US News
Bush seeks emergency boost for US economy (Roundup)
Jan 18, 2008, 22:16 GMT
US President George W. Bush (L), makes a statement on the economy in the Roosevelt Room of the White House as Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson (R), looks on, Washington, DC, USA, 18 January 2008. EPA/Tripplaar/ POOL
Washington - President George W Bush on Friday proposed some 140 billion dollars in emergency tax relief to boost the flagging US economy and avoid a recession, warning that the nation faces the 'risk of a downturn.'
Outlining his vision of an economic stimulus package, he urged steps to spark consumer spending - the engine of the US economy - and said the measures would have to be worth about 1 per cent of gross domestic product to make an impact.
'We're in the midst of a challenging period, and I know that Americans are concerned about their economic future,' Bush said at the White House. 'But our economy has seen challenging times before, and it is resilient.'
Most likely, the package will include a one-time income tax rebate to put more spending money in Americans' pockets. Bush said he is confident he can reach a deal with Congress, where the opposition Democrats hold the majority.
Democratic leaders welcomed Bush's announcement. US Senator Charles Schumer, a leading Democratic spokesman on the economy, said the stimulus package could take effect as early as March 1.
But in a sign of tough negotiations ahead, he said it should also include higher government spending, such as temporarily extending the time that jobless insurance benefits are paid.
'The president left out spending stimuli, and we hope that he will move to include them,' Schumer told reporters.
The ailing economy risks clouding Bush's last year in the White House before his term ends next January. Recession fears are rippling into the 2008 presidential election campaign as Democratic and Republican candidates jostle to present plans to bolster the economy.
Bush acknowledged that the economy is cooling because of slowing job creation, higher oil prices and a housing-market slump.
'And there is a risk of a downturn,' he said. 'Passing a new growth package is our most pressing economic priority.'
His proposal focussed on tax relief for businesses and individuals to spur investment and consumer spending. Consumer spending makes up about two-thirds of the US economy, the world's largest.
Many experts believe the 14-trillion-dollar US economy is headed for - or has already begun - a recession. The Bush administration insists the country is headed only for slower growth, but Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson acknowledged there was no easy fix.
'There are no silver bullets. There's nothing that is perfect,' he told reporters.
Bush's remarks failed to stop the slide in US stocks, which opened the day higher, but closed down Friday. At the same time, a key gauge of leading economic indicators slipped by 0.2 per cent in December, the third drop in as many months, according to the index published by the Conference Board Friday.
The US economy grew at a nearly 5-per-cent annual rate in the third quarter of 2007, but economists believe it slowed sharply in the last three months of the year.
'A huge part of this is going to be speed, getting money out quickly,' Paulson said. The bulk of tax relief should be aimed at consumers, he said.
A key goal is to dampen the fallout from the subprime mortgage meltdown and the collapse of a home-price bubble that helped finance consumer spending, which Paulson blamed on years of 'unsustainable' price rises in the real-estate market.
On Thursday, US Federal Reserve chief Ben Bernanke backed short- term government action to boost the economy.
Independently of the administration, the central bank is expected to cut US interest rates further at its next decision meeting on January 30. Lowering the cost of borrowing can spur investment and consumer spending.
Bush had been expected to present his ideas for a stimulus package in his January 28 State of the Union speech, but the Democratic-led Congress stepped up calls for action while Bush was abroad on a Middle East trip last week.
'We have an opportunity to do it sooner and the president sees no reason to wait for' the annual policy speech, White House spokesman Tony Fratto said.
© 2008 dpa - Deutsche Presse-AgenturCOMMENT
blog comments powered by DisqusLatest Headlines in US
- 1. Mitt Romney Addresses Tea Party Summit Pictures
- 2. Seven injured as US Navy plane crashes into apartments
- 3. At least three injured in US Navy plane crash
- 4. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, others to face death penalty trial
- 5. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, four others to face death penalty trial
Older Talkback
page: 1
My local news station reported this morning that the money Bush is going to hand out, has been tentatively reserved for individuals who make $85,000.00 a year, and couples who make $110,000.00 and above. Please tell me he's not going to hand out freebies to the wealthy! If he wants people to take this money, and go spend it, give it to the middle class and the poor!! I would love to go on a shopping spree at the mall with that money. I need new jeans and boots but can't afford it after the mortgage payment. Why should the people who are already spending money on themselves get even more? I hope this isn't the truth.
is doing something now, then it is already too late. This guy will be late for his own funeral.
he just wants to go out thinking he was great. well Duh!
with his middle finger......
Where is SP4 when we need him? He should be here repeating his usual rants about the american economy being wonderful and that there is no problem. That's the way to solve this crisis !
Perhaps he can no longer afford his meds?
Perhaps those headlines from Iraq, which no longer make the front page that is taken up with primaries and other irrelevancies this far ahead of Super Tuesday and the conventions, should get some more ink (or bytes), so the American people understand that they're out of touch. American troops are still dying, as well - just in lesser numbers; but 'dead is dead':
edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/01/19/iraq.violence/?iref=mpstoryview< br />
'BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Fifty-six people were killed and 70 were wounded Friday when fighting broke out in Basra and Nasiriya between security forces and members of a violent Shiite messianic cult, authorities said.'
(Note that has NOTHING to do with al Qaeda, but rather fanatical Shiites).
By the way, President Panacea is targeting the tax rebate at LOWER-earning individuals, with the cuts for people making LESS than the cutoffs, whatever those end up being. Some of this 'money pot' is being claimed by business as well. Bear in mind that this 'gift' increases the National Debt, and will come out of the pockets of your kids when they have to pay taxes. The 'free lunch' crowd is back in business in an election year.
If interest rates can be kept low, that will help to lower interest payments on that debt in terms of keeping yields down on government-issued paper; but the oil price hike is still inflationary, as nearly everything you touch in today's world is made from oil, including the pen you write with, and the plastic keyboard you type on.
From the picture it looks like he's 'bewitched, bothered and bewildered'!
Easy kids! I actually have a life.
You've enjoyed record employment
record tax receipts
low inflation
historic high household wealth
for the lats 7 years and now, the party is over.
here's the best part:
The tax cuts expire in 2009. Now, every company in the US will get a higher tax bill, all other things being the same.
They will reduce their investments, people will put their taxable investmetns under cover, capital costs will increase, and a general recession.
All of this can be avoided by making the cuts permenent.
Bush must go into his office and just cackle!
Don't blame us, we voted for Bush! hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah
hahahahahahahahaha!
The democrats are so afraid of a recession once they get in office, they are touting this too!
Tell me, what is it about Bush that he, consistently, can bend over the dems, time after time, and they just spread their cheeks in anticipation? Heck..they 'control' the congress, just look at the spectacular job rating they have!
Or, look at the failed voted-for-it-before-they-voted against-it charade they still have going on!
is back, without his meds. Enough said.
His nap wasn't long enough. Bush has declared all along that the country was in great shape - so what's his reasoning now?
What caused Bush to wake and smell the coffee???
...I suspect the republicans in congress and the democrats in congress are crapping their pants at the thought of a recession right at election time.
Now, that's not fact, that's just my opinion, but think about it, it's a lot easier to blather about the dollar differential than real economic bad news, isn't it. This gives Bush some game because they want something from him, and Bush ALWAYS presents a bill for his services i.e. '...I'll hep ya Hirry, but ya gotta dee liver!'.
Now, Bush has a chance of making his tax cuts permanent, but I doubt they'll let that happen. After 2008, they'll shoot that down, and a real recession will happen. All the players will be back in their offices so they won't give a crap, and Bush will be in Crawford, having coffee with Mutha Sheehan.
Yep, just like the dems war votes and Saddam, they get Bush to fix their problem then blame him for it. Bush actually understands this very well, takes one in the chest from either side of Congress, then sends them a statement for services rendered. Usually, it's sodomizing the dems and they copnsistanly, bend over for it, in one case after another. All that libnazi hate and angst just melts away when incumbancy is threatened.
