original), which has now failed, or who allowed our ambassador in a foreign country which just had a civil war to go without adequate protection. And he’s not doing well with Russia, China and Iran too!

    The remarks Romney made about Israel, and the Palastinians, upset a lot of the base Republicans. You won’t be able to ignore Israel, or the Middle East.

    I have no idea what you’re talking about there. Do you think that Republicans are pro-Palastinian? Do you think that is somehow ignoring Israel?

    As much as we may fear Islamists, some conservatives fear Israel.

    Again, what are you talking about?

  73. 1073

    By whatsmyname @ 1068:By Kary L. Krismer @ 1053:By whatsmyname @ 44:

    Wow. Romney finally provides some specifics:

    Romney confronted a new headache Monday after a video surfaced showing him telling wealthy donors that almost half of all Americans “believe they are victims” entitled to extensive government support. He added that as a candidate for the White House, “my job is not to worry about those people.”

    http://seattletimes.com/html/politics/2019181472_apusromney.html

    Read your link. Try to find where it says he’s talking about not worrying about those people voting for him, as opposed to not worrying about them in the broader context. And then try to think why you read such a biased piece of trash. And then try to think why you posted such a biased piece of trash.

    Seriously. Why do you try to mis-state what Romney said? What purpose does that serve you? Are you trying to deceive everyone here? That’s what it takes to support President Obama. He’s a failure, but his supporters try to deny that and try to misdirect the average voter. That’s all they can do when they can’t point to his record of failure.

    I half agree with your first statement, but the percentage drops rapidly from there.

    I read the (now much edited) article, and posted before hearing the tape. Yes, there were definite problems of context about “caring”. Although, frankly 47% goes way beyond welfare and special help. Is he including social security and medicare recipients? Government employees? Does he really have no voter support there? Are they all aggrieved whiners? Is a man who speaks contemptuously of half the American people really fit to be president?

    Rather obviously he’s not trying to say all 47% of the people who are solidly behind President Obama are all exactly the same. If he had said they have 2.3 children, would you think they all were 3 months pregnant? He was trying to paint a picture of what they were like in general.

    As to the caring, again it’s about doing things to get them to vote for him. He realizes it’s a waste of his time to try to go after certain people (or even certain states). But let’s say he becomes President and puts in place policies that are aimed at making more people more independent. Is that good or bad? It would depend on the policy. If it’s to totally cut of welfare in January, 2013, or ever, that would be bad. If it’s to help even more people move off or welfare, that could be good. Depending on what he does, I would consider that a form of caring, although obviously he could also be doing those things to reduce government spending.

    No attempt by, or need for, me to intentionally misrepresent what Romney said. But since you bring it up Why did Republicans and Romney (personally) misrepresent Obama’s words in “you didn’t build that”, adopting that as a theme for the convention? Why did Romney misrepresent an embassy statement of conciliation worded as religious tolerance as Obama apologizing for American free speech? Talk about misdirection.

    We addressed the “You didn’t build that” earlier. President Obama didn’t say “You didn’t build those.” And that was a prepared speech. He said exactly what the Republicans said he said, and he then backtracked. And in any case, that interpretation is entirely consistent with President Obama’s world view. He thinks jobs and everything else are created through government. There’s no reason at all to think he meant to say: “You didn’t build those.”

    I don’t remember the embassy statement being discussed here. I would agree that showed a lot of poor judgment. Sometimes it’s best to just STFU. And if you don’t do that, then you shouldn’t make the situation worse with your comments.

    Finally, the “failure” thing is a great piece of name-calling. What are the standards for success? No President has ever got us out of a hole the size the Bush left in only 4 years. That’s history, baby.

    I’m just going by what candidate and President Obama said he would do. Candidate Obama said he would fix the economy. Candidate Obama said he would close Gitmo. Candidate Obama said he would deal with immigration. Candidate Obama said he would make DC a less partisan place. President Obama’s administration said with his plan unemployment would stay below 8%. President Obama said a surge in Afghanistan would make things better there. We might be able to debate Obamacare, but on all the other things I don’t think there’s any way you can describe President Obama other than being a failure. He said he would do things. He didn’t. That’s failure. That makes him a failure.

    Connecting up to the 47%, but for those people, President Obama wouldn’t have a snowball’s chance right now. Americans don’t want someone who is a failure to be President. But if you pretend a failure is not a failure . . ..

  74. 1074

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ – BTW, I think President Obama’s best move was making Hillary Clinton Secretary of State. But for that he probably would have faced a primary challenge, and Bill’s speech at the convention would have been considerably different. And my postings today would be considerably different too.

  75. 1075
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1070 – The elections are about one party attaining power at the expense of the other. It is not about fixing things. It is certainly not about doing the right thing, nor about justice.

  76. 1076

    By Blurtman @ 1075:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1070 – The elections are about one party attaining power at the expense of the other. It is not about fixing things. It is certainly not about doing the right thing, nor about justice.

    You could argue the elections are about maintaining the two party system. One party would prefer to win, but that’s not the most important goal. The most important goal is keeping a third party from gaining a foothold.

  77. 1077
    David Losh says:

    I wanted to clarify that the Republican base is middle to lower class Americans who are anti government, and want the American Dream to be working.

    There is a Christian Conservative base that also relies heavily on the concept of “helping” the poor.

    The Romney comments came of as contrary to the base.

  78. 1078

    RE: David Losh @ 77 – The Republican base is not anti-government. They are for limited government, at least at the federal level. They do tend to be anti-tax.

  79. 1079
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 1069:

    RE: pfft @ 1066 – Romney was targeting the parasites who leech off the system, taking out more than they put in. I would have thought he would want the support of the banking community, but I guess not.

    private equity community?

    what’s worse than buying a company loading it up with debt and paying yourself all that money until it goes bankrupt?

    Romney’s Bain Profited Even As The Companies It Invested In Went Bankrupt, Analysis Reveals
    http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/06/23/505141/romneys-bain-profited-even-as-the-companies-it-invested-in-went-bankrupt-analysis-reveals/?mobile=nc

    I wonder if the tax breaks and the FDIC bailout of Bain Consulting qualifies Romney as part of the 47%?

    doesn’t matter, he’s going to lose.

  80. 1080
    blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 1079 – Right. Don’t vote for corporate lackeys Romney and Obama. Vote for William K. Black.

  81. 1081
    whatsmyname says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1073
    As to the 47%; I agreed with you that the caring was about getting their votes. I didn’t say that they are all the same, but Mitt did characterize them all as I described. Here is the quote:

    “There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what…These are people who pay no income tax.”

    As to You didn’t build that, Here is the quote:

    “If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet. The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together.”

    The context is clearly that he credits individual initiative, but that we don’t accomplish these things wholly on our own. In fact, he makes a point of it by literally saying, “The point is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together.” Consider this sentiment in the light of your own frustration that some people give Obama all the credit for getting Bin Laden.

    As to the failure, again this is an absurdly narrow definition. When I was in my 20’s, my stated goal was to retire by 40. I didn’t meet my goal. I could consider myself a financial failure by that standard, except when I look at other people, I have it pretty good. Success is relative. And I still have my soul. It’s certainly not like Romney did more for America’s economy these last four years. Gitmo is a triviality, sadly, because it is disgusting. Immigration is a matter of degree. Partisanship? Obama put Republicans in his highest circles. He compromised his highest goal (healthcare) by pursuing a Republican invention instead of single payer. Washington was less partisan – on the executive side. It’s not his doing that Mitch McConnell is basically a terrorist. Afghanistan? When is the last time anyone agreed with everything a president did? You win some, you lose some. That’s life for real people.

