market reacts to tea party retards

market reacts to tea party retards (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

slut4prodomme -> market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 2:01:54 PM)
Thanks to the cowards in congress of both parties allowing themselves to be held hostage by the brain dead TERRORISTS of the tea party, world financial markets are collapsing. Thanks, morons!

Kirata -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 2:05:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slut4prodomme Thanks to the cowards in congress of both parties allowing themselves to be held hostage by the brain dead TERRORISTS of the tea party, world financial markets are collapsing. Thanks, morons! Does this mean we're past calling them racists, or do you think they're just out to TERRORIZE black people? K.

tazzygirl -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 2:13:39 PM)
Italy's equivalent bond yield jumped to 6.18 percent, above where it was before July 21, when the EU announced its latest debt crisis plan, including a second Greek bailout, to calm and contain market jitters. That plan had helped lift spirits briefly, but markets were quickly roiled again by worries that the U.S. economy may be sliding back toward recession. Coupled with lingering suspicions that the EU debt crisis plan will not be enough to stamp out the crisis, the fears about the U.S. soured market sentiment across the globe. http://news.yahoo.com/spanish-italian-markets-slammed-investor-fears-124312794.html This seems to be what is being reported.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 2:42:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slut4prodomme Thanks to the cowards in congress of both parties allowing themselves to be held hostage by the brain dead TERRORISTS of the tea party, world financial markets are collapsing. Thanks, morons! Its the economy,stupid. It has NOTHING to do with the debt ceiling or the deficit. If it did the Treasury market would be going to shit also. It isnt.

MileHighM -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 2:46:32 PM)
Slut, Sure the Tea-Party went a game chicken too long with the pres and dems. But, you can't deny that until we stop spending our children's future, the markets aren't going like it. PERIOD. This debt deal was a sorry failure, because it did nothing to fundamentally reform the way feds spend money, and it did nothing to really raise revenues. A month back the Wall Street Journal, discussed that historically tax hikes were not damaging to the markets or economy.....IF AND ONLY IF, they were balanced proportionally with spending cuts at about 1:6. Meaning, if you raise taxes/revenues 1$ you cut spending by 6$. This has been true both on the federal and local government levels, whenever spending was at dangerous levels. In fact, the economy benefitted from the action, because business leaders felt the government was being responsible and stabilizing. You may think the tea-party took too hard of a line and stood too strong on refusing an revenue increases, but you cannot deny that the left wouldn't entertain even basic cuts to the over-all federal bureaucracy. It doesn't matter if it the DOD, DOE, or the EPA. The government is full of waste. Cuts some budgets, tell the agencies they can't cut services (budgeted expenditures to the citizenry), and let them trim the fat and fight the public employee unions.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 2:50:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MileHighM A month back the Wall Street Journal, discussed that historically tax hikes were not damaging to the markets or economy.....IF AND ONLY IF, they were balanced proportionally with spending cuts at about 1:6. Meaning, if you raise taxes/revenues 1$ you cut spending by 6$. This has been true both on the federal and local government levels, whenever spending was at dangerous levels. In fact, the economy benefitted from the action, because business leaders felt the government was being responsible and stabilizing. Hmmm, the numbers dont sound right. Do you have a link to the article or a date? Mustve been when I was in Vegas. This is one you might be interested in MHM: All you have to do is maintain a policy that every debt ceiling increase is matched with a spending cut dollar for dollar (the "Boehner rule") and the budget will be balanced by 2021 without any tax increases. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903341404576483791295988516.html

tazzygirl -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 2:52:04 PM)
May want to take a look at this, willbe. http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/08/03/uk-china-treasuries-idUKTRE7720BW20110803

willbeurdaddy -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 3:04:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl May want to take a look at this, willbe. http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/08/03/uk-china-treasuries-idUKTRE7720BW20110803 I saw it already. Its largely smoke from the Chinese, not quite on the order of Putin's nonsense the other day, but largely irrelevant. Note also they are talking in terms of "taking care of the debt"....which is not the same as the raising of the debt ceiling which the OP claimed was behind the stock market problems. That is a spending issue. The article is right, though, that unless there are real spending cuts coming out of the super Congress we may be fucked. But then so will the Chinese and Russians. Again, the stability of the US Treasury market is absolute proof that the OP has misplaced her anger. Two reasons for that stability: No one was concerned for even a minute that the US would default, and there is no major government debt issue that has any less risk than the US. Money is still flowing into Treasuries, not out.

tazzygirl -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 3:09:51 PM)
Oh, Im not supporting her OP. Just pointing out where her information may have come from, since she neglected to do so herself. Which really is annoying, ya know?

cloudboy -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 3:34:24 PM)
Hopefully Congress will learn to address budget issues while making the budget and not when its time to pay the creditors for purchases already made.