It's a nice job if you can get it. Just watch what happens.
Get real - you give the Bush waaaay too much credit for thinking things through. Someone might be doing the thinking, but not Bushie!
..THAT couldn't possibly be it!...and we only have 7 years of perfect examples to choose from! Just look at the last 12 months...he has the dems running for cover now on the war and NOW he's going to leave it in their hands AFTER they tried to crap on him!
God, how many examples do you need? This guy has run circles around these pseudo-intellectuals for 7 years and NOW, after 7 years of deriding the tax cuts, they are schlepping up to him for a stimulus package!
This putz never reads the news, and just recites the GOP pablum endlessly; as though he's talking to a bunch of people as dumb and blind as he is. Perhaps the most annoying part (out of many) is the glee with which he mis-states the situation - similar to the a-holes who thought hat Iraq was going to be a quick and cheap wrap-up costing less than $200 billion.
Luckily for the GOP,there's no IQ test for voting.
As for Bush, perhaps the most galling part is that he's so DAMNED LATE in recognizing problems. Remember the tsunamis, when he pledged $10 million, and then raised it? Remember Katrina? Now the economy, which he and his advisors blissfully ignored and wished would go away. I cannot recall a President less reactive, and certainly less PRO-active, than our resident numbskull's role model.
New unemployment claims have been on an uptrend since August. The housing crisis, and the writeoffs now coming from Citibank and Merrill, were likewise known months ago. The interesting news of today is the reduction in credit grade of Ambac, who insures many of the muni bonds - over half a TRILLION worth. If Ambac, which insures the debt, is downgraded, all of those Municipal issues should LIKEWISE be downgraded, because their insurance coverage is weaker. That means that investors will want a higher coupon (yield) to compensate, which is inflationary, and some funds and institutions which MUST own top-rated issues would have to sell holdings.
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/18/AR200801180359 2.html
NEW YORK, Jan. 18 -- Ambac Financial Group, the nation's second largest insurer of bonds, lost its precious AAA rating from Fitch Ratings on Friday over concerns that the company no longer had enough capital to guarantee billions of dollars in debt now imperiled by the subprime mortgage crisis.
The move to downgrade Ambac to a rating of AA could further roil financial markets, increasing pressure on Wall Street banks that hold this bad debt and making it even more costly for local governments to raise money for public projects.
Ambac and other bond insurers play an obscure but crucial role in capital markets by essentially transferring their ratings to the securities they guarantee. The downgrade of Ambac means many of those securities also will be downgraded, Fitch said.
This could spark a substantial sell-off by institutional investors such as pension funds that can only invest in top-rate securities, causing their value to drop. That in turn would prompt even more selling. As the securities become less valuable, Wall Street firms could be forced to write down billions of dollars on their balance sheets, restating how much their holdings of these securities are worth. The banks, which have already suffered staggering losses, have relied heavily on bond insurance to reduce their exposure to subprime mortgage debt and other complicated securities linked to these loans.
RE: This guy has run circles around these pseudo-intellectuals for 7 years and NOW, after 7 years of deriding the tax cuts, they are schlepping up to him for a stimulus package!'
======================
To SP4, and intellectual is someone who puts his socks on BEFORE his shoes.
The stimulus package was at least 6 months late in coming, and Bush has already yielded on tying 'tax cuts' to proposed legislation. This will be a 'rebate', one time, of about $150 billion (or as the Pentagon calls it, 'about 8 months in Iraq'). Anyone running for office, either party, would be voting for this, the 'ultimate' in pork, where the taxpayers get some bucks in return for increased borrowing from overseas to pay for it, and an decrease in deficit reduction. No one running can afford to NOT vote for some money direct to the voters, already immune to thinking about the National Debt growing to over $9.2 Trillion. Hey, what's a couple of billions, here or there?
The problem is that no ones' mind will be changed, and business is not going to suddenly expand. The 'growth' in business now is EXPORTS - sales to OTHER countries. In 2001 there was room to sharply cut interest rates and grow out of an existing problem - but we were not putting out these military and terrorism-related payouts back then, and there was a higher percentage of discretionary spending available. This amounts to one more photo-op rather than a solution, which would require some major policy changes in terms of proper debt ratings, and making sure that prospective homeowners were capable of doing the math, and not descending into eventual foreclosure. Even payday lenders are now more fully disclosing their APR's.
www.businessweek.com/investor/content/jan2008/pi20080118_195568.htm?chan=se arch
Schlumberger Slips on Growth Outlook
Investors punished the oil services giant for giving a weaker-than-expected projection of international revenue growth
Schlumberger Ltd. (SLB) shares took a beating on Jan. 18 as the market reacted to a lower-than-expected forecast for international revenue growth and mounting worries about an imminent U.S. recession.
The oilfield service provider posted stellar results for the fourth quarter and for all of 2007, with full-year earnings up 37.5% from 2006 on a 21% increase in total revenue. But the Street didn’t like the company's 10% to 20% projection for revenue growth outside North America when most analysts had pegged growth at something above 20%.
Combine Wall Street's disappointment over the growth forecast with a general fear that energy demand will soften as the economy slows down this year and you have a recipe for a fairly large pullback in the stock over the last week, said Pierre Connor, an analyst at Capital One Southcoast in New Orleans.
yes, but, maybe, but that doesn't make me wrong
I find it hilarious that you entitle one of your latest rants 'More imbecilic comments', pb. At least you weren't outright lying on that one.
Regardless, I wouldn't worry too much about the state of the economy; people like me will continue to pay for big blocks of cheese to go to people like you. Personally I think a short recession would be good and natural for the business cycle.
Seriously, you can downplay the economy all you want. (As you tried to do with our efforts in Iraq.) It isn't going to get Obama in to office. :-D
When I'm rich then I can be a Republican!
I Could not agree more!
Let's recap:
Hillary: voted to invade Iraq.
Now, how is she going to spin that one? Blame Bush? Good strategy except her sheeplike constituants have already forgiven her. Hell, to get a democrat, they'd run Osami Bin Laden!
Why would she do such a thing? Because she believed he had WMD's( he did)No, because she got Bush to get Saddam and then she could blame him for the war if it went bad. Otheriwise, these dems would have it at their backs.
Too bad we're winning...now, he gets to prattle on about troop withdrawls.
They thought they were so smart, offering Bush the bear trap. Dumb ol GW just figured all he needed to do was win in 04 so he said 'suuure!' and stepped right in. He won in 04, and they were flabbergasted. Hell, what were they thinking, he was out in 08! What does he care about the political ramifications??? He gets Saddam, the war goes on and he just goes to the next thing. He leaves the war fro the next person, and if it's a dem, THEY get to tell the american public the truth: we're not leaving.
He manages to get almost everything he wants in a so called democratically controlled Congress. At every turn, they roll over, on war funding, and just about everything else.
Who are the stupid one's now? Why, after this supposedly dumb assed president just outplayed them all to hell, would they want these lemons for a president? How did Bush manage to play all these supposedly smart political operators?
Simple.
He just sat back and let them do all the work for him. All the bullsh-t war resolutions, all the defunding talk, all the worthless votes, just played ino his hands. He has been one step ahead for 7 years, and the opposition has never got it right about this guy, not once.
So prattle on kids. Ol GW is going to be sipping java with Muther Sheehan in 12 months and Hirrary is going to need more than bundo's to make this war work for her.
Think about it: She'll be pimping it like Bush was just a year before!
Right now, you're just brainwashed.
Per Mort Zuckerman on McLaughlin; a very experienced man in financial matters:
We will have a recession second in impact to the Great Depression, which will last for over a year. Unemployment will rise to 7 percent, and interest rates will drop down to 3 percent or lower. No short-term action will help long-term; but Bush knows from nothing but glorified photo-ops anyway.