  82. 1082
    pfft says:

    willard romney, the gift that keeps on giving.

    Is Romney Tanking the GOP Senate?http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/09/is_romney_tanking_the_gop_senate.php?ref=fpblg

  83. 1083
    pfft says:

    By blurtman @ 80:

    RE: pfft @ 1079 – Right. Don’t vote for corporate lackeys Romney and Obama. Vote for William K. Black.

    you’ll love this article.

    A Rare Look at Why The Government Won’t Fight Wall Street

    Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/a-rare-look-at-why-the-government-wont-fight-wall-street-20120918#ixzz26z0UDpCE

  84. 1084

    By whatsmyname @ 81:

    As to the failure, again this is an absurdly narrow definition. When I was in my 20’s, my stated goal was to retire by 40. I didn’t meet my goal. I could consider myself a financial failure by that standard, except when I look at other people, I have it pretty good. Success is relative. And I still have my soul. It’s certainly not like Romney did more for America’s economy these last four years. Gitmo is a triviality, sadly, because it is disgusting. Immigration is a matter of degree. Partisanship? Obama put Republicans in his highest circles. He compromised his highest goal (healthcare) by pursuing a Republican invention instead of single payer. Washington was less partisan – on the executive side. It’s not his doing that Mitch McConnell is basically a terrorist. Afghanistan? When is the last time anyone agreed with everything a president did? You win some, you lose some. That’s life for real people.

    What I will give him credit for is saving the economy from collapse and making the decision to go in after OBL (as opposed to finding OBL). And he did “save” the auto industry, through rather questionable means, but I’m not convinced that situation was anywhere near as dire as the financial crisis of 2009. What else has he accomplished? I know Losh thinks he won the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, but let’s use realistic standards of accomplishment. What has he accomplished in four years?

    As to Obamacare, I wouldn’t say he compromised on single payer. He was MIA in the healthcare debate. He just wanted something passed. He didn’t push for anything in particular, just something. It is a rather ironic piece of legislation because it bears his name, but he didn’t shape it. And to a great extent you’re right, the party that shaped it was responsible largely for how it turned out, and now they hate it.

    Or how about this. You would think that if President Obama was not a failure, that the country would have changed a great deal since he took office. After all, W was a conservative and President Obama is a liberal. But what has really changed since he took office? President Obama through proclamation made contraceptives available for free for those who work for religious organizations. And again by executive order he changed immigration enforcement. That’s not a lot of change in almost four years.

  85. 1085
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1084 – Hey, Obummer, as promised, increased transparency of the financial markets. Oh, wait, he didn’t do that.

    The problem is, we want a guy to acknowledge that there are problems, but to promise relatively quick and relatively painless fixes. And to get elected, the guy can’t fight the PTB, including Wall Street and the FIRE industry. And our elections are more a popularity contest than a judgement on effectiveness. So we get what we get.

    Nothing will change until it has to. And it will have to only when we reach the end of the road.

  86. 1086
    ChrisM says:

    http://www.international-adviser.com/news/europe/irish-fa-president-predicts-worldwide-defaults

    “The vast majority of debt in today’s world will be defaulted on, according to Philippa Malmgren, president and founder of London based Principalis Asset Management.”

  87. 1087
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 1085:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1084 – Hey, Obummer, as promised, increased transparency of the financial markets. Oh, wait, he didn’t do that.

    please elaborate. start first with a link to obama saying that and working from there.

  88. 1088
    pfft says:

    This election cycle isn’t working out too well for the Republicans.

    Harry Reid Is Forcing Scott Brown To Debate Elizabeth Warren

    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/scott-brown-elizabeth-warren-harry-reid-debate-senate-2012-9#ixzz273NCohA5

  89. 1089
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 1087 – Please. Do I have to provide links to prove the sky is blue? Just Google “obama increased transparency in financial markets” and you will come up with many links.

    Is the derivatives market more transparent now? Big fail!

  90. 1090
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 88 – Warren is after Brown’s scalp. She is really on the warpath.

  91. 1091
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 1089:

    RE: pfft @ 1087 – Please. Do I have to provide links to prove the sky is blue? Just Google “obama increased transparency in financial markets” and you will come up with many links.

    Is the derivatives market more transparent now? Big fail!

    ahem.

    In New Rules to Shine Light on Derivatives, Regulators Also Allow Exemptions
    http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/07/10/in-new-rules-to-shine-light-on-derivatives-regulators-also-allow-exemptions/

    ” Do I have to provide links to prove the sky is blue?”

    yes, if you said it link it.

  92. 1092
  93. 1093
    whatsmyname says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 84:

    Or how about this. You would think that if President Obama was not a failure, that the country would have changed a great deal since he took office. After all, W was a conservative and President Obama is a liberal. But what has really changed since he took office? President Obama through proclamation made contraceptives available for free for those who work for religious organizations. And again by executive order he changed immigration enforcement. That’s not a lot of change in almost four years.

    Yes, yes; it’s proved that he’s a failure as a Democrat, because he basically a successful Republican… Then you would think that the Republicans would want to keep him in place. Hmmm. That would explain a lot of recent news.

  94. 1094
    David Losh says:

    RE: ChrisM @ 1086

    No one commented on this?

    Good article that leaves a lot for speculation, but I agree with the premise that governments will need to default, in an orderly fashion.

  95. 1095
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 1091 – Your link is not encouraging.

    “Light will begin to shine on the markets for the first time,” Gary Gensler, chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which approved the rules, said at a public meeting. “This is a very significant day for the American public.” But another member of the agency questioned whether last-minute changes undermined the new rules, allowing risk to seep back into the system. Bart Chilton, a Democratic commissioner who cast the lone vote against the plan, raised concerns that the fine print created loopholes wide enough for Wall Street to exploit.”

    Gary Gensler is an industry toadie. He is criminally negligent in the MF Global crime. And when is Obama buddy Corzine going to jail?

    The consensus is that Dood-Frank is a failure. What would anyone expect from a bill sponsored by those two suck-ups?

    The Dodd-Frank Act: A Flawed and Inadequate Response to the Too-Big-to-Fail Problem
    http://www.law.gwu.edu/Academics/research_centers/C-LEAF/Documents/WilmarthDFAct.pdf

    The Dodd-Frank act-Too big not to fail
    Flaws in the confused, bloated law passed in the aftermath of America’s financial crisis become ever more apparent
    http://www.economist.com/node/21547784

  96. 1096

    By whatsmyname @ 93:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 84:

    Or how about this. You would think that if President Obama was not a failure, that the country would have changed a great deal since he took office. After all, W was a conservative and President Obama is a liberal. But what has really changed since he took office? President Obama through proclamation made contraceptives available for free for those who work for religious organizations. And again by executive order he changed immigration enforcement. That’s not a lot of change in almost four years.

    Yes, yes; it’s proved that he’s a failure as a Democrat, because he basically a successful Republican… Then you would think that the Republicans would want to keep him in place. Hmmm. That would explain a lot of recent news.

    Yes it would! ;-)

    Although remember, my view of the world is that the Republicans and Democrats are like the AL and NL in MLB. Different, but not that different. They still care who wins the World Series.

  97. 1097

    By Blurtman @ 1095:

    The Dodd-Frank Act: A Flawed and Inadequate Response to the Too-Big-to-Fail Problem

    It’s the wrong response. You can’t possibly deal with that problem through regulation. Chase couldn’t even control itself this year. How are you going to control it through regulation? As mentioned elsewhere, the regulators didn’t even see the problem coming.

