Exactly. The facts here are that his has been the worst summer in a long time. For a long time th eweather was awful and everyone believed that as soon as it was sunny people would come to th ebeach in droves, but the crowds have never materialized. On my street half the apartments are empty, which is unheard of in the middle of the summer.
Oh my God. Please tell me you are being facisious.
Greenspan's overall outlook was positive. You can't change that, no matter how many anecdotal and editorial pieces you post, sonjata. One of the reasons the bond market has done well is because the stock market HASN'T. Hello?
Even without Greenspan's comments, the number don't lie. The economy is in recovery. Funny, everyone keeps referencing what happened in 1992 witht he Presidential election. Except that what folks don't understand is that we are at about the same point in the recovery cycle today as we were in 1992...and the election isn't until next year.
Oh, and BTW: Don't bother with the New York Times.
Keyboard:
Quote:
To discuss whether or not the media is liberal, we need to discuss those arms of the media that you have confidence in like fox news. They are doing the EXACT thing you are claiming the liberal media is going, only they are doing it in the polar political opposite. Yet you do not throw around the term, "conservative media" If you think FoxNews is the kind of media that's good for America, then i feel sorry for you.
Fox News is conservative. I have said that. God forbid we have a conservative network vs. the other 4 or 5 major ones that are liberal.
Quote:
I find it hilarious and sad people seem to need to scapegoat the media when the news show's their guy in a bad light. Despite the fact most media is owned by five companies whose CEOs i'd willing to bet don't vote democrat. and the fact that hate( i mean conservative radio) rules the airways.
How about the fact that many ALWAYS show "my guy" in a bad light? Now, do you suppose he's that bad, or perhaps...just perhaps there is some editorial choice going on? Hmmmm.
I'm also not going to let you get away with your ridiculous "hate radio" label. It's conservative radio, and you can't stand it. That doesn't make it "hate radio". What a bullshit term.
There is the possibility of deflation ( which I've never heard of in my lifetime ), the interest rates, and the sickly job market.
It's just igonoring the obvious. I wish it was different and I was wrong.
The first link talks about the POSSIBILITY that Banks may have trouble in the FUTURE...even though things are great for them now.
The second is a one-day headline which you apparently think supports your case that the economy is not turinng around. In fact, on the same page it references General Motors beating of street estimates. It also speaks of jobelss claims dropping.
Weak, jimmac. The relevant numbers show recovery. You can't change it.
you are so polarized you cannot discuss the topic from the premise given.
Ha! You are so polarized you can't deal with reality! You've resorted to saying, 'Let's play make-believe'. Your world view is so fundamentally flawed that the only way you can have a discussion anymore is to simply play pretend.
Have fun with your dollies. The real world will still be there when you decide to return and deal with it.
Isn't there a name for the condition where someone who retreats to fantasy when their world view crumbles? Something along the lines of schizophrenia, but resulting from shock?
Greenspan's overall outlook was positive. You can't change that, no matter how many anecdotal and editorial pieces you post, sonjata. One of the reasons the bond market has done well is because the stock market HASN'T. Hello?
Even without Greenspan's comments, the number don't lie. The economy is in recovery. Funny, everyone keeps referencing what happened in 1992 witht he Presidential election. Except that what folks don't understand is that we are at about the same point in the recovery cycle today as we were in 1992...and the election isn't until next year.
Oh, and BTW: Don't bother with the New York Times.
you could not have read my entire post to have responded like that. No doubt that Greenspan is trying to make a good impression. That's obvvious. The issue with the NYT post was his inability to answer the critiques posed at him. That's bad.
it becomes badder when one looks at the NAFTA issue. How can the government pay off it's debt when the taxpayers are getting axed and downsized.
That comment from Macintouch is very important. Businesses shipping previously high paying jobs overseas is new and is going to kill the tax bases of not a few locations in the US. The resulting downward pressure on wages will cut the tax income. Combined with outragous rents in the areas of the country where most of the money is generated ( ie NYC pays in a huge share of NYS tax revenue), will push people to other locations forming another part in a death spiral.
Fox News is conservative. I have said that. God forbid we have a conservative network vs. the other 4 or 5 major ones that are liberal.
There you go again. So you are saying it ok for the media to be biased.
Quote:
That doesn't make it "hate radio". What a bullshit term.
Tell it to Michael Weiner. I mean Savage.
Quote:
"my guy" in a bad light? Now, do you suppose he's that bad, or perhaps...just perhaps there is some editorial choice going on? Hmmmm.
I think your guy is the least intellgient person to hold that office. period. i think he's surrounded himself with "daddy's boys" and that like his father's firrst Iraq war, this WMD thing will not help but in fact lead to the the american people focusing on the economy, stupid.
And yes. it will be like '92 in a way. Back in '92 a bush lost the whitehouse too.
Fox News is conservative. I have said that. God forbid we have a conservative network vs. the other 4 or 5 major ones that are liberal.