The current 'rebate' talk is irrelevant, because it does not change the fundamentals - the same fundamentals that this Administration has refused to deal with. One failure after another, to the theme music of the support of idiots.
Per Zuckerman, again - a sharp drop in home values yet to come, and over $500 billion in misvalued instruments (i.e. bad debt) sitting in the banks.
The lowering of credit rating on Ambac exposes many municipalities whose debt was insured by Ambac, and a few competitors. Certain institutions cannot, by charter, have less than AAA-rated investments in their portfolio. That means a sale at lower prices to other institutions, to make the yield (which is tax-free for Munis in many cases) more attractive.
That makes it harder for States and other jurisdictions to issue debt at low coupon rates, and will complicate financing of their deficits. New Jersey is looking to sell off the freeways to companies who would charge higher tolls, so that lands smack on the public. You will see more sales of U.S. infrastructure and companies to foreign ownership, as they have $5 trillion of our money to invest.
Bush has made all of this more complicated by driving up our debt and destabilizing the economy, most of which will happen after the dumbbell is back in Texas making speeches to bigots. Who pays for Iraq, and the health care of the vets?
Zuckerman was sanguine back in March, and now is a real bear:
www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/articles/070311/19edit_2.htm
Bush is an imbecile with an overweening ego, and a Rasputin for Vice President.
Nice role model, craphead.
Hidden Dum-Dum we all gave up on long ago as giving a damn about the people of the country. After all, it's all about HIM - right?
Where did I diminish the importance of the economy? 'It's the economy, stupid' will be the mantra, taking the people's minds off Iraq for a change, while even a Conservative blonde bimbette on McLaughlin predicted that al Qaeda's influence in Pakistan is growing in their cities, and she predicted that Musharraf would lose control of the country.
'Victory', Bush-style. Leave it for everyone else to mop up the crap.
I'm afraid the USA is going to tumble in a recession which will have consequences for the entire world ,it being the biggest economy.If this crisis would be constricted to the most wealthy,I wouldn't give a rat's ass about it .It is know that 109 billions dollars in mortgage loans will never be paid back to the banks in the USA simply because house owners cannot cough up the money.the measures taken by Bush do not address this problem at all,given the trillion dollars of deficit there is simply no margin for tax cuts possible .The stock market's response to the measures introduced by Bush are indicative for his credo;they continue to tumble .
Even Napoleon knew that 'gouverner c 'est prevoir ' ,which translates into governing is foreseeing .Exactly there nothing has been done by the White House at all,the financial market was left in total liberty to do whatever it deemed necessary to maximize profits .It is only when they started losing big that Bush intervened .Not to protect the lower classes from losing their houses or their purchasing power ,but rather to cover the bankers for their misjudging the consequences of their risky loan policies.
I guess one of the first measures that need to be implicated is to cut some of the scandalous payments these irresponsible bankers reap from thiir jobs .Considering the crisis that shakes the foundations of the economy,is it normal that the CEO of a bank gets an end of the year bonus of 69 millions of dollars for 2007?
It is the disproportionate distribution of wealth in the USA which is partly responsible for the current crisis too.The lower classes have been standing in the rain during the Bush years,the prices of food and basic life necessities are booming since a few years .But Bush ,or rather the people that realy exercise power in the USa ,were too busy spending taxpayer's money on a useless war in Iraq,just to provide the sponsors of the republican party with super gains .Only LOckheed,Blackwater,Raytheon and the usual lot profit from a war.Everybody else loses .
These doomsayers don't realize we have one every 10 years.
Zuckerman thinks 7% unemployment is second to the great depression????? Hell, it's at 4.9 NOW!
The Great depression had 30% unemployment....
I think this proves, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that some of you are just-a-little-more-than-full of crap.
It defnintely looks like Bushie is having to admit the economy is heading straight down the tubes while he has been trying to play soldier games.
If things don't straighten out, why worry about other countries trying to destroy the U.S. - there won't be anything left to destroy. And why bother to try to get SP4 to see the light - his one-track mind is going full force, and he's not open to anything that goes against his god regardless of all the evidence to support it! Let him have his idol. When someone goes through a second childhood, they get testy and stubborn!
has dropped over 2000 pts in 3 months. Yeah, we're great shape.
RE: Zuckerman thinks 7% unemployment is second to the great depression????? Hell, it's at 4.9 NOW!
=======================
That was only ONE syndrome he listed; and a 7 percent unemployment rate understates the problem, jerk, because ONLY those still receiving unemployment benefits are counted in that statistic. Anyone who has benefits run out is no longer counted - that's what happened in 2001. Some freelanced or did off-the-books work, and the government did not collect taxes. The system is built so that anyone 'on the books' pays FICA until a cutoff level is reached, and also pays taxes - the incentive is that anyone 'on the books' is building S.S. credits, so if they lose the new job, they could potentially draw unemployment again.
The big problem is over $500 billion of bad debt at banks, and no one willing to take it from them. Your mortgage may well be owned by someone OTHER than the original lending institution, so no one really knows who will take the writeoff in case of foreclosure.
www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jan2008/db20080117_873508. htm?chan=rss_topStories_ssi_5
'Bernanke now admits falling home prices, higher-than-expected energy costs, and a weak stock performance are expected to drag down U.S. growth this year. Consumer spending is falling, and the unemployment rate edged up by a 'disappointing' 0.3 percentage points in December, to 5.0%, while new jobs declined. The Fed chairman acknowledged the central bank has 'consistently underestimated' the impact of rising oil prices and other commodities on the U.S. economy.'
Retail sales will remain down, suppressed by home heating bills as well as pump gasoline prices
(Remember when Bush Sr. did his part by buying a pair of socks, and was surprised at the electronic cash registers?)
seekingalpha.com/article/60772-prepare-for-a-multi-year-decline-in-cons umer-spending
The weak results of the holiday shopping season have set the stage for a dismal 2008 for retailers, or rather, holiday season results have forced the retail sector to confront realities around consumers who find themselves financially squeezed. Many retailers, analysts and trade associations were significantly more optimistic a few months back and now have a rather dour outlook for 2008.
The National Retail Federation [NRF] held its annual conference in NYC this week and the predictions from the various analysts in attendance were all rather dire. The CEO of WSL Strategic Retail even went so far as to say that the current situation amounts to “anarchy”; Deloitte provided similarly dour predictions, however they noted that retailers with exposure to overseas emerging markets should be able to offset declining sales in the U.S. The usually optimistic NRF predicts weak sales in 2008 noting that retail sales are likely to rise at their slowest pace in six years; considering that the NRF is usually rather optimistic it could mean that retail sales could be far worse than they expect.
Luxury retailers are seeing a pullback in spending, as retailers such as Nordstrom, Saks and Neiman Marcus all saw tepid sales during the holiday shopping season. American Express (is seeing a decline in card usage as well as an increase in card delinquencies, and Tiffany is seeing lower spending within its U.S. stores. The slowdown in luxury spending is probably due (primarily) to the removal of the “wealth effect” caused by the booming housing market and consumer credit bubble. In other words, consumers aren’t as able to use credit cards and HELOCs to spend above their income level. However I do suspect that some upper income households are tightening their purse strings, as they weren’t immune to abusing mortgages and other forms of credit.
(Lost equity as well as buying power also affects home remodelers. Some owners may choose to remodel cheaply rather than trading up to a larger home, but it still impacts the homebuilding industry, along with the furniture and large-appliance sectors, who enjoy sales to those buying new homes. Auto sales are already depressed, along with luxury goods. What's left, besides the staples that Wal-Mart or Target sells? Meanwhile, Sears is going through a re-org, after having profits battered)
www.nytimes.com/2007/11/08/business/08borrow.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5089& en=66843b4729553708&ex=1352178000&partner=rssyahoo&emc=rss
But now, in an ominous portent for the national economy, Mr. Whittey has grown tight with his money. His home is worth far less than it was a year ago, and his equity has evaporated. And like many other involuntary adopters of a newly economical lifestyle, he can borrow no more. “It used to be that if I wanted it, I’d just go and buy it and finance it,” Mr. Whittey, 33, said. “I’m feeling the crunch, and my spending is down significantly.”
