PDA

View Full Version : Economic turnaround update.



LWW
04-17-2010, 04:12 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">WASHINGTON (AP) - <span style='font-size: 17pt'>Regulators on Friday shut down eight banks - three in Florida, two in California, and one each in Massachusetts, Michigan and Washington - putting the number of U.S. bank failures this year at 50.</span> ...

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Last year, 140 banks failed in the U.S.</span> That was the highest annual number since 1992 during the peak of the savings and loan crisis. The failures last year cost the FDIC's insurance fund more than $30 billion.
Twenty-five banks failed in 2008 and three in 2007.

FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair has predicted that the number of bank failures will peak this year and be slightly more than in 2009. </div></div>

&gt;&gt;&gt;SCARY STUFF&lt;&lt;&lt; (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100417/D9F4JQR00.html)

LWW

Sev
04-17-2010, 04:53 PM
Well looks like they are going after Goldman Sacks.

pooltchr
04-17-2010, 05:45 PM
And even though it happened "on Obama's watch", they will continue to blame Bush!

Steve

LWW
04-18-2010, 05:57 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well looks like they are going after Goldman Sacks. </div></div>

That's a smoke screen.

LWW

LWW
04-18-2010, 06:00 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And even though it happened "on Obama's watch", they will continue to blame Bush!

Steve </div></div>

How true ... how pathetically and pitifully true.

Bush has become a totem which is used by the party to whip the natives into a frenzy.

The amazing thing is most leftists are so blinded by partisanship is that they don't recognize that Bush was one of them.

LWW

Qtec
04-18-2010, 06:12 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And even though it happened "on Obama's watch", they will continue to blame Bush!

Steve </div></div>

No it didn't.

Q

Sev
04-18-2010, 06:18 AM
The further we move away from Bush's term the more whittled the totem pole will be.
If the economy does not show a substantial recovery soon their arguments will become weaker and weaker.

For instance the numbers of economic strength growing are misleading as companies are still trimming the fat by removing non essential personal. Their expenses shrink and the bottom line looks better. Less people doing more. Increasing efficiency. Which is good for a company.
This however is having the net effect of increasing unemployment.

Keep in mind that no matter how bad the economy is there are sectors that always hire. So to say that the administration has created jobs is disingenuous as they are taking credit for the natural ebb and flow of jobs that occurs in any economic climate.
Of course they can take credit for government jobs. Which creates its own hazards.

LWW
04-18-2010, 06:48 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And even though it happened "on Obama's watch", they will continue to blame Bush!

Steve </div></div>

No it didn't.

Q </div></div>

So you are claiming <span style='font-family: Arial Black'><u>B-B-B-BOOOOSH!!!!</u></span> is still the POTUS?

Your defense of dearest leader becomes less and less rational and more and more desperate with each passing day.

LWW

LWW
04-18-2010, 06:50 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The further we move away from Bush's term the more whittled the totem pole will be.
If the economy does not show a substantial recovery soon their arguments will become weaker and weaker.</div></div>

With rational folks that will be true. With cult members it simply doesn't work.

As an example, we have a member who believes Obama is POTUS when the news is good and then magically reinstates <span style='font-family: Arial Black'><u>B-B-B-BOOOOSH!!!!</u></span> when it becomes convenient.

Doublethink on display.

LWW

pooltchr
04-18-2010, 07:41 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And even though it happened "on Obama's watch", they will continue to blame Bush!

Steve </div></div>

No it didn't.

Q </div></div>

Here's something for you to think about...the challenge is to actually think about it and not google your favorite blogs for a response.

Even if you want to push the blame back a few years, the Dems had control of the congress since 2006 (That's the last four years). They had control of the banking and finance committees that were responsible for oversight. Why didn't they do something then????

When Obama was campaigning, the economy was in a downturn. He told us that he was the one who could turn it around. Yet, he has been in office well over a year, and we are no better off. His own projections of capping unemployment at 8% with his "stimulus" package proved to be way off. Who is at fault now?

As for the "stimulus", it was a short term idea. "stimulus money is going to get cut off. But Washington forced the states to use the money for operating expenses. Things like hiring more law enforcement officers, teachers, etc. Now, when that money runs out in a couple of years, are the cities and states going to have more employees than they can afford? What will they be forced to do then?

If you are going to cut and paste a reply, don't bother. If you care to think about these questions, and offer your independent reply, I would be interested in reading it.

Steve

LWW
04-18-2010, 07:46 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Even if you want to push the blame back a few years, the Dems had control of the congress since 2006 (That's the last four years). They had control of the banking and finance committees that were responsible for oversight. Why didn't they do something then????

Steve </div></div>

They did plenty ... including taking massive cash from the financial industry to run cover while the system was plundered.

That's why Q must invent this alternate universe where Bush and Obama are both POTUS ... as the ideology requires.

LWW

LWW
04-18-2010, 07:48 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When Obama was campaigning, the economy was in a downturn. He told us that he was the one who could turn it around. Yet, he has been in office well over a year, and we are no better off. His own projections of capping unemployment at 8% with his "stimulus" package proved to be way off. Who is at fault now?

Steve </div></div>

Good question ... and one which dearest leader does not allow cult members to contemplate.

LWW

LWW
04-18-2010, 07:50 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As for the "stimulus", it was a short term idea. "stimulus money is going to get cut off. But Washington forced the states to use the money for operating expenses. Things like hiring more law enforcement officers, teachers, etc. Now, when that money runs out in a couple of years, are the cities and states going to have more employees than they can afford? What will they be forced to do then?

Steve </div></div>

The goal is to eliminate the states as autonomous entities.

All must bend to the will of the omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent state.

LWW