The other 4 or 5? You mean like what? MSNBC, home of Scarborough Country and, until recently, Savage Nation? Or do you mean CNN, which had a half-hour to hour special with Coulter discussing (well, if you consider repeatedly saying 'liberals' 'commit' 'treason' a discussion) her new book a week or two ago?
Quote:
I'm also not going to let you get away with your ridiculous "hate radio" label. It's conservative radio, and you can't stand it. That doesn't make it "hate radio". What a bullshit term.
Yeah, savage was fired from MSNBC for being conservative. I guess saying 'I hope you get AIDS and die' is just benign conservative political statement.
The first link talks about the POSSIBILITY that Banks may have trouble in the FUTURE...even though things are great for them now.
The second is a one-day headline which you apparently think supports your case that the economy is not turinng around. In fact, on the same page it references General Motors beating of street estimates. It also speaks of jobelss claims dropping.
Weak, jimmac. The relevant numbers show recovery. You can't change it.
Not weak at all. It shows things aren't heathy or stable. Only when you focus on one aspect ( wishful thinking ) does it look promising. However no matter how good big corporations and rich people are doing if workers don't have jobs they won't have money to buy the products from those big corporations. That situation is bad for the economy.
So what you get is exactly what's happening. Weak recovery followed by more downturns. This kind of anemic economy is very familure.
I haven't even brought up the subject of the national debt Bush is racking up. A debt which won't be paid off in my lifetime and maybe yours as well!
Look I really hope I'm wrong about this. I want to see a return to a healthy economy just as much as the next person. I don't care how it happens. But right now it isn't.
Yes I know on CNN they're saying a group of economists are saying the recession is over. How much do you want to bet six months from now there's still bad news?
But I suppose your comfortable letting future generations deal with it.
Ha! You are so polarized you can't deal with reality! You've resorted to saying, 'Let's play make-believe'. Your world view is so fundamentally flawed that the only way you can have a discussion anymore is to simply play pretend.
Have fun with your dollies. The real world will still be there when you decide to return and deal with it.
Isn't there a name for the condition where someone who retreats to fantasy when their world view crumbles? Something along the lines of schizophrenia, but resulting from shock?
Your mouth is moving but I don't hear you. Not only is it ridiculous for you to dismiss any possibility of us finding WMD, it is beyond all ludicrous thought to suggest that someone ELSE who merely entertains that possibility is living in an alternate reality. If you want to be totally unreasonable and deny such a possibility, then go ahead, However, don't go around calling others insane for even discussing the topic.
sonjata:
Quote:
you could not have read my entire post to have responded like that. No doubt that Greenspan is trying to make a good impression. That's obvvious. The issue with the NYT post was his inability to answer the critiques posed at him. That's bad.
it becomes badder when one looks at the NAFTA issue. How can the government pay off it's debt when the taxpayers are getting axed and downsized.
That comment from Macintouch is very important. Businesses shipping previously high paying jobs overseas is new and is going to kill the tax bases of not a few locations in the US. The resulting downward pressure on wages will cut the tax income. Combined with outragous rents in the areas of the country where most of the money is generated ( ie NYC pays in a huge share of NYS tax revenue), will push people to other locations forming another part in a death spiral.
I don't mean to insult you here, but could you please go learn a little about how the economy works before posting? I'm not a huge fan of NAFTA, but in itself will not tremendously damage the economy.
And sorry, but I cannot respect the opinion of anyone who uses the non-word "badder". Somehow I doubt that's a typo.
keyboard:
Quote:
There you go again. So you are saying it ok for the media to be biased.
Actually, that's what you said.
Quote:
Tell it to Michael Weiner. I mean Savage.
Savage is an idiot. I'm talking about the two dominant figures..Limbaugh and Hannity. Tell me they're perveyors of hate. Please. Go ahead.
Quote:
I think your guy is the least intellgient person to hold that office. period. i think he's surrounded himself with "daddy's boys" and that like his father's firrst Iraq war, this WMD thing will not help but in fact lead to the the american people focusing on the economy, stupid.
And yes. it will be like '92 in a way. Back in '92 a bush lost the whitehouse too.
And it amazes me that liberals like you haven't figured how smart Bush is, even after he's wiped the floor with your party politcally time and time again. He's gotten two dramatic tax cuts passed (in record time, might I add), gotten authorization for war, and implemented just about every program he's wanted to. Yes, he's surrounded himself with many of his father's people, which is only a good thing. Imagine..an experienced cabinet. The horror.
And please, do you have anything to say other than "It's the economy, stupid"? I know you'd like things to be bad next year, but the signs don't point to that. Poor keyboard, the election isn't happening during the year in which it needs to, is it?
