Another Republican-"Absolute" DEEP-SIXED!!

Mr. Shaman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
7,829
"On Friday, the New York Times provided a jaw-dropping analysis of the dismal state of the economy under George W. Bush. Just days after the Washington Post documented that Bush presided over the worst eight-year economic performance in the modern American presidency, the Times charted his historic failure in expanding GDP, producing jobs and fueling stock market growth. As it turns out, Bush is just the latest Republican to confirm the maxim that Wall Street and the economy overall always do better under Democratic Presidents.http://crooksandliars.com/jon-perr/bush-latest-goper-show-democrats-better-e"

It's no wonder Republicans chose RED, for their Standards!!!
 
Werbung:
Looked at the link, don't think it's telling the whole story. I've asked before but will ask again: why did the national debt go up so high in ounces of gold during Clinton's time:

2357877010073664377S600x600Q85.jpg


...and why did the MULT continue to decline during his presidency:

2762608210073664377S600x600Q85.jpg


(the green line is set at Clinton's entry and exit points and extended from there, by the way)

It held flat for quite awhile during Bush's but then finally corrected to its original destination. The reason FOR that "original destination" IS the $64,000 question, by the way.
 
Tell you what--this is a very good NON-PARTISAN article explaining Money Supply, the Velocity of Money and several other things about the economy:

http://news.goldseek.com/MillenniumWaveAdvisors/1209326748.php

While reading it, you'll eventually get down to a Velocity of Money graph and can see the very tangible evidence of the Clinton years. Below that is an interesting explanation of what was bound to come next.
 
You are using facts and evidence to debate insanity. I doubt they'll ever understand basic math well enough to realize the government in general is horrible at budgeting. Instead they'll play partisan politics and "hate talk" to gain support for their stupidity as always.

Never mind the fact Obama has continued the same policies as Bush.
 
You are using facts and evidence to debate insanity. I doubt they'll ever understand basic math well enough to realize the government in general is horrible at budgeting. Instead they'll play partisan politics and "hate talk" to gain support for their stupidity as always.

Never mind the fact Obama has continued the same policies as Bush.

yea its the same thing, for that whole less then a week in office? what you think you get to snap you fingers and change it all? it took Bush a while to really start wrecking things.
 
Looked at the link, don't think it's telling the whole story. I've asked before but will ask again: why did the national debt go up so high in ounces of gold during Clinton's time:

2357877010073664377S600x600Q85.jpg


...and why did the MULT continue to decline during his presidency:

2762608210073664377S600x600Q85.jpg


(the green line is set at Clinton's entry and exit points and extended from there, by the way)

It held flat for quite awhile during Bush's but then finally corrected to its original destination. The reason FOR that "original destination" IS the $64,000 question, by the way.

the debt in terms of price a potatos showed great reduction though.....ummm yea ...

debt goes down, price of gold goes up, means debt can still go down and debt in gold goes up still. How about debt in $?

lets make it easy for you guys....1992-2000 most people called good times for the economy, where happy and had jobs

2000-2008 most people had hard times, many lost jobs, and our debt hit a trillion...I want to know how many of you would rather be in the economic times of Clinton over the last 8 of Bush...cuz ask the rest of the US, and I am betting Bush gets one huge loss.
 
You are using facts and evidence to debate insanity. I doubt they'll ever understand basic math well enough to realize the government in general is horrible at budgeting. Instead they'll play partisan politics and "hate talk" to gain support for their stupidity as always.

Never mind the fact Obama has continued the same policies as Bush.
Hope springs eternal. I don't actually understand why folks can't just talk about economics, ask straight questions and then discuss the answers. I've got a sneaking suspicion that most of Congress is rather clueless.
 
the debt in terms of price a potatos showed great reduction though.....ummm yea ...

debt goes down, price of gold goes up, means debt can still go down and debt in gold goes up still. How about debt in $?

lets make it easy for you guys....1992-2000 most people called good times for the economy, where happy and had jobs

2000-2008 most people had hard times, many lost jobs, and our debt hit a trillion...I want to know how many of you would rather be in the economic times of Clinton over the last 8 of Bush...cuz ask the rest of the US, and I am betting Bush gets one huge loss.
Nope, doesn't work that way.

Here's the funny part: there are actually more total people employed now than during Clinton's best. More people. That means we HAVE more people than we used to. AND... less energy with which to produce physical products to sell.

You see, we have a big imbalance problem:

1) We have to import an increasing amount of our liquid fuels (oil) because of our own underlying production decline, and price runups for whatever reason keep biting harder and harder.

2) We have enjoyed a healthier standard of living (we get paid more) than most of the other developed countries and this means that the rest of them can't easily afford products that we make and want to sell to them.

Simplified, if the other countries can economically decouple from us, then how are we going to buy energy from them? They don't HAVE to give it to us, you know. And if they're going to buy products from us that are competitive with the products that they can make amongst themselves for a lot cheaper, that means we're necessarily going to have to take a payroll cut. Right there is the crux of your economic problem.
 
the debt in terms of price a potatos showed great reduction though.....ummm yea ...

debt goes down, price of gold goes up, means debt can still go down and debt in gold goes up still. How about debt in $?

lets make it easy for you guys....1992-2000 most people called good times for the economy, where happy and had jobs

2000-2008 most people had hard times, many lost jobs, and our debt hit a trillion...I want to know how many of you would rather be in the economic times of Clinton over the last 8 of Bush...cuz ask the rest of the US, and I am betting Bush gets one huge loss.
Do yourself a favor and go read this:

http://news.goldseek.com/MillenniumWaveAdvisors/1209326748.php

Pay close attention when you get down to the part where it was the "financial innovations" that were created in the EARLY '90s that caused that. You know... the "securitizations" and CDOs (Collateralized Debt Obligations) and that kind of thing? You know, THE THINGS THAT BEGAN BLOWING UP AND CAUSING THIS #@&% MESS!?!

They were financial time bombs, plain and simple.
 
Never mind the fact Obama has continued the same policies as Bush.
Yeah, Skippy.....that's what's goin' on......

:rolleyes:

"In his first seven days in office, Obama has banned the use of controversial CIA interrogation tactics, ordered the closure of the U.S. military prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and begun planning for the drawdown of troops in Iraq. He also imposed stringent limits on lobbyists, unveiled an $825 billion stimulus plan, and ordered a halt to any last-minute rules and regulations put in place by his predecessor."

:p
 
If Conservatives truly believe that Obama is continuing the same policies as Bush, then our Conservative friends should love him and show us their love.
 
It's no wonder Republicans chose RED, for their Standards!!!
You seem to have been encouraged, for some period of time, to hate America and nothing will change your mind about America being crap and worth your opprobium


I will place you on ignore shortly

BEFORE then, you can make a final statement without my response.

TICK TOCK. Tick tock. Ti...
 
Werbung:
It's no wonder Republicans chose RED, for their Standards!!!
Efforts to increase home ownership among blacks motivated politicians to pass the Community Reinvestment Modernization Act of 2000 which essentially rewrote standards on credit requirements for home mortgage lending. That well-intentioned plan ended up causing the worldwide financial collapse of 2008.
 
Back
Top