American Politics during the Obama Presidency

[QUOTE=Sidney]I called for Bush's impeachment years ago. But the Obomination is even worsr than Bush![/QUOTE]I didn't read that far back, so I withdraw the question. I'm no great supporter of Obama, I just hated the reputation of the USA being dragged through the mud by the Cheney / Bush axis.

I've travelled through maybe 20 countries in the last 10 years, and mixed with most strata of society, including army officers from at least 3 countries (and before Jackson has a go at me, hardly a single lefty student!). And maybe 90% of the people I met had little but contempt for that pair. But I know that's irrelevant, none of our business!

Just my personal observation.

[QUOTE=Sidney]I called for Bush's impeachment years ago. But the Obomination is even worsr than Bush![/QUOTE]Sidney,

I still want to know if there has ever been any US President that you did approve of?

Thanks,

Jackson

[QUOTE=Sidney]I listed before -- Reagan and Ford[/QUOTE]Okay, thanks.

Jackson

[QUOTE=Jackson]Sidney,

I still want to know if there has ever been any US President that you did approve of?

Thanks,

Jackson[/QUOTE]He is also big on Calvin Coolidge, Sidney made a boatload of money in the market during his presidency.

I think this is the link Sid's talking about.

[url]http://fredthompsonshow.com/premiumstream?dispid=320&headerDest=L3BnL2pzcC9tZWRpYS9mbGFzaHdlbGNvbWUuanNwP3BpZD03MzUxJnBsYXlsaXN0PXRydWUmY2hhcnR0eXBlPWNoYXJ0JmNoYXJ0SUQ9MzIwJnBsYXlsaXN0U2l6ZT01[/url]

[QUOTE=SteveC]I didn't read that far back, so I withdraw the question. I'm no great supporter of Obama, I just hated the reputation of the USA being dragged through the mud by the Cheney / Bush axis. [/QUOTE]O. K. Mr. Union Jack, How did the Blair / Brown axis differ from Cheney / Bush, when it came to dragging the reputations of their respective countries through the mud? They had similar positions on most significant foreign policy issues.

While I was no supporter of Bush's foreign policy, I think a lot of the criticism came from his style and bad luck. Clinton succeeded in Kosovo so he was a hero. Bush bombed out in Iraq so he wasn't. If I had been dictator of the USA, we wouldn't have been involved in either.

[QUOTE=Tiny12]O. K. Mr. Union Jack, How did the Blair / Brown axis differ from Cheney / Bush, when it came to dragging the reputations of their respective countries through the mud? They had similar positions on most significant foreign policy issues. [/QUOTE]Absolutely right. Blair was their lapdog all the way, and Brown is no better. The UK's reputation has suffered too, but not as much as the policy deserved. I've got even more contempt for the UK leaders than I have for Cheney / Bush. They didn't have the excuse of bad luck, however true that is. They're just a pair of lapdogs doing the bidding of their US masters rather than having the interests of the people who voted for them at heart.

And I wouldn't have gone in either!

[QUOTE=Sidney]Duh! Where was this program in January? One must be very suspicious of the reasons it was delayed until July. Could it be that the Obomination intentionally delayed such program in order to ''hatchet'' GM and C. Then stimulate auto sales to make his administration look good! Wake up guys, the O is an evil. Stupid man![/QUOTE]Sid, please. I love a good conspiracy theory as much as the next guy. But it's got to be a [I][b]good[/b][/i] conspiracy theory. You can do much better than this.

[QUOTE=Sidney]Duh! Where was this program in January? One must be very suspicious of the reasons it was delayed until July. Could it be that the Obomination intentionally delayed such program in order to ''hatchet'' GM and C. Then stimulate auto sales to make his administration look good! Wake up guys, the O is an evil. Stupid man![/QUOTE]No Sidney, the Conspiracy is for Mormon car dealers only.

Exon

"Inquiring minds have found some interesting quotes in the Wall Street Journal article 'Cash for Clunkers' Runs Out of Gas.

Michael J. Jackson, chief executive of AutoNation Inc. Said "It was an absolute success. There's a very compelling case the government should put more money into it. It's a great stimulus to the economy."

Actually a very compelling case can be made that the CEO of AutoNation is an economic illiterate. All the program does is shift demand forward. Those clunkers were going to die at some point. Now sales are up this year which will cut into next year's demand, at the expense of everyone not getting free money.