The Whitteys and others like them are at the center of deepening worries that the economy is headed for a substantial slowdown, possibly even a recession, as the artery of cash from Americans borrowing against the value of their homes has sharply narrowed.
“Everybody was basically using their house as an A.T.M. machine,” said Dave Simonsen, a senior vice president for NAI Alliance, an industrial real estate firm in Reno. “Now they are upside down on their house without that piggy bank to go back to.”
'We will have a recession second in impact to the Great Depression, which will last for over a year.'
LOL! Second in impact to the 'great depression' eh? (1929-1941) yet it will last all of a year! I guess that means we have only had 2 recessions in the USA's history? Well no, that isn't the case so I guess that means you are an ignoramus.
'Unemployment will rise to 7 percent, and interest rates will drop down to 3 percent or lower.'
gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2007/11/bush-unemplyment-rate-bests-clinton. html
' Bush Unemployment Rate Bests Clinton Years
Don't expect to see this in the MSM headlines any time soon...
Despite inheriting the Clinton Recession and managing through the corporate scandals and the 9-11 attacks that crippled the US economy, the average monthly unemployment rate during the Bush years now bests the Clinton years:'
'The current 'rebate' talk is irrelevant, because it does not change the fundamentals - '
Well, there shouldn't be one then....
'That makes it harder for States and other jurisdictions to issue debt at low coupon rates, and will complicate financing of their deficits. '
Good, they should cut waste. (The whole point of a downturn in the business cycle)
' New Jersey is looking to sell off the freeways to companies who would charge higher tolls, so that lands smack on the public. '
Serves them right for living in New Jersey.
'Hidden Dum-Dum we all gave up on long ago as giving a damn about the people of the country.'
Not at all, YOU are the one who had passionately argued for a US defeat in the middle east so you could have the satisfaction of saying 'I told you so'. (By the way, I TOLD YOU SO) You are the idiot who has compared the terrorists in Iraq to the minutemen in our revolution. You are the flipfloopper who changes his mind on positions on a minute by minute basis in order to take a stab at your scapegoat. You have shown nothing but contempt and disdain for the USA and our political process. Get the hell out of my country you moron.
'Where did I diminish the importance of the economy? '
Had you bothered to read what I wrote you wouldn't have asked that.
'while even a Conservative blonde bimbette on McLaughlin predicted that al Qaeda's influence in Pakistan is growing in their cities'
Well then, we should invade Pakistan.... Oh wait, you are against that, but you used to be for that, before you were against it, before you were for it.... Idiot...
'has dropped over 2000 pts in 3 months. Yeah, we're great shape.'
Well, you should have bought Apple computer... Too late now, sucks to be you!
:-D
'Remember when Bush Sr. did his part by buying a pair of socks, and was surprised at the electronic cash registers'
Nope, none of us are obsessive compulsive like you.
'Homeowners feel the lost equity'
Yup, it is a business cycle... Last time around it was the tech-stock bubble that popped, this time real estate, next energy, probably. You expect Bush to stop people from buying things they can't afford? Probably.
'
“Everybody was basically using their house as an A.T.M. machine,” said Dave Simonsen, '
Gee, not a smart idea, is it? I blame the Clinton's for deregulating the banks... Actually, to be serious, I blame those cashing in false equity and the greedy banks that let them.
(While the headlines have been focused on the economy and primaries, the situation in Iraq continues to be both miserable and expensive, with daily reports of violence continuing, even Shia against Shia. Subtract al Qaeda, and the resident sectarians will try to kill one another)
news.monstersandcritics.com/middleeast/news/article_1387662.php/At_leas t_22_killed_in_Iraq_violence_90_suspects_held__Roundup_
A US military spokesman, Rear Admiral Gregory Smith, told reporters that 18 security offensives launched as part of the Operation Phantom Phoenix have led to the arrest of 121 gunmen and 1,023 suspects and the discovery of 350 weapons caches in northern Baghdad. At least 50 gunmen enter Iraq monthly from Syria and Saudi Arabia, which marks a drop from about 100 last year, VOI quoted Smith as saying. Smith attributed the drop in the number of infiltrators to an increase in the number of checkpoints set up by Syria and Saudi Arabia on their borders with Iraq.
Al-Qaeda fighters have increased their presence in the northern Nineveh province because of its proximity to Syria where they are still getting help, Smith explained. About Iranian influence in Iraq, Smith said the US was trying to understand more about Iran-sponsored smuggling of weapons and training of Shiite militias and its financial support to them.
seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/iraq/2004135060_iraq20.html
Tensions rise between Shiites, al-Sadr
BAGHDAD — A police raid Saturday on an extremist Shiite Muslim mosque thought to be the headquarters of an extremist cult capped a weekend of violence in Southern Iraq, while elsewhere tensions between Iraq's Shiite-led government and renegade Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr continued to escalate.
Iraq's national-security adviser said he was briefly taken hostage Saturday in a Baghdad mosque and implied that his captors were al-Sadr supporters. Mowaffak al-Rubaie was released only after intervention by Iraq's interior minister, who oversees the police.
The Bush ass-wipers are out in force today ...
(Other countries are not stepping up to help with reconstruction, so this will be more expense for the American taxpayers down the road).
www.reuters.com/article/middleeastCrisis/idUSCOL838278
BAGHDAD, Jan 18 (Reuters) - Electricity cuts that blacked out Iraq's northern oilfields and main refinery this week were a timely reminder that its hopes of boosting oil production rest on something it does not have -- a dependable power supply. Iraq has managed to sustain production of around 2.2 million barrels per day (bpd), but levels were close to 3 million bpd before the U.S.-led war on Iraq in March 2003.
While sabotage attacks have constantly interrupted the country's attempts to increase oil production, power cuts are nearly as detrimental. The latest major disruption was on Wednesday, when Iraq's largest refinery at Baiji, 180 km (110 miles) north of Baghdad, was shut down by a power cut.
Iraq has also stopped pumping crude oil from its northern Kirkuk oilfields to the Turkish port of Ceyhan after the main power station feeding the fields ran out of refined fuel.
www.gulfnews.com/region/Iraq/10183375.html
Baghdad: Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki is facing discontent as residents blame the government for the lack of electricity, fuel and water.
'Where's the kerosene and the water?' asked Amjad Kazim, a 56-year-old eastern Baghdad resident. 'We hear a lot of promises but we see nothing.' Little kerosene is available on the state-run market at the subsidized price of $0.14 a litre. At the black market, it goes for more than $1 a litre–more than what the average Iraqi can afford.
'I have had no electricity for a week, and I cannot afford to buy it from neighbourhood generators,' said Hamdiyah Subeih, a 42-year-old resident of Baladiyat district. Electricity supply in Iraq is sparse and unavailable for days in many areas and on only after a few hours daily on average, residents say.
...the economy is cyclical. We all know this, don't you? What did you think, people were going to spend ever more, pay higher and higher prices for real estate? For stocks? For commodities? What world DO you live in? Bush has had record employment, tax receipts, low inflation and historic high household wealth for most of his term.
This is all coming to a stop.
Do any of you live in the USA? We have a slowdown every 10 years or so. Here's the part you're really going to hate:
It's over for Bush! Anything he does, won't work until AFTER the election, making it the next guys problem! He's going to make noise about it and maybe get the tax cuts made permenent, but othetr than that, he's doing nothing.