Could Bush lose? Sure. Will he? Not likely. That's the bottom line, and any Democrat that doesn't see it (and the differences between now and 1992) is either and idiot or just deluded. I won't fault you for supporting who you will, but to actually be so deluded as to ignore the fact that GWB is very likely going to get reelected is just beyond me.
jimmac:
Quote:
Not weak at all. It shows things aren't heathy or stable. Only when you focus on one aspect ( wishful thinking ) does it look promising. However no matter how good big corporations and rich people are doing if workers don't have jobs they won't have money to buy the products from those big corporations. That situation is bad for the economy.
Now we are getting to it: Your total lack of understanding about how the economy works. You've bought the class warfare approach from the Democratic Party.. hook, line and sinker. When corporations do well, they hire. When their business does well, workers tend to do well. I know you think of corporations as big, evil empires, but they ARE the economy. This is why the market is so closely tied to economic data and corporate profits.
As far as "one number", that's just patently false. Did you even read the data I posted? I quoted several statistics, including GDP growth. I also made reference earlier to manufacturing indices, the markets, and more. One number my ass.
Quote:
So what you get is exactly what's happening. Weak recovery followed by more downturns. This kind of anemic economy is very familure.
Speculation.
Quote:
I haven't even brought up the subject of the national debt Bush is racking up. A debt which won't be paid off in my lifetime and maybe yours as well!
Irrelevant. And, it's not just "Bush", just like the 90's surpluses were not just "Clinton".
Quote:
Look I really hope I'm wrong about this. I want to see a return to a healthy economy just as much as the next person. I don't care how it happens. But right now it isn't.
Yes I know on CNN they're saying a group of economists are saying the recession is over. How much do you want to bet six months from now there's still bad news?
A year ago I would not take that bet. Today I would. I'm glad you want things to get better, though.
As far as future generations are concerned, I don't think boomers like yourself have any room to talk on that.
ludicrous thought to suggest that someone ELSE who merely entertains that possibility is living in an alternate reality. If you want to be totally unreasonable and deny such a possibility
you aren't simply putting forward a possibility, you have resorted to engaging in a discussion that uses make-believe to give some sort of validity to your position, which reality does not.
You've fabricated a fictional set of circumstances in order to avoid dealing with the fact that reality demonstrates that your beliefs are wrong.
I said some leans left some leans right and most will do and say whatever it takes to make the easiest buck. Even at the cost of American trust.
Quote:
Savage is an idiot. I'm talking about the two dominant figures..Limbaugh and Hannity. Tell me they're perveyors of hate. Please. Go ahead.
They're too busy wrapping themselves up in the flag and spewing so many words that don't quite cross over the line of hate to paint anyone that does not agree with them as un-american.
Quote:
is, even after he's wiped the floor with your party politcally time
He got to power by his daddy, presided over a national tragedy and belongs to a party that are masters of demoguaging(sp). The fact that too many boneheaded democrats did not challenge him does not a political genius make.
Quote:
Imagine..an experienced cabinet. The horror.
Oh. no need to imagine.
Every time i see another one of personal freedoms taken away under the guise of patiotism its all to plain to see.
Every dollar more we are in debt its plain to see. And tax cuts? You mean service cuts that will "trickle down" in the form of state's budget's being busted its plain to see.
Every time property taxes go up and health and education services get cut off its plain to see...
Of course bush could lose. all that needs to happen is that katie couric and the "4 out of 5 liberal" media companies need to blanket the airwaves with anti bush propaganda
You can use that excuse in 2 years if you like.
Quote:
GWB is very likely going to get reelected is just beyond me.
You've fabricated a fictional set of circumstances...
isn't that the entire point of discussiong things that haven't happened yet? of course you fabricate circumstances. there's no point to discussion the future if you can't.
He got to power by his daddy, presided over a national tragedy and belongs to a party that are masters of demoguaging(sp). The fact that too many boneheaded democrats did not challenge him does not a political genius make.
That's really rich. Tell me that the next time Tom Daschle goes on about the end of Social Security. I can't even believe you have the balls to say that. Also, Explain to me how 9/11 was Bush's fault. Shit, I suppose you are going to try and tell me he was warned of "hijackings"? Got to power by his daddy? How is that?
Quote:
They're too busy wrapping themselves up in the flag and spewing so many words that don't quite cross over the line of hate to paint anyone that does not agree with them as un-american.
Try listening once in awhile. They paint as un-American those who ARE un-American. "Wrapping themselves in the flag"....wow. It's like you just regurgitate every liberal cliche you've ever heard. God forbid....flag waving!
Quote:
Every time i see another one of personal freedoms taken away under the guise of patiotism its all to plain to see.
More nonsense. Which freedoms have you lost? Which freedom has anyone you know lost? More liberal rhetoric. But I forget, John Ascroft is the Devil incarnate! The criminal Janet Reno was a protector of all that is good and decent (except for Waco, Ruby Ridge and Elian) but Ashcroft and Bush are out to kill civil liberties. I really want an answer here. Tell me...which freedoms?
Quote:
Every dollar more we are in debt its plain to see. And tax cuts? You mean service cuts that will "trickle down" in the form of state's budget's being busted its plain to see.
