LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Worth reading

NIGGER OM ICKS

Doesnt work


Why Obama’s Desperate Move Could Send Oil Prices Soaring!
by Kevin Kerr on June 29, 2011

in Stocks



The sudden announcement last week that the International Energy Agency (IEA) would release strategic oil supplies onto the world markets caused a significant selloff. And crude oil prices dropped around $9 in about two days.

Mission accomplished? Hardly!

The 60 million barrel release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) is merely a drop in the bucket of global usage, and will likely have the opposite effect on prices longer term. The move is simply more psychological window dressing for the comic theater that is happening in Washington right now. It would be funny, if it wasn’t so sad.

In fact, it’s really a sign of …

Desperate Measures

By releasing supplies from the SPR with crude at around $90, if prices do run up again, the administration will have to fill the SPR back up at a higher price. And as shown in the chart below, a big chunk of that oil will come from outside our borders.



The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is intended solely for emergencies that threaten the U.S. economy or national security.


It’s another foolish rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul action by the imploding U.S. government.

The careless action taken by the IEA and President Obama, has now underscored how worried they actually are about global economic growth and tight supplies. So in essence this move could actually stoke the fire to drive prices much higher, much more quickly.

In a recent Bloomberg report, Caroline Bain, of the Economist Intelligence Unit, was quoted as saying:

“Although the immediate impact of the IEA’s reserve release will be to depress prices, in the more medium term, it could actually be bullish for prices. Reserves are finite and cannot be released forever.”

Unlike Uncle Ben’s printing press that never seems to run out of ink, oil supplies are not something the U.S. government can simply print more of.

To put the gravity of the situation in perspective, this is only the third time in the past 50 years that IEA has released strategic reserves. And in order to tap the SPR, President Obama had to authorize it.

Frighteningly, the prior two times resulted in super-spikes. And I think we can expect that record to hit 3-0 very shortly.

It’ll Be Different This Time,
Just Not in a Good Way

Many things are very different this time around that make it even more unlikely this small release of oil will have any measured impact to the downside.

For instance, we don’t have the added supplies of barrels of North Sea Crude to help cushion prices.

Supplies from Norway are falling fast, and Norwegian oil production decline is devastating. The figures from some of the producers are downright scary …

According to reports, production has fallen in the region by more than 20 percent from 1991 levels. Problems have included: Corrosion of old infrastructures combined with a lack of proper investments prior to the merger of Norway’s two largest oil groups, Statoil and Norsk Hydro.

Meanwhile production from Mexico’s oil fields, which the U.S. also has counted on heavily in the past, is also falling drastically. So the likelihood of the SPR release bringing any sustained relief to oil prices and thus consumers, is highly unlikely.

No Real Answers …
Just Fairy Tales!

The recent correction in commodities across the board is a welcome opportunity for those who can step out of the land of unicorns and candy canes for a moment, and see the true disaster that is unfolding before us, especially in the energy sector.

Bloomberg recently quoted a top trader, Michael Cuggino, who helps manage $13.5 billion at Permanent Portfolio Funds in San Francisco:

“I still like the growth story. Commodity prices are going to continue to go higher. Worldwide, the economy continues to grow and monetary policy is going to stay relatively consistent with no changes.”

Amen.

Basically, by wasting valuable years that could have been used for research and development, drilling, and creation of alternatives, the U.S. has set itself up to be dependent on oil supplies from people whose ultimate goal is to destroy us.

A nightmare.

Couple that with the ongoing endless printing of dollars by the Fed and the ever-rising debt ceiling, and you have a recipe for disaster. So what is an investor to do?

Advertisement

Bent Over a Barrel

As investors and consumers we have to choose our own belief in what the reality of the situation in the U.S. is right now. But clearly job losses and lower wages, at the same time as rising food and energy costs, are a very bad combination. Regardless of what some government reports may show.

The national debt just seems to grow and grow and grow, and yet no real answers are being sought on how to change the underlying problems. And the partisan bickering and lack of any true energy policy in the U.S. is the biggest joke of all.



We need oil — and lots of it — to make everything from bubble gum to shower curtains to bandages.

The fact of the matter is that when it comes to oil supplies the U.S. is bent over a barrel and not doing anything about it. The days of cheap energy supplies are over. And that translates into higher costs for everything that uses oil or related products. Transportation, manufacturing, industrial, building … you name it. Basically everything.