Yep, the dems greenlighted this war, just like the repubs and now they want it wrapped up before 08, something Bush will never do. They got ol GW to get saddam for them, and then thought they could use the war to unseat him in 04.
How'd that work out for the dems????
No, OL GW just called their bluff, getting them to vote for it before they voted against it, and the dem sheep:????
They forgot all about Hillary backing this lemon! Heck, she's one of the war protesters now! Golly! Whooo knew?
Yep, OL GW just doubled down and now, the war is looking pretty optimistic, with more democracy in Iraq than in Pakistan!
All of this added some real money to the national debt, and I'd be the first to ask just what the benefits are supposed to be, but Hillary and Kerry and the rest HAD THAT opportunity 5 years ago, didn't they? And what did they do? They played presidential politics and spent a trillion to get into office, but failed.
So, go home, sit in a chair, pour a cool drink and realize the reason your rectum hurts is because these folks bent you over and stuck it in just like Bush did to them!
Once the McLaughlin transcripts are up on Web, I can extract his comments precisely. They extended beyond a sentence or two, and bear in mind this is from someone who 6 months ago thought the risk of recession a minor problem.
The panel was in agreement that Bush and the Fed should have acted faster - that's the recurring theme of this miserable Presidency, from Katrina on down. I call him the 'Late President Bush', because he always waits for problems to take hold before doing anything. Remember when he wanted to wait until the State of the Union to lay out policy, which would then require several months to pass and enact?
The resident propagandist can remember every time Clinton sneezed, but this well-recorded moment by the press seems to have escaped his notice.
www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,993465,00.html
'Of all people, George W. Bush, a son of a one-term President, should certainly understand the importance of getting the script and the staging just right when it comes to demonstrating how committed he is to helping Americans get and keep good jobs. The economy was improving on Election Day 1992, but voters could still recall images of George Herbert Walker Bush buying four pairs of socks at J.C. Penney the previous Christmas season and exhorting them to shop their way out of bad times. Or how, as he prepared to tee off at a Kennebunkport, Maine, golf course in the summer of 1991, the elder Bush declared the recession over and then blocked funding to extend unemployment benefits. Though people understand their President can't guarantee their jobs, they want to know that he's doing what he can and that, at a minimum, he's paying attention.'
'Not at all, YOU are the one who had passionately argued for a US defeat in the middle east so you could have the satisfaction of saying 'I told you so'.'
=========
I simply took note of what was already happening, thanks to Bush's complete lack of strategy and objectivity, and a read of today's headlines shows the same problems now as then - except that Petraeus has put a band-aid on a sucking chest wound just in time for the 2008 elections (perhaps). The story of 2008 may be Petraeus, rather than the candidate that the GOP cannot seem to settle on. Bush already has signed an agreement for an indefinite stay in Iraq to support the corrupt regime; and that's a massive switch from expecting benchmarks to be met, so that we could safely hand over control.
Kiss-asses like you just go along with the flow, right down the sewer; the 'amen corner' for a failed Presidency and failed policy, lashing out at those who call you the phony that you are. The personal insults that you seem to thrive on are ONLY evidence of your own incompetence in stating your case; looking instead for the White House press releases used to buoy up the incompetence of the past 8 years.
www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/18/opinion/main3728991.shtml
The Nation: Looming Disasters In Iraq And The Economy Will Challenge Next President
(This column was written by the editors of The Nation)
As the election drama renewed optimism among voters disgusted with the Bush era, there was an unfortunate side effect: the war in Iraq seemed to disappear from the headlines. Perhaps it was public exhaustion over a war that is nearing the end of its fifth year, or the unwillingness of Democratic leaders and candidates to keep pressing their call for an end to the occupation. Perhaps it was the White House's orchestrated 'Petraeus moment' in September and the temporary decline in violence in Iraq that led politicians and media to put the war on the back burner. Meanwhile, Democrats were slow to confront another conflagration — the tottering economy. We now face the prospect of an election-year recession on top of a disastrous and costly war.
Some voters feel that one or the other crisis demands the higher priority: the war or the rapidly deteriorating economy. We believe both are top priorities. These twin disasters are linked in practical necessity and as a stark expression of America's weakened condition. One reason Washington is so ill equipped to deal aggressively with recession is that it has spent so lavishly on a war that should never have been fought in the first place. How does government turn around a shrinking economy when it already blew its wad on Iraq? Indeed, the linkage poses discomforting questions for Democrats as well as Republicans.
Two years ago Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz estimated that the war may ultimately consume $2 trillion — now much closer to standard projections than the $200 billion estimate the Bush crowd originally scoffed at. Last year the Democratic Congress took up the fight to end the war, but most Democrats, fearing the accusation that they would be 'abandoning the troops,' shied away from using their power to curb or cut off war spending. This is a shame, since the war continues to drain desperately needed resources. The projected cost of the war for fiscal year 2008 is $156 billion, which, according to the National Priorities Project, is enough to provide healthcare for 44 million Americans (only slightly less than the total number without healthcare); or to build 1.2 million new housing units; or to provide 161 million homes with renewable energy.
If this war drifts out of sharp focus, there will be dire consequences for the next President. The Defense Secretary and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff are beating the drum for fat military budgets, even as Iraq's defense minister announced that he expects US troops to play guardian and instructor for Iraqi forces through 2018. Although all the Democratic candidates now reject long-term occupation and have called for withdrawal, among the leading contenders, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are unwilling to suggest even modest cuts to our out-of-control military budget. In fact, both call for increasing the size of the military by some 90,000 troops, which would actually increase the budget. John Edwards opposes a troop increase and has called for cutting 'wasteful' spending on such programs as missile defense, but he has not called for overall reductions in the military budget.
The economic crisis has so far been approached hesitantly and without the boldness it demands. The stimulus proposals offered by leading Democrats hover around $100 billion. This is too little. Some authorities in academia and on Wall Street warn that it will take $300 billion to $400 billion in emergency spending to alleviate severe suffering and generate real recovery. Losses from Wall Street's folly are likely to total $900 billion, warns the Levy Economics Institute, a respected think tank. That's an Iraq-class disaster.
(From 2006)
www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1681119,00.html
The real cost to the US of the Iraq war is likely to be between $1 trillion and $2 trillion (£1.1 trillion), up to 10 times more than previously thought, according to a report written by a Nobel prize-winning economist and a Harvard budget expert. The study, which expanded on traditional estimates by including such costs as lifetime disability and healthcare for troops injured in the conflict as well as the impact on the American economy, concluded that the US government is continuing to underestimate the cost of the war.
Mr Stiglitz told the Guardian that despite the staggering costs laid out in their paper the economists had erred on the side of caution. 'Our estimates are very conservative, and it could be that the final costs will be much higher. And it should be noted they do not include the costs of the conflict to either Iraq or the UK.' In 2003, as US and British troops were massing on the Iraq border, Larry Lindsey, George Bush's economic adviser, suggested the costs might reach $200bn. The White House said the figure was far too high, and the deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, said Iraq could finance its own reconstruction.
(from 2008)
money.cnn.com/2008/01/10/news/economy/costofwar.fortune/
Missing from the debate until now has been the man who famously sparked it: Lawrence Lindsey, then President Bush's chief economist, who gave an estimate in 2002 that sent the Bush administration into sticker shock. Less than three months later he was out of the White House.