Yes, because George W Bush has "busted" the state's budgets. It has nothing to do with spending binges, does it? Show me which programs Bush has cut.
Quote:
Every time property taxes go up and health and education services get cut off its plain to see...
And again...show me how Bush is responsible for property taxes. Education is a state issue. Health service cuts? Ummm...Prescription Drug Benefit? Hello? Shit...you really believe this stuff.
Quote:
Of course bush could lose. all that needs to happen is that katie couric and the "4 out of 5 liberal" media companies need to blanket the airwaves with anti bush propaganda
You can use that excuse in 2 years if you like.
Instead of mocking me, how about you show some evidence that isn't from fair.org that counterdicts my claim?
Quote:
hey said the same thing about bush senior.
Like father, like son.
oooh...originality again! Seriosuly, try having your statement mean something next time. Two words: Wishful Thinking.
Sonjata:
Quote:
NAFTA has already done damage to the economy. you're just too blind to see it.
ot should I have said you've been blinded to it?
It may have, but you are running around acting liek it in itself will prevent a recovery. I disagree with that. That's all. BTW, I mentioned your grammar because, well....seriously! How can you not realize "badder" is a non-existent word? It's Elementary (literally) my dear Sonjata.
Northgate:
Quote:
Psst...I think you mean facetious. Sorry, couldn't resist.
Correct. But mine was a misspelling...."badder" is not even a word. There's a difference.
Rick:
Quote:
Learn to spell, that is not even close.
Spell this: FOAD
alcimdedes:
Quote:
isn't that the entire point of discussiong things that haven't happened yet? of course you fabricate circumstances. there's no point to discussion the future if you can't.
Exactly. It's a PREMISE. giant can't accept that, though. Such a premise causes him to fly into fits of anti-SDW rage. After all, anyone who believes WMD may still be found is an idiot.
Yes, because George W Bush has "busted" the state's budgets. It has nothing to do with spending binges, does it? Show me which programs Bush has cut.
All those things i was talking about things that i think will happen in the future ( like next 3 years) You should know things take time to "trickle" down.
Quote:
Instead of mocking me, how about you show some evdience that isn't from fair.org that counterdicts my claim?
Reverse Ditto. And why not fair.org. OOhhhhh that's right fair.org is a part of the katie couric "did you see the way she asked that question? she must be a registered commie pinko leftist" liberal media. lol
Quote:
More nonsense. Which freedoms have you lost? Which freedom has anyone you know lost? More liberal rhetoric.
Oh i don't know. how about that lawful detention without cause and without time limits?
Just because a freedom has not been taking away from you personally, doesn't mean it hasn't been taken away.
That's really rich. Tell me that the next time Tom Daschle goes on about the end of Social Security. I can't even believe you have the balls to say that. Also, Explain to me how 9/11 was Bush's fault. Shit, I suppose you are going to try and tell me he was warned of "hijackings"? Got to power by his daddy? How is that?
Try listening once in awhile. They paint as un-American those who ARE un-American. "Wrapping themselves in the flag"....wow. It's like you just regurgitate every liberal cliche you've ever heard. God forbid....flag waving!
More nonsense. Which freedoms have you lost? Which freedom has anyone you know lost? More liberal rhetoric. But I forget, John Ascroft is the Devil incarnate! The criminal Janet Reno was a protector of all that is good and decent (except for Waco, Ruby Ridge and Elian) but Ashcroft and Bush are out to kill civil liberties. I really want an answer here. Tell me...which freedoms?
Yes, because George W Bush has "busted" the state's budgets. It has nothing to do with spending binges, does it? Show me which programs Bush has cut.
And again...show me how Bush is responsible for property taxes. Education is a state issue. Health service cuts? Ummm...Prescription Drug Benefit? Hello? Shit...you really believe this stuff.
Instead of mocking me, how about you show some evidence that isn't from fair.org that counterdicts my claim?
oooh...originality again! Seriosuly, try having your statement mean something next time. Two words: Wishful Thinking.
Sonjata:
It may have, but you are running around acting liek it in itself will prevent a recovery. I disagree with that. That's all. BTW, I mentioned your grammar because, well....seriously! How can you not realize "badder" is a non-existent word? It's Elementary (literally) my dear Sonjata.
Northgate:
Correct. But mine was a misspelling...."badder" is not even a word. There's a difference.
Rick:
Spell this: FOAD
alcimdedes:
Exactly. It's a PREMISE. giant can't accept that, though. Such a premise causes him to fly into fits of anti-SDW rage. After all, anyone who believes WMD may still be found is an idiot.
Comments
Originally posted by Rick1138
Exactly. The facts here are that his has been the worst summer in a long time. For a long time th eweather was awful and everyone believed that as soon as it was sunny people would come to th ebeach in droves, but the crowds have never materialized. On my street half the apartments are empty, which is unheard of in the middle of the summer.
Oh my God. Please tell me you are being facisious.