The bottom line: We all have exposure to higher oil prices, so we must find a way to invest in the rise to offset some of the costs and even profit from the inevitable.

There are many ways to invest in the energy markets … from commodity futures and options to individual energy stocks. But often the volatility and risks of these vehicles can dissuade some investors.

However one of the best ways I know for investing in rising energy prices are key energy ETFs, and ETF options should you want more leverage. Here are two possible opportunities you might consider:

PowerShares DB Oil (DBO): To play energy in the short-term, futures-based ETFs such as DBO are designed to help you accomplish that. While these funds aren’t intended to track the spot price of oil, they’ll often correlate better than equity-based funds.

SPDR S&P Oil & Gas E&P (XOP): Oil companies have been raking in profits hand over fist for the last several years, so it only makes sense that higher oil prices will continue that trend. And with this IEA-inspired pullback we could see those prices surge even more. So XOP, which tracks the performance of the oil and gas exploration and production portion of the S&P Total Market Index, could be a real winner.

There are many more oil-related ETFs to keep your eye on, and you can expect more to come out as this story is just heating up.

Yours for resource profits,

Kevin

Kevin Kerr has successfully traded commodities professionally for the last 22+ years. He a regular contributor to news outlets including CNBC, CNN, FOX News, CBS Evening News, and Nightly Business Report.
 
busybody said:
Why Obama’s Desperate Move Could Send Oil Prices Soaring!
by Kevin Kerr on June 29, 2011

in Stocks



The sudden announcement last week that the International Energy Agency (IEA) would release strategic oil supplies onto the world markets caused a significant selloff. And crude oil prices dropped around $9 in about two days.

Mission accomplished? Hardly!

The 60 million barrel release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) is merely a drop in the bucket of global usage, and will likely have the opposite effect on prices longer term. The move is simply more psychological window dressing for the comic theater that is happening in Washington right now. It would be funny, if it wasn’t so sad.

In fact, it’s really a sign of …

Desperate Measures

By releasing supplies from the SPR with crude at around $90, if prices do run up again, the administration will have to fill the SPR back up at a higher price. And as shown in the chart below, a big chunk of that oil will come from outside our borders.



The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is intended solely for emergencies that threaten the U.S. economy or national security.


It’s another foolish rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul action by the imploding U.S. government.

The careless action taken by the IEA and President Obama, has now underscored how worried they actually are about global economic growth and tight supplies. So in essence this move could actually stoke the fire to drive prices much higher, much more quickly.

In a recent Bloomberg report, Caroline Bain, of the Economist Intelligence Unit, was quoted as saying:

“Although the immediate impact of the IEA’s reserve release will be to depress prices, in the more medium term, it could actually be bullish for prices. Reserves are finite and cannot be released forever.”

Unlike Uncle Ben’s printing press that never seems to run out of ink, oil supplies are not something the U.S. government can simply print more of.

To put the gravity of the situation in perspective, this is only the third time in the past 50 years that IEA has released strategic reserves. And in order to tap the SPR, President Obama had to authorize it.

Frighteningly, the prior two times resulted in super-spikes. And I think we can expect that record to hit 3-0 very shortly.

It’ll Be Different This Time,
Just Not in a Good Way

Many things are very different this time around that make it even more unlikely this small release of oil will have any measured impact to the downside.

For instance, we don’t have the added supplies of barrels of North Sea Crude to help cushion prices.

Supplies from Norway are falling fast, and Norwegian oil production decline is devastating. The figures from some of the producers are downright scary …

According to reports, production has fallen in the region by more than 20 percent from 1991 levels. Problems have included: Corrosion of old infrastructures combined with a lack of proper investments prior to the merger of Norway’s two largest oil groups, Statoil and Norsk Hydro.

Meanwhile production from Mexico’s oil fields, which the U.S. also has counted on heavily in the past, is also falling drastically. So the likelihood of the SPR release bringing any sustained relief to oil prices and thus consumers, is highly unlikely.

No Real Answers …
Just Fairy Tales!

The recent correction in commodities across the board is a welcome opportunity for those who can step out of the land of unicorns and candy canes for a moment, and see the true disaster that is unfolding before us, especially in the energy sector.