Specialized care for wounded soldiers is one of many expenditures and social costs that some economists have swept into the accounting in an effort to get a bigger perspective. One of the first was from Yale's William Nordhaus, who in 2002 gave two estimates: a low number of $99 billion for a short, favorable war and a high figure of $1.9 trillion for a case in which 'the U.S. has a string of bad luck or misjudgments.' He acknowledged that such estimates were 'virtually certain to be wrong.' In 2006 economists Linda Bilmes and Joseph Stiglitz estimated that 'the true costs may exceed $2 trillion,' including a major increase in the cost of oil. The Congressional Budget Office last October gave an estimate of $1.2 trillion to $1.7 trillion for the entire war on terrorism, including Iraq and Afghanistan, through 2017; a month later the Democratic majority on the Joint Economic Committee pushed that number to $3.5 trillion as a high-side estimate. While many of those costs can reasonably be connected to the war, some of them are dependent on so many other variables that it enters the realm of the cosmic to tie them all together into one pricetag. Simply adding up the costs doesn't reach a sum that tells you on its face whether the war is worth it. Moreover, a 15-year cost estimate needs to be compared with 15 years of economic output, which will total $300 trillion.
www.cnn.com/2008/US/01/17/army.brain.injuries/
Army: Some troops suffer brain injuries and don't know it
Up to 20 percent of U.S. troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan may have suffered mild concussions but were unaware of them and did not get treatment, an Army study released Thursday shows.
Traumatic brain injuries are caused by powerful blasts, such as ones created by improvised explosive devices, or other severe trauma that shakes the brain inside the skull. The result can be bruising of the brain or greater damage. The Army began looking at the TBI issue and care in January 2007 by talking to soldiers, family members and caregivers to find out how such injuries were identified and treated, Army officials said. The Army now checks soldiers before and after deployment to identify and treat as many TBI-affected troops as possible.
This is a very difficult exercise, because there might have been costs in leaving Saddam in, as well. The problem is the future commitment that the President has made, and the budgets covering those future expenses are not his responsibility. Stiglitz has a book due out in March with better cost estimates.
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/12/AR200711120200 8.html
Tuesday, November 13, 2007; Page A14
The economic costs to the United States of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan so far total approximately $1.5 trillion, according to a new study by congressional Democrats that estimates the conflicts' 'hidden costs'-- including higher oil prices, the expense of treating wounded veterans and interest payments on the money borrowed to pay for the wars.
That amount is nearly double the $804 billion the White House has spent or requested to wage these wars through 2008, according to the Democratic staff of Congress's Joint Economic Committee. Its report, titled 'The Hidden Costs of the Iraq War,' estimates that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have thus far cost the average U.S. family of four more than $20,000.
The report argues that war funding is diverting billions of dollars away from 'productive investment' by American businesses in the United States. It also says that the conflicts are pulling reservists and National Guardsmen away from their jobs, resulting in economic disruptions for U.S. employers that the report estimates at $1 billion to $2 billion.
Oil prices have more than tripled since the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the report notes, to a peak of more than $90 per barrel. 'The war in Iraq is certainly not responsible for all of this increase,' the report states, but it estimates that declining Iraqi production 'has likely raised oil prices in the U.S. by between $4 and $5 a barrel.' The report added that 'because of the many factors affecting oil markets, this should be seen as a highly approximate estimate.'
Hormats said he agrees with the report's finding that the United States is dangerously increasing its reliance on foreign debt and that Americans will be paying the price for generations. Hormats, author of 'The Price of Liberty: Paying for America's Wars,' said that in every other major war, the United States has financed the conflict.
(This neglects the point that the unrest in the Mideast, as well as in other oil-producing nations, has caused a built-in speculator's markup of $20-30 a barrel, adding to the problem. No one wants to put the current war on budget, and Bush has relied on a series of supplementals, rather than acknowledging costs in each current fiscal year's budget).
(From 11/2/07)
www.mclaughlin.com/library/transcript.asp?id=623
'MR. ZUCKERMAN: No, I think there is reason for some optimism. But I have to tell you, I think we're facing the worst financial crisis in the last 40 or 50 years, maybe since the Great Depression. You have a situation where we have two and a half trillion dollars of paper, of which the estimate is that 25 percent of it is going to be wiped out in value. That's $600 billion. And that's just the estimates today. Those estimates get worse and worse as this paper gets to be worth less and less. And nobody knows what the consequences of that is. We've never been in that kind of situation.
Amongst other things, nobody knows who owns the paper. I mean, nobody -- Merrill Lynch announced that they were losing roughly $5 billion. It then went to $8 billion within a matter of three weeks, which they are the biggest seller of this kind of paper. They're off by 60 percent. I mean, if they're off by 60 percent, who knows what the real value is?'
(Merrill actually wrote off $25 billion in the second half, more than their entire earnings from 2002 through 2006)
www.smartmoney.com/bn/ON/index.cfm?story=ON-20080117-000989-1313
Yet the cleanup has come at a high price. Merrill's $25 billion in write-downs in the second half exceeded all of the bank's earnings from 2002 through 2006. And while analysts said Merrill probably has put the bulk of its subprime-related trouble behind it and credited the firm's strong performance in wealth and asset management, they cautioned that troubled capital markets will continue to hurt the bank and pointed to new areas of concern like commercial real estate. Merrill's shares were 7.4% lower at $51 in midday trading.
www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/mzuckerman/2007/12/13/the-credit-crisis-gro ws.html
A whole galaxy of credit instruments has now been downgraded to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars of paper losses. If those losses were incurred by individuals it would be bad enough. But leveraged lenders have a different problem. Many of them, such as commercial banks, have to maintain capital in reserve to protect against unexpected losses. If banks wish to maintain reserves equal to 10 percent of their assets, they either have to bring in new capital or shrink their balance sheets and reduce their lending accordingly. A dollar of real losses would mean scaling back lending by $10. Translate that to the whole financial sector, where the aggregate credit losses are estimated at $200 billion as of now. Ten times those losses could result in lending cutbacks of as much as $2 trillion. Such a huge hit to the credit supply will have a dramatic macroeconomic effect and could well produce a severe recession. Some major banks have literally shut their lending windows until they can repair their balance sheets.
Vicious cycle. The repair effort is further complicated because even the most sophisticated financial institutions do not know how to price many of the securities they hold and therefore cannot predict how much they will have to cut back on their loans, as the giant bank UBS said last week. This uncertainty compounds the credit crunch. So, too, does the decline in net worth of many borrowers due to a drop in house prices. In some markets, prices are down 20 percent from their mid-2006 highs. The average 10 percent drop in home values already incurred is tantamount to a $2.1 trillion loss in home equities. This threatens a vicious cycle with falling homeownership lowering house prices and forcing more defaults, causing ownership and prices to decline even more. Research suggests that for every dollar decline in home equity, spending will go down by about 9 cents, so this could lead to a $200 billion hit to consumer spending.
Another immediate effect has been a collapse in cash-out borrowing from home equity from about $700 billion in 2005 to $100 billion to date. At the same time, tighter lending and mortgage standards have contributed to a dramatic decline in residential construction from a high of over 2 million units to about 800,000 predicted for next year, with a concomitant decline in employment. A slowdown in consumer spending seems inescapable.
Bush doubled down on Iraq and now they have pacified it and have a democracy at least as good as any in the region.
This is why you are not reading much about Iraq: the libnazi press cannot push the story forward unless they acknowledge the progress so they gag it in classic CNN fashion.
Now, Bush is leaving it to the next guy as a big present, for greenlighting it for him! The dems wanted him to get Saddam and clean it up before they ran again, then blame him, for the outcome. This is why they cried for the dead out of one side of their mouths while trying to cut funding for the trrops out of the other! Remember???? You had resolutions to cut funding and then they'd cry about the dead, after they actually OK'ed the conflict to begin with! The dem sheep they represent buy it all! None of them ever brings this up!
Think about it: why would THEY want to deal with it???? Clinton had far better tools to deal with it than Bush and promptly de-constructed the capability to do so.
So here comes ol GW, beating that talking head Gore, and now, they can get a republican to do it for them! Why do you think half of ther dems greenlighted it???? This was their chance! Get saddam and pillory Bush for it!
Now, the economy is cooling since no one is going to keep paying more for housing and other items, so let's get ol GW to pimp a second stimulus package and then after we're back in office....raise taxes!