MileHighM -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 3:36:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: MileHighM A month back the Wall Street Journal, discussed that historically tax hikes were not damaging to the markets or economy.....IF AND ONLY IF, they were balanced proportionally with spending cuts at about 1:6. Meaning, if you raise taxes/revenues 1$ you cut spending by 6$. This has been true both on the federal and local government levels, whenever spending was at dangerous levels. In fact, the economy benefitted from the action, because business leaders felt the government was being responsible and stabilizing. Hmmm, the numbers dont sound right. Do you have a link to the article or a date? Mustve been when I was in Vegas. This is one you might be interested in MHM: All you have to do is maintain a policy that every debt ceiling increase is matched with a spending cut dollar for dollar (the "Boehner rule") and the budget will be balanced by 2021 without any tax increases. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903341404576483791295988516.html W, You made me work hard for this...It was hard to find: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303823104576391331356123692.html?KEYWORDS=5+1+cuts+tax

Aylee -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 4:40:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slut4prodomme Thanks to the cowards in congress of both parties allowing themselves to be held hostage by the brain dead TERRORISTS of the tea party, world financial markets are collapsing. Thanks, morons! Hostage taking? Terrorists? Does this mean that the ATF is going to be selling them guns now?

willbeurdaddy -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 5:50:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy Hopefully Congress will learn to address budget issues while making the budget and not when its time to pay the creditors for purchases already made. Now that the GOP controls the House, perhaps we'll actually get a budget.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 6:14:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MileHighM quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: MileHighM A month back the Wall Street Journal, discussed that historically tax hikes were not damaging to the markets or economy.....IF AND ONLY IF, they were balanced proportionally with spending cuts at about 1:6. Meaning, if you raise taxes/revenues 1$ you cut spending by 6$. This has been true both on the federal and local government levels, whenever spending was at dangerous levels. In fact, the economy benefitted from the action, because business leaders felt the government was being responsible and stabilizing. Hmmm, the numbers dont sound right. Do you have a link to the article or a date? Mustve been when I was in Vegas. This is one you might be interested in MHM: All you have to do is maintain a policy that every debt ceiling increase is matched with a spending cut dollar for dollar (the "Boehner rule") and the budget will be balanced by 2021 without any tax increases. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903341404576483791295988516.html W, You made me work hard for this...It was hard to find: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303823104576391331356123692.html?KEYWORDS=5+1+cuts+tax Thanks for the effort. However, this statement of yours is not what the article says: IF AND ONLY IF, they were balanced proportionally with spending cuts at about 1:6. Meaning, if you raise taxes/revenues 1$ you cut spending by 6$. It notes anecdotally that successful deficit reduction programs AVERAGED a 5 or 6:1 cuts to taxes. It does not say that there is success IF AND ONLY IF. Thats what didnt make sense to me. In fact it says very clearly: " Cut spending, don't raise taxes." Not "raise taxes in a 5:1 ratio". In fairness, though the average in those programs may have been in those ratios, that isnt even necessary for a net positive economic impact. Using Obama's former advisor's and her husband's numbers, the economic multiplier on taxation is about -1.5 times the economic multiplier on spending. Ie for every dollar of spending CUTS that is matched by a a dollar in tax INCREASES. There is still a positive economic impact of about $.50. Other economists believe the multiplier is significantly higher. Empircal studies show that it is above 2, although, again in fairness, that includes capital gains rates cuts which have much more immediate and positive impact than other tax changes.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 6:16:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: slut4prodomme Thanks to the cowards in congress of both parties allowing themselves to be held hostage by the brain dead TERRORISTS of the tea party, world financial markets are collapsing. Thanks, morons! Hostage taking? Terrorists? Does this mean that the ATF is going to be selling them guns now? ROFL!!!!!