    You fix the problem by making the entities no longer too big to fail. Last century this country broke up AT&T because it thought that it’s large size made phone bills too high. But today we don’t break up entities that were so large they almost collapsed the entire economy? No, of course not. What we do instead is encourage them to become even larger!

    Yet another way, BTW, that President Obama is a failure.

  98. 1098

    Watching Samsung’s commercial last night it occurred to me that the 47 percent is a lot like the 33 percent.

    In November 2008, both President Obama and the iPhone were the best apparent choices. But neither really lived up to their potential. Today you have about 47% of the people voting for President Obama simply because he is a Democrat. You have about 33% of the people buying an iPhone 5 simply because it is an Apple product. Nevermind neither is that good of a choice, it’s all about labels.

    Unfortunately Mitt Romney is not Android. He is a Windows 8 phone. Unknown and unproven.

  99. 1099
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1098 – Well, the most important aspect of regulation would be to sever all vital services including banking deposits from the TBTF’s. Let them experiment and crash then. Who cares.

    You may be intrigued to know that BAC’s large CDS portfolio has been transferred to its consumer banking division. So when these go tits up, so does your money. And then the FDIC is on the hook to bail out this unregulated speculation.

    Bring back Glass Steagall.

  100. 1100
    whatsmyname says:

    By Blurtman @ 1099:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1098 – You may be intrigued to know that BAC’s large CDS portfolio has been transferred to its consumer banking division. So when these go tits up, so does your money. And then the FDIC is on the hook to bail out this unregulated speculation.

    Bring back Glass Steagall.

    Uhhhh, Hey Beavis, you said tits, huh huh.

  101. 1101
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 1099:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1098 – Well, the most important aspect of regulation would be to sever all vital services including banking deposits from the TBTF’s. Let them experiment and crash then. Who cares.

    You may be intrigued to know that BAC’s large CDS portfolio has been transferred to its consumer banking division. So when these go tits up, so does your money. And then the FDIC is on the hook to bail out this unregulated speculation.

    Bring back Glass Steagall.

    I don’t agree with FDIC for CDS but BAC would get bailed out regardless.

  102. 1102
  103. 1103

    RE: pfft @ 2 – I think most people have it looking good for President Obama. Only three things can save Romney.

    1. The debates.
    2. The Dems staying home because they really don’t like President Obama that much.
    3. A major economic or terrorist news event.

    On the last item, yesterday the foreign policy experts in the Administration finally determined that the relatively sophisticated attack in Libya was in fact a terrorist attack. Yet another reason Romney should have STFU on the day of the attack. He could have been attacking the Obama Administration over this, but now he has to stay quiet because the stumbled out of the gate.

    Realistically, I think the debates are Romney’s best chance. President Obama won’t be allowed to blame others in the debates, or if he tries, he’ll look bad.

  104. 1104
    blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1103 – No Kary, you want a united front around an attack on the USA. How many Democrats held Bush and Rice accountable for 9-11? Romney would have scored big points if he said he stands united with Obama, and anybody who attacks us is a dead man.

  105. 1105

    RE: blurtman @ 1104 – The difference is that after 9/11/01 we should be more vigilant on every subsequent 9/11, especially in relatively lawless countries.

    But that would have been another way to go. Almost anything would have been better than what Romney did.

  106. 1106

    I love the Democrat’s latest stupid issue. Romney could have paid even less in taxes because he didn’t claim all of his charitable deductions. Just appalling that he gave so much money away to charity. That’s something they should really drag him over the coals for. Giving away a dollar to save 15 cents on taxes.

    What I’ve yet to see any of them realize is that he could amend his return for almost three years and claim the additional deductions. if they don’t want him to do that, they should vote for him! ;-)

  107. 1107
  108. 1108
    David Losh says:

    RE: blurtman @ 1104

    Absolutely, and something I never really thought of. It was so wrong of Romney to make a political statement before a White House response.

    Romney is pulling out to be one of the worst Presidential canidates I can remember. This is like the Al Gore, John Kerry, John McCain campaigns all rolled into one, except nothing could have topped choosing Sarah Palin as a Vice President.

  109. 1109
    pfft says:

    By David Losh @ 1108:

    RE: blurtman @ 1104

    Absolutely, and something I never really thought of. It was so wrong of Romney to make a political statement before a White House response.

    Romney is pulling out to be one of the worst Presidential canidates I can remember. This is like the Al Gore, John Kerry, John McCain campaigns all rolled into one, except nothing could have topped choosing Sarah Palin as a Vice President.

    romney has run a terrible campaign and he doesn’t have a message the voters will like. also people don’t like him. tough to win with 3 strikes like that. his taxes are still an issue. he can’t debate his way out of a paper bag on the bain issue. what is amazing is how much support he as. frightening.

  110. 1110
    whatsmyname says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 1106:

    I love the Democrat’s latest stupid issue. Romney could have paid even less in taxes because he didn’t claim all of his charitable deductions. Just appalling that he gave so much money away to charity. That’s something they should really drag him over the coals for. Giving away a dollar to save 15 cents on taxes.

    What I’ve yet to see any of them realize is that he could amend his return for almost three years and claim the additional deductions. if they don’t want him to do that, they should vote for him! ;-)

    They were realizing that he could amend his return on MSNBC last night – big time. And they were noting that the reason he had claimed less than he could was so that the tax rate on his return would match his earlier claim. What they didn’t seem to notice was that the rate he claimed earlier was supposedly based on what he had seen when he reviewing his return, when in fact he hadn’t filed one at all at that time- a bald faced lie. Oh well.

  111. 1111
    whatsmyname says:

    By pfft @ 7:

    There really are no words.

    Senate Republicans kill veterans’ jobs bill
    http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/09/19/13966931-senate-republicans-kill-veterans-jobs-bill?lite

    What is this? Some kind of laundry list? You’re just supposed to talk about things that are important.

  112. 1112
    David Losh says:

    RE: pfft @ 1109

    frightening is a good term for the support people give Romney.

  113. 1113

    By pfft @ 9:

    By David Losh @ 1108:

    RE: blurtman @ 1104

    Absolutely, and something I never really thought of. It was so wrong of Romney to make a political statement before a White House response.

    Romney is pulling out to be one of the worst Presidential canidates I can remember. This is like the Al Gore, John Kerry, John McCain campaigns all rolled into one, except nothing could have topped choosing Sarah Palin as a Vice President.

    romney has run a terrible campaign and he doesn’t have a message the voters will like. also people don’t like him. tough to win with 3 strikes like that. his taxes are still an issue. he can’t debate his way out of a paper bag on the bain issue. what is amazing is how much support he as. frightening.

    But on the bright side he doesn’t have a record of four years of failure on economic issues, Afghanistan and reducing gridlock in DC. Having people distort your record and not being likable, well, those are really important. /sarc

  114. 1114

    By whatsmyname @ 10:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 1106:

    I love the Democrat’s latest stupid issue. Romney could have paid even less in taxes because he didn’t claim all of his charitable deductions. Just appalling that he gave so much money away to charity. That’s something they should really drag him over the coals for. Giving away a dollar to save 15 cents on taxes.

    What I’ve yet to see any of them realize is that he could amend his return for almost three years and claim the additional deductions. if they don’t want him to do that, they should vote for him! ;-)

    They were realizing that he could amend his return on MSNBC last night – big time. And they were noting that the reason he had claimed less than he could was so that the tax rate on his return would match his earlier claim. What they didn’t seem to notice was that the rate he claimed earlier was supposedly based on what he had seen when he reviewing his return, when in fact he hadn’t filed one at all at that time- a bald faced lie. Oh well.