Why anyone should be surprised at the "success" in generating demand for free money is beyond me. There is always demand for free money. Yet, interestingly, everyone seems surprised by the "unexpected success".

If the government wants more "success", it can give everyone $4,500 for a car. Short-term demand will soar. But long-term demand for cars would crash for the next few years, taxpayers would be stuck with the bills, and valuable resources would be wasted on cars rather than productive assets.

Thus, the "absolute success" touted by AutoNation is in reality a tragedy. Handing out free money always is. Indeed, the more free money handed out, the bigger the ultimate tragedy. The housing crash is poof enough."

[QUOTE=Sidney]To be able to pass as much left wing legisilation as possible or if that is wrong.

O is just plain stupid! What fool wouldn't know that if sales incentives existed, people would buy cars and trucks. You take your choice, Stan. To me O is incredibly stupid and leads a huge conspiracy!

Bewildered Sid[/QUOTE]

RE: recent inquiry about career opportunities in the Obama Administration

Estimado Sidney.

I see limited career opportunities for you in the Obama Administration.

Don't call us, we'll call you.

Besos,

Nancy ¨Marsh Rat¨ Pelosi

[QUOTE=Sidney]The auto dealer can't cut 18% off the sticker? Gysell shouldn't cut her late night price to 150 pesos? The clothing store can't reduce prices by 30%? The Alamo and Casa Bar shouldn't reduce beer prices? Etc. Is this a new economics? Free money? I'm confused?[/QUOTE] [I]“Trying to jump-start sales as it resumes production, Chrysler Group LLC is offering rebates that could double the government's "Cash for Clunkers" vouchers given customers.”[/i]

I guess they could have cut prices themselves after all. Cutting prices due to lack of sales is one thing, but doing it at taxpayer expense is something else.

This is all just part of the global warming agenda under the guise of saving jobs, but it’s really just a way to force the American people to buy small “green” cars, (which they don’t like) I suspect the next step will be a gas tax increase of about fifty cents a gallon.

Remember America is the only country in the world that’s not allowed to drill its own oil.

[QUOTE=Punter 127]Actually a very compelling case can be made that the CEO of AutoNation is an economic illiterate. All the program does is shift demand forward. Those clunkers were going to die at some point. Now sales are up this year which will cut into next year's demand, at the expense of everyone not getting free money.

Why anyone should be surprised at the "success" in generating demand for free money is beyond me. There is always demand for free money. Yet, interestingly, everyone seems surprised by the "unexpected success".[/QUOTE]Your economic analysis is spot-on. However, if you have an old beater that qualifies under the program, take advantage of this, it's a no-brainer. I have one that's worth maybe $1K tops. As soon as I am sure that the program is going to be funded by Congress, I will be buying a new car, even though I had no previous plans to do so. However, as a political protest I will not be buying either a GM or Chrysler product, even though every car I've ever bought has been from one of those two manufacturers. Thinking I will get a Camry or Accord. Toyota and Honda also has the probability of being around three years from now, which Chrysler and GM do not.

For both the clunker and the new car?

Can I go buy a POS at the used car lot for $1k and trade it for $4.5K?

What are the limitations on the type of car I can buy (mpg, etc)

[QUOTE=Hunt99]Your economic analysis is spot-on. However, if you have an old beater that qualifies under the program, take advantage of this, it's a no-brainer. I have one that's worth maybe $1K tops. As soon as I am sure that the program is going to be funded by Congress, I will be buying a new car, even though I had no previous plans to do so. However, as a political protest I will not be buying either a GM or Chrysler product, even though every car I've ever bought has been from one of those two manufacturers. Thinking I will get a Camry or Accord. Toyota and Honda also has the probability of being around three years from now, which Chrysler and GM do not.[/QUOTE]

I understand the plan to be only for new cars, as far as where the money can be used. I'd be surprised if they allow it to be used on foreign cars, but maybe they will many foreign cars sold in the US (affordable ones anyway) are built in the US. I also understand that the clunkers have to be destroyed so that they cannot be resold and thus defeat what they are trying to do.

Totally idiotic, whatever the rules are, but I agree Hunt, take advantage of it if you can - the money's going to be used anyway and those who protest by not using the money are just going to lose out.