Bloomberg recently quoted a top trader, Michael Cuggino, who helps manage $13.5 billion at Permanent Portfolio Funds in San Francisco:

“I still like the growth story. Commodity prices are going to continue to go higher. Worldwide, the economy continues to grow and monetary policy is going to stay relatively consistent with no changes.”

Amen.

Basically, by wasting valuable years that could have been used for research and development, drilling, and creation of alternatives, the U.S. has set itself up to be dependent on oil supplies from people whose ultimate goal is to destroy us.

A nightmare.

Couple that with the ongoing endless printing of dollars by the Fed and the ever-rising debt ceiling, and you have a recipe for disaster. So what is an investor to do?

Advertisement

Bent Over a Barrel

As investors and consumers we have to choose our own belief in what the reality of the situation in the U.S. is right now. But clearly job losses and lower wages, at the same time as rising food and energy costs, are a very bad combination. Regardless of what some government reports may show.

The national debt just seems to grow and grow and grow, and yet no real answers are being sought on how to change the underlying problems. And the partisan bickering and lack of any true energy policy in the U.S. is the biggest joke of all.



We need oil — and lots of it — to make everything from bubble gum to shower curtains to bandages.

The fact of the matter is that when it comes to oil supplies the U.S. is bent over a barrel and not doing anything about it. The days of cheap energy supplies are over. And that translates into higher costs for everything that uses oil or related products. Transportation, manufacturing, industrial, building … you name it. Basically everything.

The bottom line: We all have exposure to higher oil prices, so we must find a way to invest in the rise to offset some of the costs and even profit from the inevitable.

There are many ways to invest in the energy markets … from commodity futures and options to individual energy stocks. But often the volatility and risks of these vehicles can dissuade some investors.

However one of the best ways I know for investing in rising energy prices are key energy ETFs, and ETF options should you want more leverage. Here are two possible opportunities you might consider:

PowerShares DB Oil (DBO): To play energy in the short-term, futures-based ETFs such as DBO are designed to help you accomplish that. While these funds aren’t intended to track the spot price of oil, they’ll often correlate better than equity-based funds.

SPDR S&P Oil & Gas E&P (XOP): Oil companies have been raking in profits hand over fist for the last several years, so it only makes sense that higher oil prices will continue that trend. And with this IEA-inspired pullback we could see those prices surge even more. So XOP, which tracks the performance of the oil and gas exploration and production portion of the S&P Total Market Index, could be a real winner.

There are many more oil-related ETFs to keep your eye on, and you can expect more to come out as this story is just heating up.

Yours for resource profits,

Kevin

Kevin Kerr has successfully traded commodities professionally for the last 22+ years. He a regular contributor to news outlets including CNBC, CNN, FOX News, CBS Evening News, and Nightly Business Report.
Click to expand...

Needs reading, therefore, I quote...

;) ;)

FoxNews? He's a liar, misinformed, stupid, RACIST!
__________________
Sideshow Barry Barker 2012 Says: "It's NOT the economy, Stupid!" It's the Birthers! The Tea Party! SARAH PALIN!
RACISM!!!
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/files/2011/04/obama-wide-grin80.jpg
 
Look what I found!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A DUMOH pollster who basically says

Dont defend the so called recovery, cause there isnt any

I know, he is a JEW, he is WHITE, he has no PhD.....so CURRY POON can attack him


..Mixed Message: Should Obama Stop Trying to Defend the Recovery?

Time.com – 2 hrs 32 mins ago
........


.Stanley Greenberg, the Democratic pollster who helped elect President Bill Clinton, South Africa's Nelson Mandela and Israel's Ehud Barak, says all of his clients have had the same, sometimes terrible, instinct: "They want to prove that their economic policies have worked."

In times of plenty, that gut feeling is right. The nation cheered the gangbusters growth under Ronald Reagan in 1984, and the mid-1990s Clinton economic boom. But when the economy is sour, politicians who litigate the past risk sounding tone-deaf to the troubles of the present. This is why Greenberg is now speaking up. He fears President Obama may make a huge mistake by trying to convince voters he saved the economy from a much worse fate. "No one is going to give you much credit for what you have done for this recovery," says Greenberg, who has been testing messages in focus groups and polls for Democrats to use in the coming election. "Saying the economy is starting to make progress is bad." (See why Washington has no plans to ride to the economic rescue.)