Even without Greenspan's comments, the number don't lie. The economy is in recovery. Funny, everyone keeps referencing what happened in 1992 witht he Presidential election. Except that what folks don't understand is that we are at about the same point in the recovery cycle today as we were in 1992...and the election isn't until next year.
Oh, and BTW: Don't bother with the New York Times.
Keyboard:
To discuss whether or not the media is liberal, we need to discuss those arms of the media that you have confidence in like fox news. They are doing the EXACT thing you are claiming the liberal media is going, only they are doing it in the polar political opposite. Yet you do not throw around the term, "conservative media" If you think FoxNews is the kind of media that's good for America, then i feel sorry for you.
Fox News is conservative. I have said that. God forbid we have a conservative network vs. the other 4 or 5 major ones that are liberal.
I find it hilarious and sad people seem to need to scapegoat the media when the news show's their guy in a bad light. Despite the fact most media is owned by five companies whose CEOs i'd willing to bet don't vote democrat. and the fact that hate( i mean conservative radio) rules the airways.
How about the fact that many ALWAYS show "my guy" in a bad light? Now, do you suppose he's that bad, or perhaps...just perhaps there is some editorial choice going on? Hmmmm.
I'm also not going to let you get away with your ridiculous "hate radio" label. It's conservative radio, and you can't stand it. That doesn't make it "hate radio". What a bullshit term.
Originally posted by jimmac
Well anybody who believes the economy is healthy is ignoring the facts.
http://money.cnn.com/2003/07/16/markets/banks/index.htm
And
http://money.cnn.com/index.html?cnn=yes
There is the possibility of deflation ( which I've never heard of in my lifetime ), the interest rates, and the sickly job market.
It's just igonoring the obvious. I wish it was different and I was wrong.
The first link talks about the POSSIBILITY that Banks may have trouble in the FUTURE...even though things are great for them now.
The second is a one-day headline which you apparently think supports your case that the economy is not turinng around. In fact, on the same page it references General Motors beating of street estimates. It also speaks of jobelss claims dropping.
Weak, jimmac. The relevant numbers show recovery. You can't change it.
Originally posted by SDW2001
you are so polarized you cannot discuss the topic from the premise given.
Ha! You are so polarized you can't deal with reality! You've resorted to saying, 'Let's play make-believe'. Your world view is so fundamentally flawed that the only way you can have a discussion anymore is to simply play pretend.
Have fun with your dollies. The real world will still be there when you decide to return and deal with it.
Isn't there a name for the condition where someone who retreats to fantasy when their world view crumbles? Something along the lines of schizophrenia, but resulting from shock?
Originally posted by SDW2001
Greenspan's overall outlook was positive. You can't change that, no matter how many anecdotal and editorial pieces you post, sonjata. One of the reasons the bond market has done well is because the stock market HASN'T. Hello?
Even without Greenspan's comments, the number don't lie. The economy is in recovery. Funny, everyone keeps referencing what happened in 1992 witht he Presidential election. Except that what folks don't understand is that we are at about the same point in the recovery cycle today as we were in 1992...and the election isn't until next year.
Oh, and BTW: Don't bother with the New York Times.
you could not have read my entire post to have responded like that. No doubt that Greenspan is trying to make a good impression. That's obvvious. The issue with the NYT post was his inability to answer the critiques posed at him. That's bad.
it becomes badder when one looks at the NAFTA issue. How can the government pay off it's debt when the taxpayers are getting axed and downsized.
That comment from Macintouch is very important. Businesses shipping previously high paying jobs overseas is new and is going to kill the tax bases of not a few locations in the US. The resulting downward pressure on wages will cut the tax income. Combined with outragous rents in the areas of the country where most of the money is generated ( ie NYC pays in a huge share of NYS tax revenue), will push people to other locations forming another part in a death spiral.
Fox News is conservative. I have said that. God forbid we have a conservative network vs. the other 4 or 5 major ones that are liberal.
There you go again. So you are saying it ok for the media to be biased.
That doesn't make it "hate radio". What a bullshit term.
Tell it to Michael Weiner. I mean Savage.
"my guy" in a bad light? Now, do you suppose he's that bad, or perhaps...just perhaps there is some editorial choice going on? Hmmmm.
I think your guy is the least intellgient person to hold that office. period. i think he's surrounded himself with "daddy's boys" and that like his father's firrst Iraq war, this WMD thing will not help but in fact lead to the the american people focusing on the economy, stupid.
And yes. it will be like '92 in a way. Back in '92 a bush lost the whitehouse too.
Originally posted by SDW2001
Fox News is conservative. I have said that. God forbid we have a conservative network vs. the other 4 or 5 major ones that are liberal.
The other 4 or 5? You mean like what? MSNBC, home of Scarborough Country and, until recently, Savage Nation? Or do you mean CNN, which had a half-hour to hour special with Coulter discussing (well, if you consider repeatedly saying 'liberals' 'commit' 'treason' a discussion) her new book a week or two ago?