thompsonx -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 6:26:35 PM)
quote: Now that the GOP controls the House, perhaps we'll actually get a budget. How long have they had a majority? How much longer is it going to take?

playfulotter -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 6:40:21 PM)
I am just upset my IRA has gone down so much in the last week or so... but it did this way back when the stock market tanked before and it was up high again till this....I wouldn't blame it on that stupid "Tea Party"...hey, the only time the country hasn't borrowed in the multiple trillions since Reagan was when Good Ol' Clinton was in office..I say bring him back but, of course, that isn't possible! Darn..... This commercial fits here since we all have to protect what we have especially in these times... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lk2B8988ws0

Aylee -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 6:41:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy Hopefully Congress will learn to address budget issues while making the budget and not when its time to pay the creditors for purchases already made. Now that the GOP controls the House, perhaps we'll actually get a budget. Since April of 2009, makes something like 857 days. Perhaps the democrat controlled Senate is going for an Anne Boleyn type of thing. Wasn't she Queen for only a 1000 days?

willbeurdaddy -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 6:44:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: playfulotter I am just upset my IRA has gone down so much in the last week or so... but it did this way back when the stock market tanked before and it was up high again till this....I wouldn't blame it on that stupid "Tea Party"...hey, the only time the country hasn't borrowed a lot in the trillions since Reagan was when Good Ol' Clinton was in office..I say bring him back but of course that is against the law! ha ha As I recall youre not close to retirement. Dont panic and keep contributing, dollar averaging in the gains that will come eventually (he says optimistically...after all if they dont we're all fucked anyway)

MileHighM -> RE: market reacts to tea party retards (8/4/2011 6:48:33 PM)
I understand, mostly because we are over 20% GDP in spending, especially when we should be far below that number. Considering spending is so high we should just cut in the long term (agreed). But, I don't see, as ben stein put it on a fox interview, how we can avoid raising taxes with the amount of debt that we have. We need to pay down principle soon and fast. However, if you are going to raise taxes that ratio should be the guideline based on historical data. The 1:1.5 is woefully inadequate. quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: MileHighM quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: MileHighM A month back the Wall Street Journal, discussed that historically tax hikes were not damaging to the markets or economy.....IF AND ONLY IF, they were balanced proportionally with spending cuts at about 1:6. Meaning, if you raise taxes/revenues 1$ you cut spending by 6$. This has been true both on the federal and local government levels, whenever spending was at dangerous levels. In fact, the economy benefitted from the action, because business leaders felt the government was being responsible and stabilizing. Hmmm, the numbers dont sound right. Do you have a link to the article or a date? Mustve been when I was in Vegas. This is one you might be interested in MHM: All you have to do is maintain a policy that every debt ceiling increase is matched with a spending cut dollar for dollar (the "Boehner rule") and the budget will be balanced by 2021 without any tax increases. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903341404576483791295988516.html W, You made me work hard for this...It was hard to find: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303823104576391331356123692.html?KEYWORDS=5+1+cuts+tax Thanks for the effort. However, this statement of yours is not what the article says: IF AND ONLY IF, they were balanced proportionally with spending cuts at about 1:6. Meaning, if you raise taxes/revenues 1$ you cut spending by 6$. It notes anecdotally that successful deficit reduction programs AVERAGED a 5 or 6:1 cuts to taxes. It does not say that there is success IF AND ONLY IF. Thats what didnt make sense to me. In fact it says very clearly: " Cut spending, don't raise taxes." Not "raise taxes in a 5:1 ratio". In fairness, though the average in those programs may have been in those ratios, that isnt even necessary for a net positive economic impact. Using Obama's former advisor's and her husband's numbers, the economic multiplier on taxation is about -1.5 times the economic multiplier on spending. Ie for every dollar of spending CUTS that is matched by a a dollar in tax INCREASES. There is still a positive economic impact of about $.50. Other economists believe the multiplier is significantly higher. Empircal studies show that it is above 2, although, again in fairness, that includes capital gains rates cuts which have much more immediate and positive impact than other tax changes.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625