President Obama's own strategists agree - but only in part. New projections of tepid economic growth under 3%, and unemployment over 8.5%, have all but erased hopes that Obama can run for reelection as the guy who saved America from the worst economic crises since the Great Depression. It's not a convincing message when four out of five Americans still rate the economy as "poor." So Obama has shifted to a message of "winning the future," touting an "innovation" agenda. "The question is who has the vision to move the country forward," says Daniel Pfeiffer, the White House communications director.

But behind the scenes, there is a fierce debate in Democratic circles about just how much Obama should also be focused on explaining the recent past. As it now stands, the President's stump speech features a backward-looking message at its core. Obama trumpets "more than 2 million jobs in the private sector" that have been created in the last 15 months. At a recent speech in Ohio he dismissed May's bad jobs numbers as "bumps on the road to recovery." In Greenberg's estimation, this is an error on par with President Obama's midterm election pitch, which described the nation as a car that had just gotten out of a ditch that Republicans drove into in the first place. The metaphor didn't work, Greenberg explained in a recent memo, because "people thought they were still in the ditch."

Those close to Obama say Greenberg is drawing the wrong conclusions. "Nobody is hanging a mission accomplished sign on the economy," shoots back David Axelrod, the President's top message adviser who is now working on the reelection campaign. "Stan seems to feel that you can run for President and be President without putting things in context in any way." Axelrod has argued that a forward-looking message needs to include clear mentions of both the current successes of the President and the Republican approach that Obama believes helped create the current situation. Geoffrey Garin, a pollster for Senate Democrats who has recently conducted focus groups for Priorities USA, a new independent expenditure group that plans to support Obama in 2012, agrees. "'Recovery' is not the right word," Garin says. "But it is important to talk about the progress that is being made and the foundation that is being made for more progress." (See "What U.S. Economic Recovery? Five Destructive Myths.")

Implicit in Greenberg's theory is a mea culpa of sorts, an admission that he misunderstood the public mood in early 2010, when he felt the President's fortunes would be helped by modest economic improvement. "I still thought that the economy was going to kick in," he said.

But after polling and holding focus groups, Greenberg came to realize that the real concern over the economy dates further than the 2008 collapse, to an entire decade of economic stagnation for the middle class. Recovery from the financial crisis, even if it were happening faster, would not be enough. When Greenberg tested messages trumpeting the recent rebound, or blaming the economy on Republican mismanagement before 2008, the results were dismal, he says. Voters did not want to hear it. They responded more positively to messages about long-term fixes, like rebuilding the middle class and taking on China, or moving beyond the politics of blame.

Just how to calibrate that message will be a key early test for the Obama campaign. Obama has already offered several formulations, calling for "nation building here at home" in a recent primetime address on Afghanistan, and arguing that the Republicans spending plans amount to a "vision of our future that's deeply pessimistic." Obama strategists have already set their sights on the final months of the campaign, when they hope to make the election a choice between Obama and his Republican challenger, not a referendum on the last three years.

Republicans, meanwhile, are focused squarely on Obama's job creation record. "The President has failed" has become GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney's refrain. But Greenberg argues that such a strategy could backfire just as well on Romney. "If they make the election about 'Did we get the stimulus right?,' and we make the election about how to create jobs, we win that," Greenberg argues. "That could be a trap for them."
 
So, the remaining economic question is:


When will the Federal Government institute a national Lottery in order to raise revenues?

They can state that all revenues will go to fund health care programs.
 
kbate said:
So, the remaining economic question is:


When will the Federal Government institute a national Lottery in order to raise revenues?

They can state that all revenues will go to fund health care programs.
Click to expand...

Education.

An economy runs on Pure Education! The more educated you are, the richer you are!

:mad:
__________________
Some people feel the wealth of a nation is measured in BAs, MAs, and PhDs and that it as nothing to do with fives, tens and twenties...
A_J, the Stupid
 
busybody said:
Look what I found!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A DUMOH pollster who basically says

Dont defend the so called recovery, cause there isnt any

I know, he is a JEW, he is WHITE, he has no PhD.....so CURRY POON can attack him


..Mixed Message: Should Obama Stop Trying to Defend the Recovery?

Time.com – 2 hrs 32 mins ago
........


.Stanley Greenberg, the Democratic pollster who helped elect President Bill Clinton, South Africa's Nelson Mandela and Israel's Ehud Barak, says all of his clients have had the same, sometimes terrible, instinct: "They want to prove that their economic policies have worked."