    My understanding is the returns were newly prepared. I really doubt he had the information to prepare a return until now. Someone like him is typically waiting on returns from other entities, and they can trickle in.

  115. 1115
    whatsmyname says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1114
    “My understanding is the returns were newly prepared. I really doubt he had the information to prepare a return until now. Someone like him is typically waiting on returns from other entities, and they can trickle in.”

    Absolutely true, and I certainly don’t fault him for that. The problem is that he was out there quoting numbers and telling people that they were from the return that he knew he hadn’t done yet. Who lies about such minutia? What won’t such a person lie about?

  116. 1116

    RE: whatsmyname @ 1115 – I think you’re reverting to the partisan Democrat definition of the term lie. Being wrong is not a lie. I could say the balance in my checking account is $1,200, but if it turned out to be only $1000, that would not make me a liar if I was wrong because I had not yet reconciled my account and had forgot to enter my water bill payment.

    I have not called President Obama a liar because unemployment went above 8%. I have not called him a liar because he didn’t close Gitmo. I didn’t call him a liar because he didn’t try to do anything on immigration during his first year. I didn’t call President Obama a liar because he couldn’t make DC less partisan. If President Obama were a Republican, partisan Democrats would be calling him a liar for all of those things, because being a liar in their eyes only requires being wrong. And they take it even further. Because it’s President Obama that said/promised those things, his failure to accomplish them is completely unimportant to them.

  117. 1117

    Romney is jumping all over President Obama for saying you can’t change DC from the inside, and rightly so, but for the wrong reasons.

    The question was what did President Obama think was his biggest failure. He jokingly answered immigration (because of the crowd) but then answered it was not realizing you couldn’t change DC from the inside. Apparently being a Senator doesn’t make you a DC insider, so he hadn’t realized that when he promised us “Hope and Change.”

    But more the the point: What about fixing the economy to put people back to work? As I’ve said before, that should have been his number one priority. Now we learn it’s not something he even considers his biggest failure. Apparently he didn’t succeed putting people back to work because he never considered that important.

    I don’t know about the rest of you, but I would consider daily fist fights in the House of Representatives to be a good trade off for fixing the economy, putting people to work and solving the debt problem. I don’t care if the politicians get along.

  118. 1118
    David Losh says:

    Now that we see the tax return issue, you’re right, this was Romney fitting the returns to match previous statements.

    The statements Romney made about Lybian really bothered also. He should have shown a united front rather than take the deaths as a political opportunity.

  119. 1119
    David Losh says:

    Romney should have never asked if we are better off today than we were four years ago. I’m much better off, as well as millions of others. We need to help the people who were swindled by the financial markets, and return to some normalcy.

    What I don’t see, or understand, is why any one would advocate going back to failed economic policy that created a bubble.

    Here’s a bubble link: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/dotcon/historical/bubbles.html

    I was talking to a hard core Republican yesterday who also doesn’t get the Romney message. He is also better off than he was four years ago.

  120. 1120

    By David Losh @ 1118:

    The statements Romney made about Lybian really bothered also. He should have shown a united front rather than take the deaths as a political opportunity.

    I would agree, but I not sure the deaths were known at the time the statement was made.

  121. 1121

    RE: David Losh @ 19 – The better off is just a take off on prior elections. Whenever there is higher unemployment than four years ago, that question will be asked. In this case we also have lower earnings, so it applies to a broader group of people.

  122. 1122
    blurtman says:

    RE: David Losh @ 1119 – Earth to Dave. Earth to Dave.

    “NEW YORK (CNNMoney) — The average American family’s net worth dropped almost 40% between 2007 and 2010, according to a triennial study released Monday by the Federal Reserve.

    The stunning drop in median net worth — from $126,400 in 2007 to $77,300 in 2010 — indicates that the recession wiped away 18 years of savings and investment by families.”

    http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/11/news/economy/fed-family-net-worth/index.htm

    Realizing this is 2010 data, but just look at the increasing food stamp rolls, and the continuing decline in wages and standard of living and in the labor force participation rate. Perhaps your success in indicative of the continuing trickle up and concentration of wealth in the USA.

  123. 1123

    RE: blurtman @ 1122 – Hey, Dave’s got his! Why should he care about the suffering and misfortune of other people? Why should he even want to understand what Romney is saying?

    Of course, Democrats care about everyone. That’s why President Obama made fixing the economy his highest priority. Oh, wait. . .. Nevermind.

  124. 1124
    blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1123 – Dave should have his as he seems to work hard. Everyone should have theirs that works hard and plays by the rules. But stats are stats, and a lot of Americans are hurting. And then there is the lack of a level playing field in the USA – affirmative action for the wealthy and special “minority” groups. Wall Street can continue to be paid well, in fact by taxpayers, even though they fail in a big way, hurting not only their employers, but the nation as well.

    This is not an attack on Dave, in fact, he is to be complimented for his success. But the trend in the USA is not a good one, and continuing wealth concentraion in a narrow band of the citizenry never ends well.

    Romney’s attempted message of an America where folks can work their way out of poverty is a good one. But the messenger is not to be believed.

  125. 1125
    David Losh says:

    RE: blurtman @ 1122

    We took heavy financial losses in the past four years. My net worth dropped considerably, so did my buddy. There is no question about that.

    We are better off then we were four years ago from the collapse of an over heated, over inflated, global economy built on false profits, pun intended. At least today we are warned.

    We can’t go back to the Romney Ryan promises that he will reinflate the bubble. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/dotcon/historical/bubbles.html

  126. 1126
    pfft says:

    By blurtman @ 1122:

    RE: David Losh @ 1119 – Earth to Dave. Earth to Dave.

    “NEW YORK (CNNMoney) — The average American family’s net worth dropped almost 40% between 2007 and 2010, according to a triennial study released Monday by the Federal Reserve.

    The stunning drop in median net worth — from $126,400 in 2007 to $77,300 in 2010 — indicates that the recession wiped away 18 years of savings and investment by families.”

    http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/11/news/economy/fed-family-net-worth/index.htm

    Realizing this is 2010 data, but just look at the increasing food stamp rolls, and the continuing decline in wages and standard of living and in the labor force participation rate. Perhaps your success in indicative of the continuing trickle up and concentration of wealth in the USA.

    there you go again blurtman.

    first of all obama wasn’t president in 2007. He didn’t become president until 2009. he’s done everything possible to arrest the collapse. we’ve added 5 million jobs in the last 2+ years in spite of unprecedented Republican filibustering. we’d have millions more jobs if Obama’s policies weren’t being blocked for purely political reasons.

    “continuing decline in wages”

    wages are growing.

    ” the labor force participation rate”

    it’s been pointed out a million times why that is happening. it’s the boomers. why do you continually mislead us on that point?

    “but just look at the increasing food stamp rolls”

    haven’t you been watching the Republican campaign? that’s not because the economy is bad, it’s because food stamp benefits are so good. food stamps are like a hammock! obviously not like a nice shaded hammock on a beach but close.

  127. 1127
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 23:

    RE: blurtman @ 1122 – Hey, Dave’s got his! Why should he care about the suffering and misfortune of other people? Why should he even want to understand what Romney is saying?

    Of course, Democrats care about everyone. That’s why President Obama made fixing the economy his highest priority. Oh, wait. . .. Nevermind.

    3 jobs bills blocked by Republicans in the last year that would add millions of jobs? His first act as president an unprecedented in size stimulus.

    you think that people need to go without health insurance to get our economy growing. do you think we need more air pollution too for economic growth?

    by the way a new study almost completely debunked your tax thesis.