Mongers-

The requirements for the "clunkers for cash" program are as follows:

-The car being traded in must be a 1984 or newer model and must have had an EPA combined fuel economy rating of 18 MPG or less.

-The new car being bought will get an automatic, on the spot discount of $3500 USD. If the new car being bought has a combined 22 MPG EPA rating, the discount will be $4500.

-The dealer must "junk" the cars that are being traded in, as such they may not resell them.

Suerte,

Rock Harders

[QUOTE=El Queso]Totally idiotic, whatever the rules are, but I agree Hunt, take advantage of it if you can - the money's going to be used anyway and those who protest by not using the money are just going to lose out.[/QUOTE]It's not just those that protest, where does this program leave the [strike]poor[/strike] financially challenged and fixed income folks?

I’m talking about the people who can’t afford to buy a new car?

[I]-They’re unable to take advantage of the rebate.

-The pool of cars they can afford buy are being destroyed.

- What’s the effect of this program on the used car salesman?[/i]

The left seems to roll out the cry for “compassion” on an as “they” need to basis, where is the compassion for the [strike] poor [/strike] financially challenged and fixed income folks?

I guess they’ll just have to walk to get their free health care.

If this program was really about stimulating the economy and saving jobs we wouldn’t see the [b]MPG[/b] and [b]MUST DESTROY[/b] requirements.

This program is about the [color=green][b]“Green agenda”[/b][/color], and it says [b]screw[/b] the poor and the old!

I promise you the rebates will be taken back in tax increases, so Hunt is correct, you may as well get a piece of the pie, you’re going to pay for it anyway!

[QUOTE=Sidney]Duh! Who voted for the Obomination?[/QUOTE]This program is a sad joke (not that I won't take advantage of it if possible) It is cleary driven by the Green movement and directly punishes the poor (doesn't just exclude them)

The destruction of the clunkers eliminates the largest source of spare parts for those on a tight budget. This drives up the cost of owning an older car. Secondarily, if they can get credit, it encourages the kind of behavior that got us into this mess in the first place (I. E. Trade in the clunker, get a new car loan for more than you can afford, etc, etc)

Please don't mistake anything Obama does as 'for the poor.' He doesn't care about the poor. He is a millionaire. If he cared about the poor, he'd help out his half brother and his aunt (both living in poverty) Don't judge a man by his words alone, his actions speak volumes.

[QUOTE=Rock Harders]Mongers-

The requirements for the "clunkers for cash" program are as follows:

-The car being traded in must be a 1984 or newer model and must have had an EPA combined fuel economy rating of 18 MPG or less.

-The new car being bought will get an automatic, on the spot discount of $3500 USD. If the new car being bought has a combined 22 MPG EPA rating, the discount will be $4500.

-The dealer must "junk" the cars that are being traded in, as such they may not resell them.

Suerte,

Rock Harders[/QUOTE]One more relevant point - you have to have owned and had the car registered for the last 12 months. So no buying an old one for $500 and then turning around trading it in. BUT - perhaps you can get somebody who owns an old car to do the purchase for you in cash. As with any government give-away program, there are surely ways to game the system, not all of which are completely fraudulent.

[QUOTE=Wild Walleye]Please don't mistake anything Obama does as 'for the poor.' He doesn't care about the poor. He is a millionaire. If he cared about the poor, he'd help out his half brother and his aunt (both living in poverty) Don't judge a man by his words alone, his actions speak volumes.[/QUOTE]I suspect that there are probably lots of poor people who would genuinely appreciate owning some of these apparently drivable cars, but unfortunately the program requires that the trade-ins be wrecked within 72 hours.

In other words, we're destroying a billion dollars worth of cars that could instead be given to the less financially fortunate among us. In fact, many local Goodwill franchises operate just such a program.

Of course, some people have speculated that the entire program was not actually an economic stimulus program, but instead was an environmental program in which the goal was to get the older, polluting, low fuel economy cars off the road before the true end of their mechanical lifespan.

Thanks,

Jackson

“Obama promised to fix health care and trim the federal budget deficit, all without raising taxes on anyone but the wealthiest Americans. It's a promise he's already broken and will likely have to break again. Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress have already increased tobacco taxes — which disproportionately hit the poor — to pay for extending health coverage to 4 million children in working low-income families.”