In times of plenty, that gut feeling is right. The nation cheered the gangbusters growth under Ronald Reagan in 1984, and the mid-1990s Clinton economic boom. But when the economy is sour, politicians who litigate the past risk sounding tone-deaf to the troubles of the present. This is why Greenberg is now speaking up. He fears President Obama may make a huge mistake by trying to convince voters he saved the economy from a much worse fate. "No one is going to give you much credit for what you have done for this recovery," says Greenberg, who has been testing messages in focus groups and polls for Democrats to use in the coming election. "Saying the economy is starting to make progress is bad." (See why Washington has no plans to ride to the economic rescue.)

President Obama's own strategists agree - but only in part. New projections of tepid economic growth under 3%, and unemployment over 8.5%, have all but erased hopes that Obama can run for reelection as the guy who saved America from the worst economic crises since the Great Depression. It's not a convincing message when four out of five Americans still rate the economy as "poor." So Obama has shifted to a message of "winning the future," touting an "innovation" agenda. "The question is who has the vision to move the country forward," says Daniel Pfeiffer, the White House communications director.

But behind the scenes, there is a fierce debate in Democratic circles about just how much Obama should also be focused on explaining the recent past. As it now stands, the President's stump speech features a backward-looking message at its core. Obama trumpets "more than 2 million jobs in the private sector" that have been created in the last 15 months. At a recent speech in Ohio he dismissed May's bad jobs numbers as "bumps on the road to recovery." In Greenberg's estimation, this is an error on par with President Obama's midterm election pitch, which described the nation as a car that had just gotten out of a ditch that Republicans drove into in the first place. The metaphor didn't work, Greenberg explained in a recent memo, because "people thought they were still in the ditch."

Those close to Obama say Greenberg is drawing the wrong conclusions. "Nobody is hanging a mission accomplished sign on the economy," shoots back David Axelrod, the President's top message adviser who is now working on the reelection campaign. "Stan seems to feel that you can run for President and be President without putting things in context in any way." Axelrod has argued that a forward-looking message needs to include clear mentions of both the current successes of the President and the Republican approach that Obama believes helped create the current situation. Geoffrey Garin, a pollster for Senate Democrats who has recently conducted focus groups for Priorities USA, a new independent expenditure group that plans to support Obama in 2012, agrees. "'Recovery' is not the right word," Garin says. "But it is important to talk about the progress that is being made and the foundation that is being made for more progress." (See "What U.S. Economic Recovery? Five Destructive Myths.")

Implicit in Greenberg's theory is a mea culpa of sorts, an admission that he misunderstood the public mood in early 2010, when he felt the President's fortunes would be helped by modest economic improvement. "I still thought that the economy was going to kick in," he said.

But after polling and holding focus groups, Greenberg came to realize that the real concern over the economy dates further than the 2008 collapse, to an entire decade of economic stagnation for the middle class. Recovery from the financial crisis, even if it were happening faster, would not be enough. When Greenberg tested messages trumpeting the recent rebound, or blaming the economy on Republican mismanagement before 2008, the results were dismal, he says. Voters did not want to hear it. They responded more positively to messages about long-term fixes, like rebuilding the middle class and taking on China, or moving beyond the politics of blame.

Just how to calibrate that message will be a key early test for the Obama campaign. Obama has already offered several formulations, calling for "nation building here at home" in a recent primetime address on Afghanistan, and arguing that the Republicans spending plans amount to a "vision of our future that's deeply pessimistic." Obama strategists have already set their sights on the final months of the campaign, when they hope to make the election a choice between Obama and his Republican challenger, not a referendum on the last three years.

Republicans, meanwhile, are focused squarely on Obama's job creation record. "The President has failed" has become GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney's refrain. But Greenberg argues that such a strategy could backfire just as well on Romney. "If they make the election about 'Did we get the stimulus right?,' and we make the election about how to create jobs, we win that," Greenberg argues. "That could be a trap for them."
Click to expand...

RW lies, misinformation and distortion! INDEPENDENT Keynesian analysis PROVED IT (the stimulus) WORKED!
 
NeverEndingMe said:
the big question, how far are we from becoming the next Greece
Click to expand...