    REPORT: Expiration Of High-End Bush Tax Cuts Would Have Little Effect On Economic Growth
    http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/09/21/888981/report-expiration-of-high-end-bush-tax-cuts-would-have-little-effect-on-economic-growth/

    just a little helpful hint people, it’s best just to go with me always being right until proven otherwise;)

  128. 1128
    blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 1126 – Take your party line nonsense elsewhere.

    First, nobody is talking about Obama. Quite trolling.

    Second, as has been pointed out repeatedly, but your Democrat blinders prevents you from understanding, the labor force participation rate counts workers aged 16-65. While you may argue that masive amounts of boomers retiring at age 62 are the cause of the record low labor force participation rate, the facts do not support this.

    “Baby boomers currently working expect to retire at an average age of 69, and over a third (37 percent) hope to retire in 2012 at age 66. The planned retirement age of baby boomers born in 1946 has increased by over two years since they were previously surveyed in 2008. Working baby boomers say they are planning to delay retirement because they need to continue receiving a salary to pay for day-to-day expenses (27 percent) and they enjoy working or want to stay active (24 percent).”
    http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2012/04/13/how-baby-boomers-are-picking-a-retirement-age

    What is contributing to the record low LFPR is the abysmal job prospects for younger Americans.

    So since you introduce the President in this dialogue, under President Obama, the labor force participation rate has declined to a record low.

    Record number of food stamp recipients.

    Record number of folks filing for and receiving Social Security Disability, hint, because there are no jobs.

    Please provide a link that wages are growing. I have provided several previously that indicate the opposite.

    Please swtich to meme 2 – “It could have been worse.” Or meme 3 – “It is Bush’s fault.” Or meme 4 – “I just need 4 more years.”

  129. 1129
    whatsmyname says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1116
    Half right, my friend. It is one thing to be wrong. It is another to be wrong with intent to deceive. Your Obama examples are forward looking statements where he may have well had (misplaced) confidence that he could prevail. Romney tells us that he looked at the returns at a time when he fully knows that they don’t exist. He later phonies them up to match his earlier statement – again demonstrating intent to deceive when he could have just admitted that he was “wrong” before. I’m not trying to make these into big lies. That’s the point. These are tiny, pointless lies. Who but a pathological liar behaves this way?

  130. 1130
    pfft says:

    By blurtman @ 1128:

    RE: pfft @ 1126
    Please swtich to meme 2 – “It could have been worse.” Or meme 3 – “It is Bush’s fault.” Or meme 4 – “I just need 4 more years.”

    I’ll use all 4 because all 4 are true thank you.

    so I don’t have to keep repeating myself I beg you please bookmark this link.

    Why Is Labor Force Participation Shrinking?
    http://www.offthechartsblog.org/why-is-labor-force-participation-shrinking/

    Labor market participation traditionally peaks between ages 25 and 54.

    the participation rates for those ages is(barely) inching up.

  131. 1131
    David Losh says:

    RE: pfft @ 1126

    I’m a broken record on this point that small business has lost a lot of equity, but still owes on the debts they incurred during the boom years.

    Even if they can dig out they have lost four years of production. That won’t change soon unless there is debt settlement.

    Banks don’t have to settle anything, they are collecting as much as they can for as long as they can. All the government has done is give lenders, and investors lower intertest rate economic policy.

    Unfortunately some businesses have taken advatage of these historically low interest rates in hopes of future expansion. Other businesses don’t, or can’t qualify for more debt.

    We have a complete mess that Obama is continueing to support.

    We need to close banks, regulate, and tax the heck out of lending, or financial markets, then change the laws to be sure this never happens again.

    Obama could have done all of this a year ago, but he played it safe on the campaign trail.

  132. 1132

    By pfft @ 27:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 23:

    RE: blurtman @ 1122 – Hey, Dave’s got his! Why should he care about the suffering and misfortune of other people? Why should he even want to understand what Romney is saying?

    Of course, Democrats care about everyone. That’s why President Obama made fixing the economy his highest priority. Oh, wait. . .. Nevermind.

    3 jobs bills blocked by Republicans in the last year that would add millions of jobs? His first act as president an unprecedented in size stimulus.

    you think that people need to go without health insurance to get our economy growing. do you think we need more air pollution too for economic growth?

    Is this your memory problem acting up again? How many times do I need to remind you that President Obama cannot get his “create jobs by borrowing money” programs through Congress because there was an election in 2010 where the American people changed the composition of Congress because they didn’t like what President Obama was doing?

    As to Obamacare and jobs, and taxes and jobs, clearly both have a negative impact on job creation. You can have studies that show anything, depending on what the entity paying for the study wants! Is a company that is forced to pay for a certain level of health insurance for their employees going to employ more or less people? Is a company that is forced to pay more taxes going to employ more or less people? It’s not really a hard question to answer, unless you’re either President Obama or a partisan Democrat.

  133. 1133

    By whatsmyname @ 1129:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1116
    Half right, my friend. It is one thing to be wrong. It is another to be wrong with intent to deceive.

    But my point was, partisan Democrats equate being wrong with being a liar.

  134. 1134

    I watched the 60 Minutes Romney/Obama pieces last night. No big surprises, but I can’t really understand why people say Romney isn’t likable. Romney seems much more likable, IMHO, because he actually seems to understand what’s important to people.

  135. 1135
    blurtman says:

    Paging Dave Losh.

    Is Romney a Hispanic? His dad was born in Mexico so that should qualify him, no?

  136. 1136
    David Losh says:

    RE: blurtman @ 1135

    Absolutely, he’s Hispanic. He was awarded many more opportunities because of his minority status.

  137. 1137
    blurtman says:

    RE: David Losh @ 1136 – Perhaps you are thinking of Elizabeth Warren. In any event, he appears to be one of them White Hispanics.

  138. 1138
    whatsmyname says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 1133:

    By whatsmyname @ 1129:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1116
    Half right, my friend. It is one thing to be wrong. It is another to be wrong with intent to deceive.

    But my point was, partisan Democrats equate being wrong with being a liar.

    I can’t speak to partisan Democrats generally, but the post to which you refer features two clear and concise examples of intent to deceive, and why you can have a high confidence that they were intent to deceive.

  139. 1139
    pfft says:

    By blurtman @ 1137:

    RE: David Losh @ 1136 – Perhaps you are thinking of Elizabeth Warren. In any event, he appears to be one of them White Hispanics.

    that’s a cheap shot and she answered it well. scott brown looks like he’s going to lose. elizabeth warren should be your dream candidate.

  140. 1140
    David Losh says:

    RE: blurtman @ 1137

    Please forgive me for this very racist comment, but I have been fascinated by this topic for some time.

    Romeny must be Hispanic, just look at his hair style.

  141. 1141

    RE: David Losh @ 40 -IMHO, the candidates’ sex, sexual preferences, race and religion are totally irrelevant to deciding who should be elected. Why would you be fascinated by Romney’s race?

  142. 1142
    blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1141 – I am not fasccinated with Romney’s race, just trying to point out the absurdity of racial and ethnic categories like “Hispanic” that divide the citizenry, and perpetuate racism. By the criteria of the USG, Romney is indeed a “Hispanic” and when affirmative action is practiced, can be given preference for jobs and school admission.

  143. 1143
    blurtman says:

    RE: David Losh @ 40RE: David Losh @ 40 – Rico Suave.

  144. 1144
    David Losh says:

    RE: blurtman @ 1143

    Romeny does have very nice hair, muy rico.

  145. 1145

    By David Losh @ 1144:

    Romeny does have very nice hair,

    If you look at most of the Senators, it’s apparent we elect people based largely on their hair, or fake hair. That’s probably why we get the results we get out of DC.

