Inflation is coming

#26
#26
no joke. i mean St. Obama might have to be a terrible economist,,,, then again look what group of people he is reflecting
 
#28
#28
myrobbins7 said:
Got Gold guys? :)
Click to expand...

i have several firearms ranging from small caliber to large,, so i can get the gold,

whoever has the guns gets the gold, whoever has the gold makes the rules, therefore whoever has the guns makes the rules. (a little aristotilian logic for ya)
 
#30
#30
VolByBirth said:
So you are saying Obama will increase the debt by almost $9T?
Click to expand...

I thought he had already proposed 3T in new spending. For a guy who is fresh off the starting blocks I would say he is well on his way.
 
#32
#32
again, if deficit spending was bad under Bush, why is it now being hailed as the savior of our economy now that Obama is doing it?
 
#34
#34
MG1968 said:
again, if deficit spending was bad under Bush, why is it now being hailed as the savior of our economy now that Obama is doing it?
Click to expand...

Obama is spending money to stimulate the economy because of the Recession, Bush spent money mainly to fund an unpopular war in Iraq.

It's probably a hopeless task to make you understand this, but people want Obama to steer the country out of the recession, where the majority of Americans never supported the War in Iraq.
 
#35
#35
GASOUTHERNVOL said:
i have several firearms ranging from small caliber to large,, so i can get the gold,

whoever has the guns gets the gold, whoever has the gold makes the rules, therefore whoever has the guns makes the rules. (a little aristotilian logic for ya)
Click to expand...

If this is true, we conservatives will be just fine!:gun:
 
#36
#36
BigPapaVol said:
You're out of your mind of you believe today that Obama won't again double the debt.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Unless Obama plans to invade another country and topple the existing dictatorship, I think we'll be ok. We should be out of this recession in 2 years and spending will be cut.
 
#38
#38
oklavol said:
Unless Obama plans to invade another country and topple the existing dictatorship, I think we'll be ok. We should be out of this recession in 2 years and spending will be cut.
Click to expand...

I don't think you have anything to worry about there. Obama would sign us all over to them than to stand up against them.
 
#40
#40
VolByBirth said:
Do you have any clue what the failure of these two companies will do not only to the U.S. but global economy? These companies are so intertwined with every financial aspect of the economy that I would argue the words like "depression" might hold some merit if this were to happen. Lehman's failure took down the whole shadow banking community. We're talking now about true depository institutions.

I struggle with the "too big to fail" doctrine that U.S. typically goes by -- but in this case, it's true.

I agree with your comments about flawed money injections -- but that has almost nothing to do with Obama at this point. Paulson had a blank checkbook writing checks with zero oversight. The TARP funds have been poorly appropriated but worse is the lack of direction and purpose of these funds.
Click to expand...

Reality is that they are failing and efforts to recover them have failed. Just throwing money at them isn't fixing anything, and really is actually aggravating the situation. We can either let them fail and take our lumps (i.e. depression) or try to outright nationalize them (and then watch congress mismanage them). The thing is, we can't avoid this market correction. The more we try to dodge it, the worse we're making it.
 
#41
#41
oklavol said:
Unless Obama plans to invade another country and topple the existing dictatorship, I think we'll be ok. We should be out of this recession in 2 years and spending will be cut.
Click to expand...
When has Obama ever even mentioned a spending cut?

Further, if coming out of this recession is simply a matter of time, why are we pissing away a couple trillion dollars on garbage to get there?
 
#42
#42
As I understand it his spending is designed to return dividends in the economy. He spends 500 billion in the next 3 years he gets 2 trillion worth of new jobs and the spending that incurs. And if that does'nt make much sense to you that makes two of us, but it's IMO no worse than GWB's announcements.
 
#43
#43
dan4vols said:
As I understand it his spending is designed to return dividends in the economy. He spends 500 billion in the next 3 years he gets 2 trillion worth of new jobs and the spending that incurs. And if that does'nt make much sense to you that makes two of us, but it's IMO no worse than GWB's announcements.
Click to expand...
have you seen the expenditure list? It's full of garbage earmarks and a bunch of nothing that will help our economy. Reducing taxes by the trillion and allowing people to make their own decisions with the money will do far more for the economy than a slew of earmarks.
 
#44
#44
oklavol said:
Obama is spending money to stimulate the economy because of the Recession, Bush spent money mainly to fund an unpopular war in Iraq.

It's probably a hopeless task to make you understand this, but people want Obama to steer the country out of the recession, where the majority of Americans never supported the War in Iraq.
Click to expand...

how will Husseins spending help any more than bush's spending. that crazy. if you want the economy to rebound, then give companies tax breaks and see how many employees they hire within a year. Hussein a socialist and higher taxes are coming.
 
#45
#45
joevol320 said:
how will Husseins spending help any more than bush's spending. that crazy. if you want the economy to rebound, then give companies tax breaks and see how many employees they hire within a year. Hussein a socialist and higher taxes are coming.
Click to expand...

amen. if odumb@$$ wants to raise taxes on big buisnesses, which employee the people, taxes go up two things happen 1)prices go up 2)jobs are cut, good call on that one :good!:
 
#47
#47
GASOUTHERNVOL said:
amen. if odumb@$$ wants to raise taxes on big buisnesses, which employee the people, taxes go up two things happen 1)prices go up 2)jobs are cut, good call on that one :good!:
Click to expand...

Explain how this is a guarantee. Let's assume big business has a profit margin of 10% with 100,000 employees. Taxes are raised and the profit margin goes to 7%. Assume one of the two things above happen -- 1) prices go up or 2) jobs are cut.

- If prices go up then demand slows. Therefore, production slows and jobs are cut. This might help the margin but overall profit will be lower.
- If they cut jobs at the same production level it means they were inefficient and wasteful. If you are running efficient at a certain demand and you cut workers with no decrease in demand -- odds are production/service quality will be low -- further hurting future earnings. If you cut employees without any detriment, you were inefficient in the first place and you are now in the correct equilibrium.

I'm not saying this is right -- it's just how I read the above statement. Looking for other thoughts.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top