“I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.”
Barack Hussein Obama
Strasbourg, France

__________________
ROSE: I don't know what Barack Obama's worldview is.
BROKAW: No, I don't, either.
ROSE: I don't know how he really sees where China is.
BROKAW: We don't know a lot about Barack Obama and the universe of his thinking about foreign policy.
ROSE: I don't really know. And do we know anything about the people who are advising him?
BROKAW: Yeah, it's an interesting question.
ROSE: He is principally known through his autobiography and through very aspirational (sic) speeches.
BROKAW: Two of them! I don't know what books he's read.
ROSE: What do we know about the heroes of Barack Obama?
BROKAW: There's a lot about him we don't know.
Tom Brokaw and Charlie Rose, The Charlie Rose Show
October 30, 2008
 
kbate said:
So, the remaining economic question is:


When will the Federal Government institute a national Lottery in order to raise revenues?

They can state that all revenues will go to fund health care programs.
Click to expand...

gambling is illegal, unless sponsored by the state lol
 
as can be seen

once again

CURRY POON and Noted Crazed loon, UD are defending what even Hussein n Co

ISNT

Makes the HUSSEIN supporters (ok, ready for this) INSANE

Get it?

Hussein....Insane

Tee FUNNY Hee

No?

YES!















































:D
 
WOLF: Obamanomics is shovel-ready
The failure of Keynesian economics is no laughing matter, Mr. President
In 1932, President Hoover received a letter from a man in Illinois that read simply, “Vote for Roosevelt and make it unanimous.” Based on its recent floundering, it seems even the White House recognizes that Obamanomics has been a disaster. It’s nearly unanimous now.

When President Reagan entered office, America faced a deep recession with double-digit unemployment and inflation, plus dishearteningly long gas lines. Rather than wasting time blaming his predecessor, the Gipper went right to work unveiling Reaganomics - an embrace of the free market - which included four simple principles: (1) lower tax burden, (2) lower government spending, (3) lower regulatory burden, and (4) a strong dollar monetary policy.

The top income tax rate was reduced from a stifling 70 percent to a low of 28 percent. Total federal spending was reduced from 23.5 percent of gross domestic product to 21.2 percent. Deregulation ended disastrous price controls and curtailed the government’s micromanaging of private businesses. Disciplined money supply strengthened the dollar.

As Peter Ferrara, policy adviser to Reagan, has described, the results were beyond spectacular. Reaganomics unleashed an explosive growth of wealth and prosperity, the largest in the history of humankind. Some 20 million jobs were created. Unemployment dropped to 5.3 percent. The gross domestic product growth rate hit a high of 6.8 percent, and the total economy grew by nearly a third. Inflation dropped to 3.2 percent. Even the oil shortage was solved almost overnight.

Barack Obama is no Ronald Reagan.

President Obama entered office peddling the false hope that government can “spread the wealth.” This is as foolish as bucketing water from one end of a swimming pool to the other. At best you achieve nothing; in reality, the spilled water along the way leaves everybody worse off.

Obamanomics favors top-down compulsory cooperation over voluntary. It is the anti-Reaganomics. Mr. Obama has done the following: (1) raised taxes, (2) unleashed a wild orgy of spending, including his disastrous so-called “stimulus,” (3) dramatically increased regulations and even nationalized industries and businesses, and (4) printed money out of “quantitative easing” thin air.

The results were predictable. Since the Obama stimulus - a collection of “shovel-ready” projects promised to save the economy - was signed into law, America has lost 1.9 million jobs and unemployment has surpassed 9 percent. GDP growth remains anemic. Consumer confidence has tumbled. Gas prices were at $1.81 per gallon before Mr. Obama put his “boot on the neck” of suppliers, and now it’s more than doubled, to $3.81. We burn our food supply in our gas tanks, and grocery prices have skyrocketed - some staples by as much as 40 percent. Since the president signed his mortgage rescue plan, Americans have seen 3.82 million foreclosures. Most disturbingly, the majority of Americans are receiving some type of welfare.

Want to better understand Obamanomics? Look no further than “cash for clunkers,” Mr. Obama’s laughably misguided idea to use American’s wealth to, quite literally, destroy American’s wealth, to use taxpayers’ money to destroy taxpayers’ working automobiles. Despite the propaganda, these weren’t “clunkers” at all. I continue proudly to drive one myself. Edmonds.com estimated the cost per new car sold at $24,000. Some estimates are much higher. A year later, auto sales were at their worst in 27 years and Americans - low-income Americans in particular - are suffering a government-created shortage of low-priced cars. Still the Democrats claim that the clunkers program “has been successful beyond our wildest dreams.” The truth is, it was motivated by environmentalism, not economics. It reflects Mr. Obama’s arrogant belief that he knows better than you what type of car you should drive. Controlling your behavior is one wild dream, indeed.