    Personally I find this type of hair discrimination disgusting. ;-)

  146. 1146
    blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1145 – When you read job interviewers recommendations, its a good smile, good groooming, and good clothing that are key to being hired. Of course Einsteen would have been rejected as a bum. Small minds, distracted minds, issues are too confusing. Hey. he/she looks good, and what a smile!

  147. 1147
    pfft says:

    Scott Brown is losing and desperate. Stay classy GOP.

    Brown Staffers Make ‘Tomahawk Chop’ Motions At Warren Supporters
    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/09/brown-staffers-tomahawk-chop.php?ref=fpb

    And Republicans wonder why minorities don’t vote for them?

    Warren is going to win. Romney is losing Mass and all those Obama voters are going to tip it to Warren.

  148. 1148
    David Losh says:

    Has any one else noticed that Mitt Romney has the Ronald Reagan hair style, with a little less grease? Of course Reagan parted his hair on right, but Mitt parts his hair on the left, which is another campaign error.

    By the way have you also noticed that Romeny Ryan sounds a lot like Ronald Reagan?

  149. 1149
    Blurtman says:

    RE: David Losh @ 1148 – Reagan’s fantastic hairline was indicative of a lack of testosterone. He may have had girlie parts.

    And Romney’s wife is a blondie. !Que bonita!

    Ryan is sort of a grown up Screech from Saved By The Bell. Geeky, and overcompensating by excessive excersize.

    Obama sort of has the elder statesman Julius Erving salt and pepper close cropped fro look.

    I hope they all appear on Dancing with the Stars soon! Except Reagan, of course.

  150. 1150
    David Losh says:

    RE: Blurtman @ 1149

    You probably don’t recall, but seriously there was speculation the Reagan hair style was appealing to the Hispanic voter.

    It’s kind of a pompodour.

  151. 1151
    ChrisM says:

    “The young woman was looking through the day’s trash for her next meal.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/25/world/europe/hunger-on-the-rise-in-spain.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1

  152. 1152
  153. 1153
    pfft says:

    By ChrisM @ 51:

    “The young woman was looking through the dayâ��s trash for her next meal.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/25/world/europe/hunger-on-the-rise-in-spain.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1

    how is that austerity working guys?

    thank god Obama didn’t follow the conventional wisdom and cut the deficit as much as some wanted. thank god for the stimulus!

  154. 1154
    blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 1153 – Still waiting for those links showing increasing wages, you fraud.

  155. 1155
    blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 52 – You’ll find many more links of Native Americans complaining about Elizabeth Warren’s oportunistic misrepresentation of her Native American ancesrty.

  156. 1156
    blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 53 – Please do not invoke the name of God to peddle your partisan bullshat.

  157. 1157
  158. 1158
    pfft says:

    By blurtman @ 55:

    RE: pfft @ 52 – You’ll find many more links of Native Americans complaining about Elizabeth Warren’s oportunistic misrepresentation of her Native American ancesrty.

    I didn’t know it that was proven? maybe like scott brown you can tell that she isn’t a “person of color” huh? what a joke.

  159. 1159
    pfft says:

    By blurtman @ 56:

    RE: pfft @ 53 – Please do not invoke the name of God to peddle your partisan bullshat.

    it’s just economics, nothing partisan about it.

    how’s Europe doing with it’s austerity? awful. you are entitled to your opinion but not to you own facts. it’s a fact that obama passed the stimulus and it’s a fact that that is what you do when the economy is crashing. that real-time experiment called Europe that we’ve all watched unfold just proves that.

    by the way Jesus was a liberal…he would have helped the poor in their time of need.

  160. 1160
    ChrisM says:

    I don’t know that Europe has gone the austerity route…

    Instead I see a series of bailouts…

    Now Iceland, we can probably agree they went the “default” route, which is demonstrably the best for the average citizen…

  161. 1161

    By pfft @ 59:

    By blurtman @ 56:

    RE: pfft @ 53 – Please do not invoke the name of God to peddle your partisan bullshat.

    it’s just economics, nothing partisan about it.

    how’s Europe doing with it’s austerity? awful. you are entitled to your opinion but not to you own facts.

    Ever consider the fact that maybe the population is different over there? Maybe in Greece there are more than 47% of the people who are reliant on government. At some point increases in such dependence will reach a tipping point, causing the economy to fail, just as is the case with government debt.

    The idea that their population might be different is hardly far fetched. For how many years have the best and brightest of Europe been attracted the the United States? That has to create a talent drain. But hey, the US is now on their side! It’s now harder for talented people to come to this country even on a temporary basis.

  162. 1162
    pfft says:

    By ChrisM @ 1160:

    I don’t know that Europe has gone the austerity route…

    Instead I see a series of bailouts…

    in exchange for massive cuts in government spending.

    Yes, there’s been austerity in Europe
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/yes-theres-been-austerity-in-europe/2012/05/08/gIQAQ1NsAU_blog.html

  163. 1163
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 1157 – Try again. You said wages were rising.

  164. 1164

    This opinion piece is written by someone who purports to support President Obama, but I would agree with almost everything written in it (including the part about health care).

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paolo-romanacci/obama-hasselbeck-the-view_b_1916003.html

    Funny thing about the Hasselbeck question. If you expand it a bit to include both the middle class and minorities, President Obama has really failed them terribly. But he leads in the polls for a lot of those groups (depending on what part of the middle class you’re talking about though). Are they suffering from Stockholm Syndrome?

  165. 1165
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 1163:

    RE: pfft @ 1157 – Try again. You said wages were rising.

    and of course what I was talking about, a calculated risk post, was in fact right!

    please spin away real personal incomes rising…

  166. 1166

    On the topic of California, and how screwed up it is, Comcast is closing all of its call centers there. Originally they said it was due to the business climate in California, but they later walked that back.

    Comcast to Northern California: Drop dead.

    That seemed to be the message communicated by the cable company’s axing of 1,000 jobs in the Bay Area and Sacramento on Tuesday, a decision attributed to “the high cost of doing business in California.”

    Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/business/bottomline/article/Comcast-rewinds-but-jobs-still-leaving-3897220.php#ixzz27hY9xebc

  167. 1167
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 1166:

    On the topic of California, and how screwed up it is, Comcast is closing all of its call centers there. Originally they said it was due to the business climate in California, but they later walked that back.

    Comcast to Northern California: Drop dead.

    That seemed to be the message communicated by the cable company’s axing of 1,000 jobs in the Bay Area and Sacramento on Tuesday, a decision attributed to “the high cost of doing business in California.”

    Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/business/bottomline/article/Comcast-rewinds-but-jobs-still-leaving-3897220.php#ixzz27hY9xebc

    what they really mean is we have to meet our arbitrary earnings numbers this year to get your stock price up and for our CEO to get a bonus so we fired a bunch of workers. we’ll beat estimates by a penny and the stock will pop 2% and then nobody will care. no matter, we must show every more earnings growth ever quarter.

    speaking of…

    New Obama ad calls for ‘economic patriotism’
    http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-economic-patriotism-ad-20120927,0,4447277.story

    It’s time for a new economic patriotism, rooted in the belief that growing our economy begins with a strong, thriving middle class

    preach it!

  168. 1168
    pfft says:

    To all those that don’t believe the polls. intrade has obama at 75%.

    http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/contract/?contractId=743474

  169. 1169

    By pfft @ 1167:

    New Obama ad calls for ‘economic patriotism’
    http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-economic-patriotism-ad-20120927,0,4447277.story

    It�s time for a new economic patriotism, rooted in the belief that growing our economy begins with a strong, thriving middle class

    preach it!