I'm also not going to let you get away with your ridiculous "hate radio" label. It's conservative radio, and you can't stand it. That doesn't make it "hate radio". What a bullshit term.
Yeah, savage was fired from MSNBC for being conservative. I guess saying 'I hope you get AIDS and die' is just benign conservative political statement.
Oh, and BTW: Don't bother with the New York Times.
Oh yes. that Safire is a REAL liberal
Originally posted by SDW2001
The first link talks about the POSSIBILITY that Banks may have trouble in the FUTURE...even though things are great for them now.
The second is a one-day headline which you apparently think supports your case that the economy is not turinng around. In fact, on the same page it references General Motors beating of street estimates. It also speaks of jobelss claims dropping.
Weak, jimmac. The relevant numbers show recovery. You can't change it.
Not weak at all. It shows things aren't heathy or stable. Only when you focus on one aspect ( wishful thinking ) does it look promising. However no matter how good big corporations and rich people are doing if workers don't have jobs they won't have money to buy the products from those big corporations. That situation is bad for the economy.
So what you get is exactly what's happening. Weak recovery followed by more downturns. This kind of anemic economy is very familure.
I haven't even brought up the subject of the national debt Bush is racking up. A debt which won't be paid off in my lifetime and maybe yours as well!
Look I really hope I'm wrong about this. I want to see a return to a healthy economy just as much as the next person. I don't care how it happens. But right now it isn't.
Yes I know on CNN they're saying a group of economists are saying the recession is over. How much do you want to bet six months from now there's still bad news?
But I suppose your comfortable letting future generations deal with it.
Originally posted by giant
Ha! You are so polarized you can't deal with reality! You've resorted to saying, 'Let's play make-believe'. Your world view is so fundamentally flawed that the only way you can have a discussion anymore is to simply play pretend.
Have fun with your dollies. The real world will still be there when you decide to return and deal with it.
Isn't there a name for the condition where someone who retreats to fantasy when their world view crumbles? Something along the lines of schizophrenia, but resulting from shock?
Your mouth is moving but I don't hear you. Not only is it ridiculous for you to dismiss any possibility of us finding WMD, it is beyond all ludicrous thought to suggest that someone ELSE who merely entertains that possibility is living in an alternate reality. If you want to be totally unreasonable and deny such a possibility, then go ahead, However, don't go around calling others insane for even discussing the topic.
sonjata:
you could not have read my entire post to have responded like that. No doubt that Greenspan is trying to make a good impression. That's obvvious. The issue with the NYT post was his inability to answer the critiques posed at him. That's bad.
it becomes badder when one looks at the NAFTA issue. How can the government pay off it's debt when the taxpayers are getting axed and downsized.
That comment from Macintouch is very important. Businesses shipping previously high paying jobs overseas is new and is going to kill the tax bases of not a few locations in the US. The resulting downward pressure on wages will cut the tax income. Combined with outragous rents in the areas of the country where most of the money is generated ( ie NYC pays in a huge share of NYS tax revenue), will push people to other locations forming another part in a death spiral.
I don't mean to insult you here, but could you please go learn a little about how the economy works before posting? I'm not a huge fan of NAFTA, but in itself will not tremendously damage the economy.
And sorry, but I cannot respect the opinion of anyone who uses the non-word "badder". Somehow I doubt that's a typo.
keyboard:
There you go again. So you are saying it ok for the media to be biased.
Actually, that's what you said.
Tell it to Michael Weiner. I mean Savage.
Savage is an idiot. I'm talking about the two dominant figures..Limbaugh and Hannity. Tell me they're perveyors of hate. Please. Go ahead.
I think your guy is the least intellgient person to hold that office. period. i think he's surrounded himself with "daddy's boys" and that like his father's firrst Iraq war, this WMD thing will not help but in fact lead to the the american people focusing on the economy, stupid.
And yes. it will be like '92 in a way. Back in '92 a bush lost the whitehouse too.
And it amazes me that liberals like you haven't figured how smart Bush is, even after he's wiped the floor with your party politcally time and time again. He's gotten two dramatic tax cuts passed (in record time, might I add), gotten authorization for war, and implemented just about every program he's wanted to. Yes, he's surrounded himself with many of his father's people, which is only a good thing. Imagine..an experienced cabinet. The horror.
And please, do you have anything to say other than "It's the economy, stupid"? I know you'd like things to be bad next year, but the signs don't point to that. Poor keyboard, the election isn't happening during the year in which it needs to, is it?
Could Bush lose? Sure. Will he? Not likely. That's the bottom line, and any Democrat that doesn't see it (and the differences between now and 1992) is either and idiot or just deluded. I won't fault you for supporting who you will, but to actually be so deluded as to ignore the fact that GWB is very likely going to get reelected is just beyond me.
jimmac:
Not weak at all. It shows things aren't heathy or stable. Only when you focus on one aspect ( wishful thinking ) does it look promising. However no matter how good big corporations and rich people are doing if workers don't have jobs they won't have money to buy the products from those big corporations. That situation is bad for the economy.