I can't wait to see ol GW's play on this!
LOL! the bore is in a real lather today!
'No reprieve from war costs'
'No reprieve from dumb comments, either'
'No payoff in infrastucture[sic] Iraq investments'
'Zuckerman comments on Web Monday'
'Dum-dum with selective amnesia'
'Threats Of War, Recession Going Ignored'
'Lies on the Iraq war costs; brain injuries'
'Assessing the total costs of the war'
'For SP4: Mort Zuckerman details re recession'
'Zuckerman - The Credit Crisis Grows'
And my favorite, the aptly titled:
'More garbage from the pit of ignorance'
Well done demonstrating your obsessive compulsive disorder yet again. You need electro-shock therapy. Thanks for rantings from your leftist sources and your heavily redacted commentary from Mort frigging Zuckerman. Do you really expect ANYONE to believe Mort Zuckerman has the interests of the USA as one of his priorities? The man is a leftist leech who sees the USA as his boarding house between starting in Canada and ending in Israel.
from some of the comments posted here if maybe the wrong people are in the political arena - notice I stated 'some'! It's up to others to figure out who the 'some' are!! Or maybe argue about it...........
Certainly it can be said that there are NO innocents among American politicians. The Clinton Clan set up our trade deals with China and the Bush Bunch signed off on it. Now have a look at this article. It's stuff like this that makes it profitable to read foreign newspapers.
www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/08/07/bcnchina107a .xml
Snippet:'Xia Bin, finance chief at the Development Research Centre (which has cabinet rank), kicked off what now appears to be government policy with a comment last week that Beijing's foreign reserves should be used as a 'bargaining chip' in talks with the US.
'Of course, China doesn't want any undesirable phenomenon in the global financial order,' he added.
He Fan, an official at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, went even further today, letting it be known that Beijing had the power to set off a dollar collapse if it choose to do so.
'China has accumulated a large sum of US dollars. Such a big sum, of which a considerable portion is in US treasury bonds, contributes a great deal to maintaining the position of the dollar as a reserve currency. Russia, Switzerland, and several other countries have reduced the their dollar holdings.
'China is unlikely to follow suit as long as the yuan's exchange rate is stable against the dollar. The Chinese central bank will be forced to sell dollars once the yuan appreciated dramatically, which might lead to a mass depreciation of the dollar,' he told China Daily.
The Clinton Clan is, of course, blaming this nightmare on the Bush Bunch. The truth is, they have been switch-hitting.
Snippet:'Simon Derrick, a currency strategist at the Bank of New York Mellon, said the comments were a message to the US Senate as Capitol Hill prepares legislation for the Autumn session.
'The words are alarming and unambiguous. This carries a clear political threat and could have very serious consequences at a time when the credit markets are already afraid of contagion from the subprime troubles,' he said.'
In other words, we either do what the Chinese want and play the game by Chinese rules or we can watch our economy collapse like the house of cards it is.
Whose responsible? Bush-Clinton-Bush and like as not, Clinton again.
The United States is a republic, not an empire or monarchy. We are fools for allowing these political dynasties.
'While the headlines have been focused on the economy and primaries,'
They are focused on the economy because the situation in Iraq is improving to the degree that the democrats can no longer push surrender to the terrorists as a political strategy. (In other words: Treason) What they are left with is desperately trying to call slower growth and nearly full employment a 'recession' or even 'depression'. Pathetic because there hasn't even been a contraction in the GDP yet. It isn't going to work.
'the situation in Iraq continues to be both miserable and expensive, with daily reports of violence continuing'
Wrong, liar. This is now your fall back BS. The facts on the ground are proving you wrong and despite the lack of coverage the American people are realizing that, thanks to the most brilliant American general since Eisenhower or Abrams and the most competent fighting force the world has ever known we are making clear, undeniable progress in Iraq.
GO TO THIS LINK AND LOOK AT THE MAPS:
www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2008/01/al_qaeda_in_iraqs_sh.php
Al Qaeda in Iraq's area of operations as of December 2007. Dark red indicates operating areas, light red is transit routes. Click to view.
Nearly one year to the day of the announcement of the 'surge' of US forces to Iraq and the change in counterinsurgency plan, Iraqi and Coalition forces have shrunk al Qaeda's ability to conduct operations inside Iraq, a senior US commander said.
During a press briefing in Baghdad, Lieutenant General Ray Odierno, the Commander of Multinational Corps Iraq, said al Qaeda in Iraq has been ejected from its strongholds in the cities to the rural regions of Iraq.
Al Qaeda in Iraq's area of operations as of December 2006. Dark red indicates operating areas, light red is transit routes. Click to view.
From late 2006 into 2007, 'Iraq was caught in a cycle of bloodshed under the dark cloud of al Qaeda,' said Odierno. Al Qaeda was 'entrenched in numerous urban safe havens across Iraq' until the surge forces launched Operation Phantom Thunder in June 2007.
Operation Phantom Phoenix, the current nationwide operation targeting al Qaeda's remaining safe havens, was launched on Jan. 8. Iraqi and US forces have captured or killed 121 al Qaeda fighters, wounded 14, and detained an additional 1023 suspects. Al Qaeda's leadership has been hit hard during the operation, with 92 high values targets either killed or captured.
Iraqi and US forces have also discovered 351 weapons caches and four tunnel complexes, Odierno said. Iraqi and US forces have also discovered three car bomb and improvised explosive device [IED] factories and 410 IEDs, including 18 car bombs and 25 homes rigged with explosives. Also found were 'numerous torture chambers, an underground medical clinic, several closed schools, and a large foreign fighter camp with intricate tunnel complexes,' said Odierno.
The reduction of ethno-sectarian violence in Baghdad from December 2006 to December 2007. Ethno-sectarian violence is down 90 percent Baghdad from December 2006 to December 2007.
Iraqi security forces have conducted independent operations and deployments during Phantom Phoenix. An entire brigade was moved from Anbar province to Diyala, where a major fight against al Qaeda in Iraq is under way.
'With less than a week's notice the 3rd Brigade of the 1st Iraqi Army Division was alerted to deploy from Anbar province to Diyala province to support combat operations in the Diyala River Valley,' said Odierno.” This was a good Iraqi decision and was executed solely by the Iraqis. Within 36 hours upon arrival, the 3rd Brigade uncovered two sizeable caches, gathered significant intelligence and aggressively hunted down al Qaeda in tough terrain and demanding climatic conditions.' As recently as the spring of 2007 Anbar was the most violent province in Iraq.
www.theleafchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080120/OPINION01/8012 00329
Surge shows success signs
In the year since the surge began in Iraq — with its 30,000 additional U.S. troops — the improvement in security throughout the country is outstanding. Perhaps nowhere is it more notable than in the capital of Baghdad.
This time last year, just 8 percent of Baghdad's neighborhoods were secure. Today, that number has jumped all the way to 75 percent.
Gen. David Petraeus, a former Fort Campbell commander, launched the surge strategy in Baghdad in February 2007. Its goal was to reduce violence by moving troops off the bases and into the neighborhoods, and it's working.
'They extended beyond a sentence or two, and bear in mind this is from someone who 6 months ago thought the risk of recession a minor problem.
The panel was in agreement that Bush and the Fed should have acted faster '
So if 6 months ago the thought of this recession (which STILL hasn't happened!) was thought to be 'minor' would it have been a good idea to spend a lot of money on a stimulus package? You contradict yourself again. Indeed, since there HAS BEEN NO RECESSION why should we drive up the budget deficit by dumping money in to the economy?
Regardless, since there wasn't a downturn 6 months ago, or a serious one even 2 months ago, how could anyone have 'acted faster'? Since there has yet to be A SINGLE quarter of contraction, let alone the 2 you need to call it a recession how on earth could you call a stimulus package 'too late'?