    Wow. That’s just proof President Obama doesn’t understand what the problem is.

    A thriving economy doesn’t begin with a thriving middle class. It begins with jobs. More jobs will help the middle class thrive. Unfortunately, President Obama is an anchor on job growth.

  170. 1170
    pfft says:

    New Data Show Obama Net Positive For Job Creation Since He Took Office
    http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/09/27/920781/new-data-obama-net-positive/?mobile=nc

  171. 1171
    Blurtman says:

    Here Is The White House Spin On Today’s Disappointing Economic Data

    A massive 13% collapse in durable goods, the biggest since January 2009; a $20 billion miss to annualized Q2 GDP estimates, and well below the lowest estimate, 60+ weeks of constant upward BLS revisions to initial claims “data” and not to mention assorted atrocious economic (note: not to be confused with market – the two are now completely unlinked) data from around the globe. And what does the White House say: the data shows that the “US is making progress.” We sure wouldn’t want to know what it would look like if after 3 episodes of easing, trillions injected into the economy via the Fed, and of course $6 trillion in extra debt the US was not making progress. Oh and yes, everything else is Bush’s fault.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-09-27/here-white-house-spin-todays-disappointing-economic-data

  172. 1172
    Blurtman says:

    Real Per Capital “Core” Durable Goods Orders

    http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2012/09/real-per-capital-core-durable-goods.html

    “I have little to add other than this is how recessions start, an opinion expressed earlier… ”

    Obama – Fail!

  173. 1173

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1164
    I just read a poll indicating that among small business owners, Obama is leading Romney by eight percentage points. Stockholm Syndrome? Are they supporting the guy keeping them down? More than likely, the largest shareholders of large corporations support Romney, despite the fact that the Dow Jones Industrial Average is up 70% since Obama took office. Why?
    I figure they control both candidates, but that Romney is one of them. He’ll do their bidding a little more willingly, and won’t be obliged to pander to his base by mouthing anti business utterings every once in a while. He’ll run the government the way he ran Bain. Heap it up with debt, lay off the employees, and set up shop in third world countries.

  174. 1174
    ChrisM says:

    RE: pfft @ 1162 – I’m not clear on the methodology for your link at http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/yes-theres-been-austerity-in-europe/2012/05/08/gIQAQ1NsAU_blog.html.

    They state “The best way to see this is to look at the change in the “structural budget deficit” for each euro zone country — that’s the amount of deficit countries have once you factor out economic conditions. (After all, you don’t want to count a surge in tax revenues due to economic growth as “austerity.”) ”

    Why wouldn’t you count the surge in tax revenues as austerity? The end goal is to have a balanced budget; it shouldn’t matter if it comes from the income or expense side of the equation.

    Reading the source material at https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2012/01/pdf/exesum.pdf I’m yet again reminded that economics is not at all a science. I could quote numerous passages in the text, but hope this will be sufficient:

    Compare their 2010-2011 economic projections (on page 20):
    https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/01/pdf/text.pdf

    vs what actually happened (page 2):
    https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2012/01/pdf/c1.pdf

    US 2011: projected 2.6 vs. reality of 1.7
    Europe 2010: projected 1.0 vs. reality of 1.9
    Germany 2010: projected 1.2 vs 3.6
    Germany 2011: projected 1.7 vs 3.1

    Japan is totally off the wall:
    2010: projected 1.9 reality 4.4
    2011: projected 2.0 reality -0.7

    And tell me why I should care about what the IMF thinks is going to happen? A dartboard may be as effective.

    In Taleb’s _Black Swan_ he discusses a paper that compares economists’ projections vs. the reality, and it turns out the dartboard was as effective. I remember the Wall Street Journal effectively repeating that experiment w/ stock predictions back in the late 90’s.

    I’d love to hear an explanation of how all these economists have calculated expected results for things like CPI, Case-Schiller, durable goods, etc. Surely it *must* be more than listening to and extrapolating from the garbage on CNBC! Right??

  175. 1175

    By Ira Sacharoff @ 73:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1164
    I just read a poll indicating that among small business owners, Obama is leading Romney by eight percentage points. Stockholm Syndrome? Are they supporting the guy keeping them down? More than likely, the largest shareholders of large corporations support Romney, despite the fact that the Dow Jones Industrial Average is up 70% since Obama took office. Why?

    As to the business owners, to a great extent the Republicans are FOS when they talk about them. Many business owners are probably in the 47% that don’t pay any income taxes. I would guess that far more than 47% of them don’t pay income taxes.

    But yes, if they are supporting President Obama they are supporting the person that is keeping them down. President Obama is an anchor on the economy and job creation. He is worse than incompetent in that he is not just failing to make things better, he has been making things worse with his rhetoric. I’ve been saying that for at least a year now, and the latest durable goods figures is some evidence that I’m right.

    People don’t support candidates in a rational manner. For example, if either abortion or gun rights is your bet issue, it could very well make sense in many states for that to affect your vote for governor. But to have that affect your vote for President is a bit of a stretch at this point. One or two terms of an R or D as president is not likely to impact the court on those two issues. In any case, right now the number one issue for everyone should be jobs, an area where President Obama is a proven failure.

    Although maybe they are related. After four more years of Obama job losses, gun rights will probably be very important. ;-)

  176. 1176
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 1173http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=te6qG4yn-Ps

    The correct choice is neither. Ole!

  177. 1177
    David Losh says:

    Let me interject a little more hyperbole by saying that this last assault on the American people by the Republican Party should make it clear they are a terrorist organization engaged in unAmerican activity.

    I’m referring to this claim that we should have all concentrated our effort on 9/11, funny how they slipped that one in again, on protecting Americans in Libya.

    Mitt Romney hates America, and everything we stand for.

    It may have started with his statements after the attacks, but the Republican Party has picked this issue to base fear mongering on.

    The terrorist in the Middle East pale in comparison to our torture in Gitmo, or our killing of women, and childern. So why would the Republican party bring up this crap during an election?

  178. 1178

    RE: David Losh @ 77 – Foreign policy is suppose to be President Obama’s advantage, but he didn’t even foresee a terrorist attack on 9/11 on a country full of militia type entities. You don’t think that’s relevant? Americans died because of not preparing for what seemingly should have been something that should have been prepared for.

    How about the military losing more airplanes in one day in Afghanistan than any time since Vietnam? Not a lot of press on that, was there?

    How about the failed surge in Afghanistan. The surge Senator Obama said wouldn’t work in Iraq did work there despite his claims, but it failed in Afghanistan despite his claims it would work there.

    On the topic of terrorists, what about the recent report on the use of drones in Pakistan? We’re attacking, waiting for the first responders to come in, and then attacking again to kill the first responders! Not much press on that either.

    And on the topic of war dead, why did that get much more attention from the press when a Republican was in office?

    I’m very critical of President Obama on jobs, but seemingly he really isn’t that good on foreign policy either. He has an advantage there because the press doesn’t report the negatives.

  179. 1179

    Check out this Fox News clip from Colbert at 4:30 in.

    http://www.colbertnation.com/full-episodes/wed-september-26-2012-jim-holt

    I’m not familiar with Monica Crowley, but she’s critical of President Obama for allowing revolution in Libya because Moammar Gaddaffi was one of our allies?????

    Colbert makes fun of what Hanity (sp?) said after, but I find her to be far more ridiculous.

  180. 1180
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1179 – She gets a pass as she is a very attractive blonde. PhD, too.

  181. 1181
    Blurtman says:

    RE: David Losh @ 1177 – Dave, don’t know if the below is true. It was posted on Mish Shedlock’s blog. What do you say?