Now we are getting to it: Your total lack of understanding about how the economy works. You've bought the class warfare approach from the Democratic Party.. hook, line and sinker. When corporations do well, they hire. When their business does well, workers tend to do well. I know you think of corporations as big, evil empires, but they ARE the economy. This is why the market is so closely tied to economic data and corporate profits.
As far as "one number", that's just patently false. Did you even read the data I posted? I quoted several statistics, including GDP growth. I also made reference earlier to manufacturing indices, the markets, and more. One number my ass.
So what you get is exactly what's happening. Weak recovery followed by more downturns. This kind of anemic economy is very familure.
Speculation.
I haven't even brought up the subject of the national debt Bush is racking up. A debt which won't be paid off in my lifetime and maybe yours as well!
Irrelevant. And, it's not just "Bush", just like the 90's surpluses were not just "Clinton".
Look I really hope I'm wrong about this. I want to see a return to a healthy economy just as much as the next person. I don't care how it happens. But right now it isn't.
Yes I know on CNN they're saying a group of economists are saying the recession is over. How much do you want to bet six months from now there's still bad news?
A year ago I would not take that bet. Today I would. I'm glad you want things to get better, though.
As far as future generations are concerned, I don't think boomers like yourself have any room to talk on that.
Originally posted by SDW2001
ludicrous thought to suggest that someone ELSE who merely entertains that possibility is living in an alternate reality. If you want to be totally unreasonable and deny such a possibility
you aren't simply putting forward a possibility, you have resorted to engaging in a discussion that uses make-believe to give some sort of validity to your position, which reality does not.
You've fabricated a fictional set of circumstances in order to avoid dealing with the fact that reality demonstrates that your beliefs are wrong.
Actually, that's what you said.
I said some leans left some leans right and most will do and say whatever it takes to make the easiest buck. Even at the cost of American trust.
Savage is an idiot. I'm talking about the two dominant figures..Limbaugh and Hannity. Tell me they're perveyors of hate. Please. Go ahead.
They're too busy wrapping themselves up in the flag and spewing so many words that don't quite cross over the line of hate to paint anyone that does not agree with them as un-american.
is, even after he's wiped the floor with your party politcally time
He got to power by his daddy, presided over a national tragedy and belongs to a party that are masters of demoguaging(sp). The fact that too many boneheaded democrats did not challenge him does not a political genius make.
Imagine..an experienced cabinet. The horror.
Oh. no need to imagine.
Every time i see another one of personal freedoms taken away under the guise of patiotism its all to plain to see.
Every dollar more we are in debt its plain to see. And tax cuts? You mean service cuts that will "trickle down" in the form of state's budget's being busted its plain to see.
Every time property taxes go up and health and education services get cut off its plain to see...
Of course bush could lose. all that needs to happen is that katie couric and the "4 out of 5 liberal" media companies need to blanket the airwaves with anti bush propaganda
You can use that excuse in 2 years if you like.
GWB is very likely going to get reelected is just beyond me.
They said the same thing about bush senior.
Like father, like son.
Should I have said "even worse" or "worse?"
would that have made you happier?
NAFTA has already done damage to the economy. you're just too blind to see it.
ot should I have said you've been blinded to it?
imma baaaaaad maaaaan
Originally posted by SDW2001
Oh my God. Please tell me you are being facisious.
Psst...I think you mean facetious. Sorry, couldn't resist.
Oh my God. Please tell me you are being facisious
Learn to spell, that is not even close.
don't correct that man. He is the grammar and spelling G-O-D!!!!!!!!!
You've fabricated a fictional set of circumstances...
isn't that the entire point of discussiong things that haven't happened yet? of course you fabricate circumstances. there's no point to discussion the future if you can't.
He got to power by his daddy, presided over a national tragedy and belongs to a party that are masters of demoguaging(sp). The fact that too many boneheaded democrats did not challenge him does not a political genius make.
That's really rich. Tell me that the next time Tom Daschle goes on about the end of Social Security. I can't even believe you have the balls to say that. Also, Explain to me how 9/11 was Bush's fault. Shit, I suppose you are going to try and tell me he was warned of "hijackings"? Got to power by his daddy? How is that?
They're too busy wrapping themselves up in the flag and spewing so many words that don't quite cross over the line of hate to paint anyone that does not agree with them as un-american.
Try listening once in awhile. They paint as un-American those who ARE un-American. "Wrapping themselves in the flag"....wow. It's like you just regurgitate every liberal cliche you've ever heard. God forbid....flag waving!
Every time i see another one of personal freedoms taken away under the guise of patiotism its all to plain to see.
More nonsense. Which freedoms have you lost? Which freedom has anyone you know lost? More liberal rhetoric. But I forget, John Ascroft is the Devil incarnate! The criminal Janet Reno was a protector of all that is good and decent (except for Waco, Ruby Ridge and Elian) but Ashcroft and Bush are out to kill civil liberties. I really want an answer here. Tell me...which freedoms?