Mr. Obama, abandoning any pretense of economic literacy, has placed the blame for unemployment squarely on America’s archenemy: the ATM. The jobless rate remains high, according to the president, because - it’s hard to make this stuff up - “when you go to a bank you use the ATM, you don’t go to a bank teller.” Other Democrats share his ignorance. Recently, Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. claimed that Apple’s iPad was “probably responsible for eliminating thousands of American jobs.” Mr. Jackson, an iPad owner himself, adds hypoc-risy to ignorance.

Mr. Obama, meet Ned Ludd. In the early 1800s, the Luddites - named for Ned Ludd, an alias used to conceal their leaders’ true identities - sabotaged factories for fear of new technology. Their mistake was a belief that jobs themselves are prosperity when, in fact, it’s the products and services of those jobs that create prosperity. The government could hire people to dig holes and other people to fill them back in, but America would be poorer for the wasted effort. In reality, new technologies, from the advent of the wheel to today’s nanotechnology - including the ATM and the iPad - increase efficiency, which frees people for more important endeavors. This is the precise mechanism that improves mankind’s standard of living.

And now, as Obamanomics continues to crumble, the president has made a stunning admission: ” ‘Shovel-ready’ was not as shovel-ready as we expected.” The line drew laughter from his friendly audience. This is not the first time his own supporters have been caught laughing at Obamanomics. Last week - before the Democratic National Committee, no less - the president made this wild claim: “Over the last 15 months, we’ve created over 2.1 million private-sector jobs.” That despite the record showing America has 1.9 million fewer jobs today than before his “stimulus.” According to the White House’s own transcript, what followed next was “laughter” (until later, that is, when Orwellian Ministry of Truth officials in the administration scrubbed the record and changed the transcript to read “applause”).


Americans are suffering, Mr. President, and it’s no laughing matter. It’s time to put Obamanomics where it belongs: on the trash heap of history. Got a shovel?

Dr. Milton R. Wolf, a Washington Times columnist, is a board-certified diagnostic radiologist and President Obama’s cousin.
 
vetteman said:
Reason and history is of no consequence to those bent on re-writing it.
Click to expand...

Which is why the Right Wing blames illegal immigration on the Left despite Reagan, Bush and McCain. Fuck history if people were educated they'd be democrats! Shit. . .defund teacher unions if people are educated they'll know!
 
vetteman said:
You need to pay attention, while all of the leftists here were calling for Bush's impeachment over the war, which he had total congressional authorization to conduct, I was suggesting he be impeached for failure to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed," in the matter of illegal immigration, which as we know is a constitutionally charged duty of the President.
Click to expand...

There was a serious call over Bush's impeachment? When? As I recall the left pretty thoroughly rejected those guys.

It's like with crazy ideas you have the people who thought 9/11 was an inside job and those people were so far and few between that you remember the names of the main two and she hasn't made a peep in over a year. Then there's the crazies who think Obama isn't an American. . .you don't tell them to STFU. Why is that?
 
vetteman said:
Because in our country, and apparently unknown to you, they have the same right to speak that you do.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Unless your the police you telling them to shut the fuck up has nothing to do with their rights. It has to do with you not associating with idiots. In the same way that the left did not associate (by large) with 9/11 was an inside job or Bush will invoke Martial Law to get a third term.

Integrity. Get some.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

RobDownSouth
Remember those dire predictions of a "Recession in 2023-2024"? The White House does!
Replies
0
Views
300
RobDownSouth
RobDownSouth
Counselor706
Joe Biden and the powerless presidency
Replies
5
Views
437
John_von_Neumann
John_von_Neumann
Ulaven_Demorte
New and Improved "Doom and Gloom™" Thread
2 3
Replies
51
Views
4K
IrezumiKiss
IrezumiKiss
K
Paul Krugman: "In Defense of Obama"
5 6 7
Replies
155
Views
9K
IrezumiKiss
IrezumiKiss
Ulaven_Demorte
About all of the minimum wage "Doom and Gloom"
2
Replies
30
Views
1K
bronzeage
bronzeage
Back
Top