jimjimbo Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 Unless you are Argentina. and then, if you have a hot woman president, you can get away with shit.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 Unless you are Argentina. and then, if you have a hot woman president, you can get away with shit.... argentina president.jpg They are all *******. That includes the men too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty Favog Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 "The price of meat has just gone up and your old lady as just gone down" - Frank Zappa (sorry, had to do it) 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minermark Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Try as i do, i can not help but look at the price DAILY! Good thing i have NOT needed the money and do not need the money, Cause if i did, after Tax's it would really suck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJkizak Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 I have the answer---have everyone win the Powerball. JJK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paducah Home Theater Posted February 5, 2016 Author Share Posted February 5, 2016 They are ramping up the verbiage... now it's "we're trapped in a death spiral". http://www.cnbc.com/2016/02/05/citi-world-economy-trapped-in-death-spiral.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akdave Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 It generates the clicks, clicks make the money, the doom headlines get gloomier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Remember when the big complaint was a weak dollar and high energy prices? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Chickens are coming home to roost. For 8 years the USG has "fluffed the numbers" on economic recovery. There really hasn't been a recovery because the unemployment figures are not reflecting the permanent loss of useful jobs. Secondly, wages are flat, and finally, passive income from savings is next to zero. All three of those features are driving down consumption (deflationary). Consumption is the one dimension of the economy that can't be fluffed up by the economics gurus in government. The financial crisis of 08 was artificially lifted up by both the bailouts and the extensive QE. This in effect prevented any corrections. The lies were not washed into the gutter. We just moved forward with the SAME faulty ideas that created the crisis. We postponed the reckoning that free markets must have to exist. The US population is wildly "underutilized" to support a 1W lifestyle. To have what we have in total, we would need a 70% workforce participation with very high wages and the ability to save money at 6% or 7%. We are no where near that. So, either lifestyle must fall dramatically, or the economy has to be pumped again with massive new money from the FED to once more, stave off the "day of reckoning." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 "The price of meat has just gone up and your old lady as just gone down" - Frank Zappa (sorry, had to do it) Look here brother.......who you jivin' with that cosmic debris? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Remember when the big complaint was a weak dollar and high energy prices? Yes. Not much to ***** about on those two fronts and now with the good economic numbers Interest rates will start to rise and profit taking will happen in the stock market as it makes adjustments...Any guess how low it will go by the 2016 Election? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 My only guess would be that it will remain within historical standard deviation, but that is simply playing the statistical percentages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babadono Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 The country is going to he## in a hand basket---- and we don't even make the hand baskets here anymore. ----- Dennis Miller Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 When economies were mostly local to a nation, they had national institutions to run them, manage them. Now that economies are no longer local, but all mixed into one global system, it seems obvious that there ought to be a global management - some sort of global central bank. But of course, that can never happen without a loss of sovereignty to someone. Not everyone can be a priority. Right now, each nation attempts to rig the commodity over which they have some control. The US with the reserve currency, Saudi with oil, China with gold and rare earths, Russia with gas. And so on. Hmmm? I wonder where that leads? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 I wonder if this is obvious to everyone: As productivity climbs, you need less and less people. What we have however, is rising productivity AND rising population in the USA. Uh-oh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ski Bum Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Yeah, yeah, yeah, the sky is falling; eat right, stay fit, die anyway; suicide is the only answer, woe is everything! Hey look, some of those Benjamin Graham style "old man" stocks are too tempting to pass up. I've added some recently. The health sector funds have been hit pretty hard, but they will likely be hurt less and recover faster than other segments, so they're hitting sale prices too. Keeping plenty of dry powder, too. Happy investing, folks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 From the 1960s? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJkizak Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Chickens are coming home to roost. For 8 years the USG has "fluffed the numbers" on economic recovery. There really hasn't been a recovery because the unemployment figures are not reflecting the permanent loss of useful jobs. Secondly, wages are flat, and finally, passive income from savings is next to zero. All three of those features are driving down consumption (deflationary). Consumption is the one dimension of the economy that can't be fluffed up by the economics gurus in government. The financial crisis of 08 was artificially lifted up by both the bailouts and the extensive QE. This in effect prevented any corrections. The lies were not washed into the gutter. We just moved forward with the SAME faulty ideas that created the crisis. We postponed the reckoning that free markets must have to exist. The US population is wildly "underutilized" to support a 1W lifestyle. To have what we have in total, we would need a 70% workforce participation with very high wages and the ability to save money at 6% or 7%. We are no where near that. So, either lifestyle must fall dramatically, or the economy has to be pumped again with massive new money from the FED to once more, stave off the "day of reckoning." So what your saying is what we should have done is what the Republicans did in 1929---nothing, let the markets correct themselves---creating a 20 year depression that only the most humongous stimulus in history called WWII could have the capacity to bail us out, which it did. JJK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Not quite. I am saying we should have left the largest banks to completely fail and be liquidated. And, all the toxic assets - bad loans- should have been written down to market value. Then, use the $3T from the FED to refi 5 million homes on low interest terms. There would not be A 20 year recovery, but something more like 5. The huge brunt of all loss should have been on the richest swindlers, who were made whole. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 (edited) Not quite. I am saying we should have left the largest banks to completely fail and be liquidated. And, all the toxic assets - bad loans- should have been written down to market value. Then, use the $3T from the FED to refi 5 million homes on low interest terms. There would not be A 20 year recovery, but something more like 5. The huge brunt of all loss should have been on the richest swindlers, who were made whole. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk I have seen others make this claim even as the crisis was going on...The actual situation was because of AIG being viewed as "insurance " by Countries who had global stakes in that assumption our view/control of Capitalism was at stake and NOONE would predict a 5 year recovery in the global markets if they were allowed to fail--Actually what did happen was pretty incredible, imo. Edited February 7, 2016 by Zen Traveler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.