    “Put it another way. Chile chose the private route for its Social Security. Every Chilean has a portfolio backed by real assets (not an imaginary “trust fund”) like mining, agriculture, and oil stocks. They get fat dividends from them. They pass on these assets to their children when they die. Guess what? The baby boomer thing is no problem. Can you imagine if we had chosen that free market route? Can you imagine right now if someone 50 years old had a $750,000 portfolio of blue chips paying 5% dividends? Free market is the way to go.”

  182. 1182
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 1181:

    RE: David Losh @ 1177 – Dave, don’t know if the below is true.

    it’s not true. the chile thing was a mess.

  183. 1183
    pfft says:

    Can ya dig it? I can dig it!

    Romney ‘I Dig It’ Trust Gives Heirs Triple Benefit
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-27/romney-i-dig-it-trust-gives-heirs-triple-benefit.html

  184. 1184

    By Blurtman @ 1180:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1179 – She gets a pass as she is a very attractive blonde.

    And as an added bonus, she apparently isn’t a very good judge of men! She’ll be a real catch for someone.

  185. 1185

    By pfft @ 83:

    Can ya dig it? I can dig it!

    Romney �I Dig It� Trust Gives Heirs Triple Benefit
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-27/romney-i-dig-it-trust-gives-heirs-triple-benefit.html

    You’re going to have to explain to me how taking advantage of the provisions in our stupid estate tax system is somehow related to the claim that too many Americans are reliant on the government. The author is apparently an idiot for thinking they are somehow related.

    What he’s doing is legally avoiding tax on something that shouldn’t even be taxed in the first place. OMG, we better not vote for him! Let’s vote instead for the guy who takes money from the Social Security system to try to get re-elected.

  186. 1186
    David Losh says:

    RE: pfft @ 1182

    Chile is a mess, but they are investing heavily in South America. I’ll ask this afternoon what happened, or why the pensions there are more secure.

  187. 1187
    pfft says:

    How Democratic Ads Are Exploiting Romney’s ‘47 Percent’ Moment
    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/09/democratic-tv-ads-romney-47-percent.php?ref=fpa

  188. 1188

    RE: pfft @ 1187 – Yep, they like to mislead people. They aim for the gullible ignorant voter.

  189. 1189
    Blurtman says:

    Obama administration tells contractors again: Don’t issue layoff notices

    The Obama administration issued new guidance intended for defense contractors Friday afternoon, reiterating the administration’s position that the companies should not be issuing layoff notices over sequestration.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/industry/259305-omb-tells-contractors-once-again-dont-issue-layoff-notices

    Yea, we are not cutting the military budget. And I thought Obama was owned solely by the banksters. Good to see he is not neglecting the military industrial complex.

  190. 1190
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 1189:

    Obama administration tells contractors again: Don�t issue layoff notices

    The Obama administration issued new guidance intended for defense contractors Friday afternoon, reiterating the administration�s position that the companies should not be issuing layoff notices over sequestration.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/industry/259305-omb-tells-contractors-once-again-dont-issue-layoff-notices

    Yea, we are not cutting the military budget. And I thought Obama was owned solely by the banksters. Good to see he is not neglecting the military industrial complex.

    layoffs in the face of the fiscal cliff is just silly. they are going to reach a deal after the election. just about everyone know that.

    the fiscal cliff is all hype.

  191. 1191

    RE: Blurtman @ 1189 – Seeing unintended consequences are not the Obama administration’s strong suit.

    As to pfft’s claim they will settle, I think that depends on the election. If 2012 looks like 2010, with the Tea Party types making strong gains, but President Obama being reelected, we might have problems. Romney could probably get more concessions out of the Tea Party types than President Obama.

    Conversely, if the Democrats do well in the election, the outgoing Republicans might be had to deal with in the lame duck session.

    The more interesting issue is why wouldn’t the companies send WARN notices? They may be legally obligated to do so.

  192. 1192
    pfft says:

    As a Democrat I am kinda ashamed sometimes that we’ve lost elections to people who are just so blatantly and profoundly stupid.

    Paul Ryan on His Tax Plan: “It Would Take Me Too Long to Go Through All the Math”
    http://gawker.com/5947668/paul-ryan-on-his-tax-plan-it-would-take-me-too-long-to-go-through-all-the-math

    Paul Ryan is literally a moron.

  193. 1193
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 1190 – Perhaps. Or, Obama could know that munitions inventory will be depleted shortly after the election. What is your prediction for the settled terms that avoid the cliff?

  194. 1194

    RE: pfft @ 92 – You’re in no position to judge anyone else’s intelligence. In all your months here you’ve demonstrated no ability to think whatsoever. Only the ability to repeat what you’ve been told to think.

    BTW, on the topic of calling people nasty things, Christie today called President Obama a liar. It was based on the tax cut claims President Obama makes. I’d call him a liar for other reasons, and not that. But whatever. Refreshing to see a politician correctly identify someone else and not put it into PC terms.

  195. 1195
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 1194 – Liar = Politician. No harm, no foul.

  196. 1196
    Blurtman says:

    In office, then, Mr. Obama quickly proved to be a different breed of porpoise than the voters bargained for. He let the Wall Street privateers run amuck another four years, aided with colossal infusions of conjured-out-of-nothing “money” from the Federal Reserve. He let loose the demons of a high-tech totalitarian “security” state with every sort of electronic surveillance, citizen data-mining, and drone spying that innovation allowed. He stood silent like a Banana Republic store mannequin after the supreme court decided that corporations could buy elections (he could have pushed loudly for legislation or even a constitutional amendment to redefine corporate “personhood”). And of course, he continued to prosecute the absurd war in Afghanistan where, after nine years, US forces are unable to accomplish the only aims of being there: to control the terrain and to moderate the behavior of the people who live there.

    http://kunstler.com/blog/2012/09/zeitgeist-failure.html#more

  197. 1197
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 1194:

    RE: pfft @ 92 – You’re in no position to judge anyone else’s intelligence. In all your months here you’ve demonstrated no ability to think whatsoever. Only the ability to repeat what you’ve been told to think.

    BTW, on the topic of calling people nasty things, Christie today called President Obama a liar. It was based on the tax cut claims President Obama makes. I’d call him a liar for other reasons, and not that. But whatever. Refreshing to see a politician correctly identify someone else and not put it into PC terms.

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 1194:

    RE: pfft @ 92 – You’re in no position to judge anyone else’s intelligence. In all your months here you’ve demonstrated no ability to think whatsoever. Only the ability to repeat what you’ve been told to think

    you mean I repeat facts? reality has a well-known liberal bias.

    have you noticed I don’t reply to you anymore by the way? I play one more time though.

    “In all your months here you’ve demonstrated no ability to think whatsoever.”

    like?

    while we are insulting each other, this is the funniest thing written on here in awhile.

    “but I can’t really understand why people say Romney isn’t likable. Romney seems much more likable, IMHO, because he actually seems to understand what’s important to people.”

    really kary?

  198. 1198
    pfft says:

    like I said. how do we lose elections to these people?

    Republicans Overwhelmingly Think The Polls Are Rigged
    http://www.businessinsider.com/poll-bias-republicans-rigged-unskewed-polling-obama-romney-2012-9

  199. 1199
    corndogs says:

    RE: pfft @ 1192http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio

    Here’s one of your kind…..

  200. 1200
    corndogs says:

    RE: David Losh @ 77 – “Mitt Romney hates America, and everything we stand for”… What is it that “WE” stand for Losh?….

Leave a Reply

Use your email address to sign up with Gravatar for a custom avatar.
Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Please read the rules before posting a comment.