Every dollar more we are in debt its plain to see. And tax cuts? You mean service cuts that will "trickle down" in the form of state's budget's being busted its plain to see.
Yes, because George W Bush has "busted" the state's budgets. It has nothing to do with spending binges, does it? Show me which programs Bush has cut.
Every time property taxes go up and health and education services get cut off its plain to see...
And again...show me how Bush is responsible for property taxes. Education is a state issue. Health service cuts? Ummm...Prescription Drug Benefit? Hello? Shit...you really believe this stuff.
Of course bush could lose. all that needs to happen is that katie couric and the "4 out of 5 liberal" media companies need to blanket the airwaves with anti bush propaganda
You can use that excuse in 2 years if you like.
Instead of mocking me, how about you show some evidence that isn't from fair.org that counterdicts my claim?
hey said the same thing about bush senior.
Like father, like son.
oooh...originality again! Seriosuly, try having your statement mean something next time. Two words: Wishful Thinking.
Sonjata:
NAFTA has already done damage to the economy. you're just too blind to see it.
ot should I have said you've been blinded to it?
It may have, but you are running around acting liek it in itself will prevent a recovery. I disagree with that. That's all. BTW, I mentioned your grammar because, well....seriously! How can you not realize "badder" is a non-existent word? It's Elementary (literally) my dear Sonjata.
Northgate:
Psst...I think you mean facetious. Sorry, couldn't resist.
Correct. But mine was a misspelling...."badder" is not even a word. There's a difference.
Rick:
Learn to spell, that is not even close.
Spell this: FOAD
alcimdedes:
isn't that the entire point of discussiong things that haven't happened yet? of course you fabricate circumstances. there's no point to discussion the future if you can't.
Exactly. It's a PREMISE. giant can't accept that, though. Such a premise causes him to fly into fits of anti-SDW rage. After all, anyone who believes WMD may still be found is an idiot.
ot to power by his daddy? Not quite.
Yes, because George W Bush has "busted" the state's budgets. It has nothing to do with spending binges, does it? Show me which programs Bush has cut.
All those things i was talking about things that i think will happen in the future ( like next 3 years) You should know things take time to "trickle" down.
Instead of mocking me, how about you show some evdience that isn't from fair.org that counterdicts my claim?
Reverse Ditto. And why not fair.org. OOhhhhh that's right fair.org is a part of the katie couric "did you see the way she asked that question? she must be a registered commie pinko leftist" liberal media. lol
More nonsense. Which freedoms have you lost? Which freedom has anyone you know lost? More liberal rhetoric.
Oh i don't know. how about that lawful detention without cause and without time limits?
Just because a freedom has not been taking away from you personally, doesn't mean it hasn't been taken away.
Like father, like son. oooh...originality again!
So sue me. I have a thing for the classics.
Originally posted by SDW2001
keyboard:
That's really rich. Tell me that the next time Tom Daschle goes on about the end of Social Security. I can't even believe you have the balls to say that. Also, Explain to me how 9/11 was Bush's fault. Shit, I suppose you are going to try and tell me he was warned of "hijackings"? Got to power by his daddy? How is that?
Try listening once in awhile. They paint as un-American those who ARE un-American. "Wrapping themselves in the flag"....wow. It's like you just regurgitate every liberal cliche you've ever heard. God forbid....flag waving!
More nonsense. Which freedoms have you lost? Which freedom has anyone you know lost? More liberal rhetoric. But I forget, John Ascroft is the Devil incarnate! The criminal Janet Reno was a protector of all that is good and decent (except for Waco, Ruby Ridge and Elian) but Ashcroft and Bush are out to kill civil liberties. I really want an answer here. Tell me...which freedoms?
Yes, because George W Bush has "busted" the state's budgets. It has nothing to do with spending binges, does it? Show me which programs Bush has cut.
And again...show me how Bush is responsible for property taxes. Education is a state issue. Health service cuts? Ummm...Prescription Drug Benefit? Hello? Shit...you really believe this stuff.
Instead of mocking me, how about you show some evidence that isn't from fair.org that counterdicts my claim?
oooh...originality again! Seriosuly, try having your statement mean something next time. Two words: Wishful Thinking.
Sonjata:
It may have, but you are running around acting liek it in itself will prevent a recovery. I disagree with that. That's all. BTW, I mentioned your grammar because, well....seriously! How can you not realize "badder" is a non-existent word? It's Elementary (literally) my dear Sonjata.
Northgate:
Correct. But mine was a misspelling...."badder" is not even a word. There's a difference.
Rick:
Spell this: FOAD
alcimdedes:
Exactly. It's a PREMISE. giant can't accept that, though. Such a premise causes him to fly into fits of anti-SDW rage. After all, anyone who believes WMD may still be found is an idiot.
I agree with your last statement.