down 95,000 jobs this month

#26
#26
What is humorous is the unemployment numbers were bad today, but the stock market is going up, because they think the bad numbers will be another reason for the government to hand-out more money.....:cool:
 
#27
#27
overseasorange2 said:
What is humorous is the unemployment numbers were bad today, but the stock market is going up, because they think the bad numbers will be another reason for the government to hand-out more money.....:cool:
Click to expand...

pretty much. traders know if the fed is going to be forced to buy $1 trillion in assets that you don't want to be on the other side of that trade. this could (or likely already is) create a massive bubble though and that's scary.
 
#28
#28
Along the lines of your thinking Droski:

Bank of America and some other major banks
have declared a 50 state (not 57) moratorium
on foreclosures.

This isn't because of some benevelent attitude,
it is because they are swamped and are backlogged.

Along the same lines some companies such as
Ronald McDonald have been given a waiver from
Obamacare mandates because they would have
to drop insurance for their employees if they had
to meet certain stipulations in the legislation.

That may be fine and good but what about
other small businesses, think they are going
to get a waiver, lay people off or just go out
of business???

As Reagan pointed out, the American economy
is based on small business which employs about
70% of the workforce.

Some may say that all these problems are
caused by idiotic thinking but I question that,
I really believe the basic philosphy behind this
administration is that they want to totally
destroy the American economy so that they
can rebuild it more along the totalitarian model
they have in mind. :no:
 
#29
#29
droski said:
Doesn't make it any less idiotic. And she certainly is implying that unemployment checks are a huge driver of economic growth.
Click to expand...


She is implying that? I didn't get that form the article.

Seemed that, as a politician, she was arguing in favor of extending benefits and posited that, in terms of government programs that can have a positive effect, unemployment benefits have the effect of putting money into people's pockets that they will then spend.

I think it is rephrasing by Fox (and you) that she is saying its a "huge" benefit to the economy or that it rivals private sector jobs.

She's not. She's saying as far as government programs go this is one that puts money into a position to make it into the economy. I guess I see the logic of that and have very little respect for efforts by the right to take her words and mangle them to fuel the usual Fox News straw man tactic.
 
#30
#30
gsvol said:
Along the lines of your thinking Droski:

Bank of America and some other major banks
have declared a 50 state (not 57) moratorium
on foreclosures.

This isn't because of some benevelent attitude,
it is because they are swamped and are backlogged.

Along the same lines some companies such as
Ronald McDonald have been given a waiver from
Obamacare mandates because they would have
to drop insurance for their employees if they had
to meet certain stipulations in the legislation.

That may be fine and good but what about
other small businesses, think they are going
to get a waiver, lay people off or just go out
of business???

As Reagan pointed out, the American economy
is based on small business which employs about
70% of the workforce.

Some may say that all these problems are
caused by idiotic thinking but I question that,
I really believe the basic philosphy behind this
administration is that they want to totally
destroy the American economy so that they
can rebuild it more along the totalitarian model
they have in mind. :no:
Click to expand...



How is halting bankruptcies due to a backlog in processing "along the same lines" as a waiver to an employer to implement health insurance reform?
 
#31
#31
no doubt in my mind obama would torpedo the economy if he thought it would lead to the type of social programs and euro socialism he desires. the problem is he knows he needs to get reelected to do it. it's scary to think what he might do when he doesn't have that hanging over his head.
 
#32
#32
lawgator1 said:
She is implying that? I didn't get that form the article.

Seemed that, as a politician, she was arguing in favor of extending benefits and posited that, in terms of government programs that can have a positive effect, unemployment benefits have the effect of putting money into people's pockets that they will then spend.

I think it is rephrasing by Fox (and you) that she is saying its a "huge" benefit to the economy or that it rivals private sector jobs.

She's not. She's saying as far as government programs go this is one that puts money into a position to make it into the economy. I guess I see the logic of that and have very little respect for efforts by the right to take her words and mangle them to fuel the usual Fox News straw man tactic.
Click to expand...


i quoted her directly.
 
#33
#33
lawgator1 said:
She is implying that? I didn't get that form the article.

Seemed that, as a politician, she was arguing in favor of extending benefits and posited that, in terms of government programs that can have a positive effect, unemployment benefits have the effect of putting money into people's pockets that they will then spend.

I think it is rephrasing by Fox (and you) that she is saying its a "huge" benefit to the economy or that it rivals private sector jobs.

She's not. She's saying as far as government programs go this is one that puts money into a position to make it into the economy. I guess I see the logic of that and have very little respect for efforts by the right to take her words and mangle them to fuel the usual Fox News straw man tactic.
Click to expand...

I was right, you do agree with Pelosi. Thanks for confirming my suspicions.
 