But now;

[b]Surprise, Surprise:[/b] Geithner Won’t Rule Out Tax Increase for [u]Middle Class![/u]

“To get the economy back on track, will President Barack Obama have to break his pledge not to raise taxes on 95 percent of Americans? In a “This Week” exclusive, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner told me, “We ’re going to have to do what ’s necessary.”

Geithner was clear that he believes a key component of economic recovery is deficit reduction. When I gave him several opportunities to rule out a middle class tax hike, he wouldn’t do it.

“We have to bring these deficits down very dramatically, ” Geithner told me. “And that ’s going to require some very hard choices.”"

[b]Read my lips???[/b]

Yes, he inherited a bad economy. Then he quadrupled the debt, printed trillions of dollars, destroyed what was left of the banks, took over two of the big-3 and gave them to the autoworkers' union and is trying to destroy health care.

Raise taxes? He already has. Every aspect of our lives is becoming more expensive under his rule. He has cheapened our dollars, raised the minimum wage (yes this is a tax) won't keep the capital gains tax cuts in place, increased govt fees, made used cars too expensive for the budget conscious (any old POS is now worth $4,500 so good luck finding a car for less than $4,500)

Who do you think these costs hit hardest? Surprise! These costs hurt the less economically advantaged people the most. Included amongst them, are those who don't pay income taxes. Just wait until they raise everyone's taxes.

The cash for clunkers program is lip service to the greens and a payoff to the auto workers union (I. E. Buy up the older used car inventory at 3X its actual value in order to create sales for GM and Chrysler) I am surprised that they didn't specifically exclude Ford from participating in the program.

[QUOTE=Punter 127]"Obama promised to fix health care and trim the federal budget deficit, all without raising taxes on anyone but the wealthiest Americans. It's a promise he's already broken and will likely have to break again. Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress have already increased tobacco taxes — which disproportionately hit the poor — to pay for extending health coverage to 4 million children in working low-income families."

But now;

[b]Surprise, Surprise:[/b] Geithner Won’t Rule Out Tax Increase for [u]Middle Class![/u]

“To get the economy back on track, will President Barack Obama have to break his pledge not to raise taxes on 95 percent of Americans? In a “This Week” exclusive, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner told me, “We ’re going to have to do what ’s necessary.”

Geithner was clear that he believes a key component of economic recovery is deficit reduction. When I gave him several opportunities to rule out a middle class tax hike, he wouldn’t do it.

“We have to bring these deficits down very dramatically, ” Geithner told me. “And that ’s going to require some very hard choices.”"

[b]Read my lips???[/b][/QUOTE]

At the end of the day, amantes of big government, whether they be Chavez or Castro, have one thing on their mind - a brutal determination to stay in power.

Our amante of big government AKA ¨a village in Kenya has lost its idiot¨ is probably dreaming of staying in power forever in order to endlessly torment us with his birdbrain ideas

[QUOTE=Wild Walleye]Yes, he inherited a bad economy. Then he quadrupled the debt, printed trillions of dollars, destroyed what was left of the banks, took over two of the big-3 and gave them to the autoworkers' union and is trying to destroy health care.

Raise taxes? He already has. Every aspect of our lives is becoming more expensive under his rule. He has cheapened our dollars, raised the minimum wage (yes this is a tax) won't keep the capital gains tax cuts in place, increased govt fees, made used cars too expensive for the budget conscious (any old POS is now worth $4,500 so good luck finding a car for less than $4,500)

Who do you think these costs hit hardest? Surprise! These costs hurt the less economically advantaged people the most. Included amongst them, are those who don't pay income taxes. Just wait until they raise everyone's taxes.

The cash for clunkers program is lip service to the greens and a payoff to the auto workers union (I. E. Buy up the older used car inventory at 3X its actual value in order to create sales for GM and Chrysler) I am surprised that they didn't specifically exclude Ford from participating in the program.[/QUOTE]I’m in total agreement with you, and I think it’s going to get worse before it gets better.

I’m not convinced that we’ve seen the bottom, and if we have, for how long?

Could we be looking at a double dip recession?

The $14 trillion Economic Stimulus has done nothing for jobs, nor will it. And without jobs, credit card write-offs and foreclosures will soar. How can they not?