FURTHER, it is the federal reserves job to release money to ease inflation or to stimulate growth. How is it Bush's fault if this independent body has not released more money in the form of lower interest rates?
You demonstrate your ignorance bu your need to scapegoat your bogeyman, you idiot.
'More garbage from the pit of ignorance'
Again, an apt title for your rants.
'I simply took note of what was already happening, thanks to Bush's complete lack of strategy and objectivity,'
Would you like me to google up some of your golden oldies, you miserable liar? You have overtly supported the terrorists because you saw every American killed in Iraq as an opportunity to sermonize and focus your illiterate anger on the man you love to hate. You peddled your defeatism, scorned our sacrifice and openly rooted for a humiliating defeat at the hands of the head chopping, child murdering, miserable savages that the USA and the coalition were working to defeat in Iraq. You have compared the terrorists to our minutemen in the revolutionary war and predicted even endorsed their victory. All of tis is still up there for anyone to see, you piece of sh*t.
'except that Petraeus has put a band-aid on a sucking chest wound just in time for the 2008 elections (perhaps).'
(Perhaps) eh? So there is still hope for your allies in al Qaeda to salvage victory against the infidels. No, there has been a dramatic turnaround in Iraq. You are one of the last idiots on earth who refuse to see it. Even Bin Laden and Harry Reid have grudgingly acknowledged it.
'Kiss-asses like you just go along with the flow,'
Another one of your lies. I was against the invasion of Iraq to begin with, when it had 70% approval in the USA. I was against abandoning the mission when it was deeply unpopular. Now that over half the country thinks it is going 'well' or 'very well' I can honestly say have maintained the exact same position throughout. It has never been about popularity with me it is about right and wrong, something that you will never understand.
'The personal insults that you seem to thrive on are ONLY evidence of your own incompetence in stating your case;'
I have stated my case and time has proven me correct and you wrong,, not to mention a weasel and a liar. In terms of 'insults' I think you are a contemptible traitor and I intend to remind you of that.
''MR. ZUCKERMAN: No, I think there is reason for some optimism. But I have to tell you, I think we're facing the worst financial crisis in the last 40 or 50 years, maybe since the Great Depression. '
LOL... 'K... Mort Zuckerman, the same guy who gave so much to the Clinton's, the same guy who bought the Israeli greenhouses in Gaza to give as a present to the Palestinians (Who immediately trashed them and used them to launch attacks against Israel) The Canadian who has said that he owes his allegiance to Israel... That Mort Zuckerman is trying to put the scare in to people about a looming depression. Even though there hasn't been a recession. Or even a contraction.
Well, looks like Mort is on board with the Clinton's.
' You have a situation where we have two and a half trillion dollars of paper, of which the estimate is that 25 percent of it is going to be wiped out in value. '
From where? Where are these estimates coming from? When does this begin? Should I build a bunker? What will stop it? A Billary in the oval office? LOL! It is a bubble popping. Thankfully this is in real estate which will retain value. Not like the internet bubble where the whole thing evaporated.
'Merrill actually wrote off $25 billion in the second half, more than their entire earnings from 2002 through 2006'
Gee, how much was lost in the tech bubble? (Under the Clinton's)
' Merrill's $25 billion in write-downs in the second half exceeded all of the bank's earnings from 2002 through 2006.'
Am I supped to feel bad for Merrill Lynch for buying up bad loans that shouldn't have been made in the first place? Good heavens. Thanks for nothing with the reposts of every utterance of Mort Zuckerman.
We could put into place a quarterly payment, in the form similar to gift cards sold in stores (Government Gift Cards), from the government for every household in the U.S. They must be used with one stipulation that the cards can only be purchased for goods Made in The U.S.A.
Five-thousand dollars for every household per quarter sounds reasonable.
The first quarter can start as soon as they can get them made, (by a company headquartered in America, of course) anytime during a three-month period would do.
Businesses could offer special discounts if folks choose to use their gift cards in their stores, online, etc.
If the government can waste billions, (hey, what can be done about that?) they can implement this for the people and our economy.
With best intentions,
One Individual
Edited: They must be used with one stipulation that the cards can only be purchased for goods Made in The U.S.A.
Should read: They must be used with one stipulation that the cards can only be used to purchase goods Made in The U.S.A.
How do you define 'Made in the US' - many products are manufactured elsewhere (or parts of them are) and then assembled in the US.
Also, this scheme is effectively a trade restriction against other countries - so they will ban US imports in retaliation. Since the USA is the World's largest exporter, who do you think will lose most ?
'Since the USA is the World's largest exporter, who do you think will lose most ?'
The USA also has the largest trade defect. We should be buying American whenever possible.
what is the right thing to do if the goods manufactured in the U.S. aren't as good as the items manufactured outside the U.S.? I've found that to be true in some clothing items I've purchased.
Some people need lessons in basic common sense;SP4,if the economy functions well,it is thanks to Baush;if it crashes,well than it is just a cycle .It is supposed to go up and down every ten years .Only the downhill part is cyclical according to SP4,the credit dor the surging part is for Bush,I'd say strange cycles that function in halves ,but then again logics have always failed in SP4 's ranting .Never mind .
I'd also wish that republicans and other style ignorants take basic lesson in economy .Nu use looking for the origin of this crisis anywhere else than in the financial market .Sub prime loans in the mortgage departments gave the starting shot causing massive losses to all the implicated institutions,which means banks and insurance companies .The error made by Bush was doing too little too late ,which is hardly something surprisisng,remember the comments made by Greenspan about Bush during the briefings he gave in the White House;no understanding and no interest from the president,Greenspan stated he was often dismissed without even be given any attention.This crisis is now worldwide as stock markets tumble everywhere .Are there any serious consequences to it ?No idea ,those that are the first victims are the big shareholders,which excludes me and most other common people .
...I think you guys are doing just fine.
I could not have said it better: Iraq has about the same violence as Pakistan and twice the democracy. This is why the libnazi press is gagging stories on it.
The economy, having been at break-neck record levels for years, is finally slowing. It has been so good, the only way to go is down. The dems, desperate for an issue they can come up on the winning side on, are trying to convince us a recession is in full swing.
Poorly made loans do not define a recession, and as soon as they work through these, I think we're going to come out on the other side stronger than ever.
The dems gambled on mayhem in Iraq and a sinking economy and did everything to help it along, dragging their feet on Iraq, pulling their defeatist crap, but none of it has worked, so they need some new rhymes. Well, the Clintons are the best there is for this kind of stuff, so it'll be interesting to see what they do to first deal out that pesky negro and then go on to the Republican smear.
' Too Little, too Late '.
What a photo of G.W. Bush !
Says it all, dosn't it?
Meltdown.
SP4, your comments on recession:
'Poorly made loans do not define a recession, and as soon as they work through these, I think we're going to come out on the other side stronger than ever.' (what an idiotic statement, could only be made by a blind neo-con idiot)
I know you have 'two degrees' and make over $100,000 per year (ya, I believe that), but having a meltdown in the equity markets, having no where to sell loans, companies failing, companies writing down $10 BB (numerous companies), makes a recession. And the cause of recession, not paying the bills as one goes. The money your President and your congress spent our country into the toilet between 2001 and 2006. The dollar is worthless, the bond market is on the skids, the new world currency will be the Euro real soon, oil is at all time highs, gas prices at all time highs, inflation was the strongest last month since 2001, looks like a recession to me. Watch the market tomorrow and the rest of the week. You will see what your President is good at---nothing! It was only a matter of time, no accountability has its price!
It is the economy stupid!
Well said PPerfect .
Clear concise and precise.
I think eveyone will understand that, except for one person.
page: 1
Amazed...........Jan 18th, 2008 - 22:37:38
that he will even admit the economy needs a boost!!!
Report this comment