#34
#34
overseasorange2 said:
What is humorous is the unemployment numbers were bad today, but the stock market is going up, because they think the bad numbers will be another reason for the government to hand-out more money.....:cool:
Click to expand...

A few years ago a large banking merger happened in which two competitors vied to take over a third company, Wells Fargo won the competition because they would put 2,000 more people out of work than the competition.





droski said:
pretty much. traders know if the fed is going to be forced to buy $1 trillion in assets that you don't want to be on the other side of that trade. this could (or likely already is) create a massive bubble though and that's scary.
Click to expand...

Does this make gold less attractive to you??

That's what the gold rush is all about.

BTW, the fed isn't 'forced' to do anything, they are a private enterprise and are at liberty to make decide what they want to do in their own best interests.
 
#35
#35
it would probably short term be bullish for gold yes.

there is political force in order whe you are apponted by a political entity.
 
#36
#36
droski said:
i quoted her directly.
Click to expand...


Let's recap.


1. MG 1968 asserted that Pelosi believed that unemployment benefits and welfare were better than private sector jobs for putting money into the economy.

2. I challeneged whether she said that.

3. You quoted her as saying that, as far as government programs go, unemployment benefits were the best option because it gave people money whichb they might spend and put into the economy as far as demand is concerned.

4. I pointed out that what you quoted DOES NOT EVEN COME CLOSE to the way that MG1968 put it. I also pointed out that MG1968 had intentionally misstated her position in rather cavalier fashion because he wanted to attack that, as opposed to what she actually said.

5. You say simply that you quoted her. MG1968 says simply that I agree with Pelosi.

Nice to see some intellectual honesty here (deep sarcasm).
 
#37
#37
lawgator1 said:
3. You quoted her as saying that, as far as government programs go, unemployment benefits were the best option because it gave people money whichb they might spend and put into the economy as far as demand is concerned..
Click to expand...

where does she say as far as govt programs go?
 
#39
#39
lawgator1 said:
How is halting bankruptcies due to a backlog in processing "along the same lines" as a waiver to an employer to implement health insurance reform?
Click to expand...


Unemployment rates!!

I'll simplify for you, as nationwide (even international) corporations receive waivers from this draconian legislation, small businesses do not.

In other words the small business owner is left with the options of downsizing his work force to cover increased insurance costs, ignoring the law and facing prosecution and heavy fines later or going out of business.

Just to make sure you can't find some other way to misunderstand my post, many foreclosures are caused by homeowners being unemployed because of the idiotic fiscal policies of the current administration.

hardwork.png


And to be a bit more blunt, even if all this malarky being put out by Obamama and the likes of you were to actually accomplish the stated goals, it puts an unbearable financial burden on my grandchildren.

You could spit in my face and not piss me off near as much as proposing to rape my grandchildren, financially or otherwise.

:furious3:
 
#42
#42
droski said:
it would probably short term be bullish for gold yes.

there is political force in order whe you are apponted by a political entity.
Click to expand...

So when was the last time a fed chairman was forced out??

Does one have to cater to to fed owners in order to be in a position to be a presidential candidate??

Again I ask you this simple question:

Can you explain the process by which the United States of America 'monetizes the national debt?'

Yes or no?
 
#43
#43
yes i can explain it. do i want to waste my time with your conspiracy theories. no. if that makes you think i don't understand economics than so be it.
 
#45
#45
duh! you've been here long enough to know the answer to that one, droski
 
#46
#46
droski said:
yes i can explain it. do i want to waste my time with your conspiracy theories. no. if that makes you think i don't understand economics than so be it.
Click to expand...

Since you purport to be the premier economist on this board, why don't you expalin how the debt is monetized so that us mere peons can all understand that process?

We'll leave all conjecture about any conspiracies aside and only pursue assertainable facoids.

Are you up for that??

I know your time must be sooo sooo valuable, that's why we have hours and hours of your drivel here everyday, I would be the last to want to waste your damned valuable time.

Man up or duck out!
 
#47
#47
droski probably does know about the economy than most anyone else on this board...
 
#48
#48
kev20 said:
duh! you've been here long enough to know the answer to that one, droski
Click to expand...

Well, while everyone recognizes ACLG for the
board troll he is, not everyone recognizes droski
for being exactly the same, although they may
take dramatically different stances on some issues,
still, in the end they try to divert us from the truth
about certain matters.

It's a pity and a shame that we waste so much time
discussion the postitions of either.
 
#50
#50
IPorange said:
droski probably does know about the economy than most anyone else on this board...
Click to expand...

In which case I am quite sure you would be very pleased to have him to explain how we monteize the national debt, in terms even you could understand since he claims to have much knowledge in that area!
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top