Demand for credit is weak and so is bank willingness to lend.

No jobs, no long term recovery!

As incredible as this sounds, the only thing keeping Turbo Tim and Helicopter Ben from really cranking up the printing presses and devaluing the dollar big-time is the subtle threat of the Chinese to sell thier treasury bonds if the US continues on its re-inflation rampage. Notice how the US is suddenly mum on human right in China? Oddly, the Chinese government has become the US monger's best friend!

Who woulda thunk it?

[QUOTE=Tequila Tim] subtle threat of the Chinese to sell thier treasury bonds if the US continues on its re-inflation rampage. [/QUOTE]No idle threat. BTW, China did not buy all this paper in the last six months: Obama. The tsunami has been in the works for quite awhile. Plenty of blame to go around.

[QUOTE]No wonder the Chinese are concerned about their exposure to the US, ....accumulated over the past decade.

China announced its foreign exchange reserves, the world's largest, had risen by a record $178.3bn to $2,130bn in the second quarter. Although the exact breakdown of the stockpiles is a secret, analysts estimate that 65-70 per cent are held in dollars.[/QUOTE][url]http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ed6fd068-7d20-11de-b8ee-00144feabdc0.html[/url]

[QUOTE=Damman]No idle threat. BTW, China did not buy all this paper in the last six months: Obama. The tsunami has been in the works for quite awhile. Plenty of blame to go around.

[url]http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ed6fd068-7d20-11de-b8ee-00144feabdc0.html[/url][/QUOTE]Printing trillions of US dollars is what causes inflation. You read about a little spending here and there (TARP $800B, omnibus spending $1T, etc) what you forget is that the Fed blew $10-13T in the past 6 mos and BHO is printing money like the guys in "To Live and Die in LA." How are we going to pay for health care? Print some more! Cash for clunkers? Print some more! Acorn, AFL-CIO? Print some more.

Politics aside, if you print more money, you devalue the currency in circulation.

Chinese threats to sell US treasuries are idle threats. When you sell bonds, prices fall and yield to maturity (YTM) rises. If they sell, they loose money, lots and lots of money. They are stuck in their investment and I believe that they are OK with that for now.

However, remember that they too can print money and there is a lot less transparency in China. If they get traction on moving towards and alternate currency (I. E. Something other than the USD) then you could see selling with the intention of driving down the dollar and making the alternative look better and more stable (to get fence-sitters to opt in) The Chinese won't give a crap about a little inflation if they could move the global standard currency away from the dollar. As far as inflation, they can report whatever they like (like in Argentina)

[QUOTE=Sidney]A great speaker though. How can intelligent people ''buy'' this crap! IN has losts tens of thousands of jobs because of his decimation of GM, C, dependent businesses, and support businesses. Elkhart has 19% unemployment with 15,000 unemployed! But O created 25 jobs for airport runway rehab! And he promises 400 new jobs for battery research and green jobs. What a joke he is![/QUOTE]I couldn't agree with Sidney more.

It does not take a phi beta kappa to realize that the jobs Obama (AKA a village in Kenya has lost its idiot) is so proud of are dead end jobs. What happens when the sidewalk is finished. Work on another sidewalk?

What we desparately needed was immediate tax breaks for taxpayers and businesses. Tax breaks for businesses so that they 1) do not have to lay off as many people and 2) can be more competitive in the world economy.

I doubt that fixing cracks in a sidewalk is going to make any business more competitive in the world economy.

I do not know if we are coming out of this recession or simply seeing a slowing of the recession. In any event, if the recession is coming to an end (a very big IF) it is not because of Obama's birdbrain policies. Rather, it is in spìte of Obama's birdbrain policies.

Furthermore, there is not doubt that Obama's birdbrain policies will plague countless generations of Americans regardless if or when this recession ends.

On a brighter note, I think Obama can get a full refund on that book he bought and memorized I. E Economics for Dummies

[url]http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_obama_accuse_veterans_of_selfishness_and.html[/url]

Sydney, I agree with some to many of the things you say about Obama. But when you post things like this, it brings into questions many of the claims you make.

Every good lie has a kernel of truth. This has a few kernels, but unfortunately is about 90% made up. The few kernels that are true have been distorted and expanded upon into sheer fantasy.