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

[NeverEndingMe]

obama is awesome! obama is the first president to declare war on the middle class

President Barack Obama's Complete List of Historic Firsts [Updated]

Yes, he's historic, alright.

• First President to Preside Over a Cut to the Credit Rating of the United States Government

• First President to Violate the War Powers Act

• First President to Orchestrate the Sale of Murder Weapons to Mexican Drug Cartels

• First President to be Held in Contempt of Court for Illegally Obstructing Oil Drilling in the Gulf of Mexico

• First President to Defy a Federal Judge's Court Order to Cease Implementing the 'Health Care Reform' Law

• First President to Require All Americans to Purchase a Product From a Third Party

• First President to Spend a Trillion Dollars on 'Shovel-Ready' Jobs -- and Later Admit There Was No Such Thing as Shovel-Ready Jobs

• First President to Abrogate Bankruptcy Law to Turn Over Control of Companies to His Union Supporters

• First President to Bypass Congress and Implement the DREAM Act Through Executive Fiat

• First President to "Order a Secret Amnesty Program that Stopped the Deportations of Illegal Immigrants Across the U.S., Including Those With Criminal Convictions"

• First President to Demand a Company Hand Over $20 Billion to One of His Political Appointees

• First President to Terminate America's Ability to Put a Man into Space.

• First President to Encourage Racial Discrimination and Intimidation at Polling Places

• First President to Have a Law Signed By an 'Auto-pen' Without Being "Present"

• First President to Arbitrarily Declare an Existing Law Unconstitutional and Refuse to Enforce It

• First President to Threaten Insurance Companies if they Publicly Speak out on the Reasons for their Rate Increases

• First President to Tell a Major Manufacturing Company In Which State They Are Allowed to Locate a Factory

• First President to File Lawsuits Against the States He Swore an Oath to Protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN, etc.)

• First President to Withdraw an Existing Coal Permit That Had Been Properly Issued Years Ago

• First President to Fire an Inspector General of Americorps for Catching One of His Friends in a Corruption Case

• First President to Propose an Executive Order Demanding Companies Disclose Their Political Contributions to Bid on Government Contracts

• First President to Golf 73 Separate Times in His First Two-and-a-Half Years in Office

But remember: he will not rest until all Americans have jobs, affordable homes, green-energy vehicles, and the environment is repaired, etc., etc., etc.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

July 25, 2011
Is Your IRA Going To Be Raided?
By Monty Pelerin

The notion of government raiding personal retirement accounts for funds may seem extreme. Perhaps it shouldn't. Other governments have done it. Argentina did in 2008. Ireland has indicated it might. The worsening financial crisis may eventually move other countries in that direction.

Surely the US would never do so.

Actually, there is little basis for assuming they would not and factual evidence they would. Here are three good reasons to believe they would:

Financial Ratios The US financial ratios are arguably as bad as the weakest countries in Europe. Unlike Europe, the US government has shown no willingness to meaningfully cut government spending and/or balance the budget. Europe has signaled austerity programs, although time will determine whether they adhere to such programs.
Rule of Law All modern governments believe they are above the law. They justify violation of the law on the grounds it is necessary for the "good of the nation." The US government has frequently demonstrated that property rights should not stand in the way of public policy. Abuses of eminent domain are numerous. The automotive bailout was a flagrant example. Not only was the bailout without legal precedent, but US bankruptcy law was violated in order to reward unions at the expense of bondholders.
Behavior Pattern The US government has a despicable record with regard to honoring retirement obligations. The government raided the Social Security trust fund so that politicians could spend at higher levels. That continuing raid put Social Security in a liquidity crisis that should not have occurred for another couple of decades. President Clinton and Congress reneged on the promise that Social Security benefits would never be taxed. Now Treasury Secretary Geithner routinely raids public pension plans in order to allow government to continue spending.
Most politicians in the US believe (or behave as if they believe) they can continue to kick the spending can further down the road. Apparently many believe the spending/debt problem will somehow magically go away or at least metastasize after they have left government. Unfortunately, the problem is not going away and will get much worse unless political courage and will is found to enact substantial spending cuts. These cuts must be larger than numbers discussed in current political discussions.

What About The Debt Ceiling?

The debt ceiling problem will eventually be resolved with an increase in the ceiling. Unfortunately, that solves nothing, as previously discussed. The problem is not debt; it is spending.

Raising the ceiling does not mean that markets will provide funds at interest rates acceptable to the government or its financial condition. In my opinion, QE2 was never expected to stimulate the economy. It was a holding action to protect government from the bond vigilantes who might have refused to purchase government debt at current interest rates.

Some politicians might have naively believed that the economy would begin to grow during the six-month QE2 period. Instead, the economy deteriorated. QE3 or QE10 will not solve underlying economic problems. Reductions in spending and regulatory uncertainty are necessary. Companies will not hire or invest when they cannot determine future costs and taxes.

When the ceiling is increased, government will be able to lawfully issue new debt. Depending upon the market's reception, three outcomes are possible:

There will be enough buyers in traditional credit markets to absorb the debt at "reasonable" interest rates.
The Fed will institute QE3.
A combination of 1 and 2 will be necessary.
My guess is that number 3 will be required. There will be demand at reasonable interest rates, but probably not enough to meet government requirements. The amounts required are truly enormous. For example, in August the financing required is about $600 billion -- about $130 billion of new debt and almost $500 billion of debt rollovers (see detail). Subsequent months are comparable. Credit markets are unlikely to be confident or deep enough to provide the this level of funding for long.

Why Raid IRAs?

The simple answer was provided by famed bank robber Willie Sutton: "That is where the money is."

Total market capitalization of the US stock market is about $16 trillion and 40% of that is estimated to reside in IRAs and 401Ks. They are big, visible, vulnerable, and mostly immobile targets.

This $6 trillion, if it were grabbed in some fashion, would satisfy the next 4-6 years of government deficits. Whatever can be used from IRAs lessens the amounts needed from sources 1 and 2 above.

Before proceeding, it should be noted that the term "IRA" as generally used in this article generally refers to Individual Retirement Accounts and self-directed retirement accounts such as 401Ks. Many of the comments pertain to both even though the IRA abbreviation is used.

How Might Government Go After This Money?

There are innumerable ways. Here is some speculation regarding what might happen.

It is unlikely that government confiscates IRA funds, at least directly. That is likely too big a step, at least as a first move. More likely, government mandates that a percentage of IRA funds be invested in Treasury securities. The percentage would start out small and then likely increase as government insolvency worsened.

Let's imagine a scenario. After proper citizen conditioning, the government would require that all IRAs must be at least 20% invested in Treasuries. The rationale would be that we must all do our share in assisting the country out of its economic hardship. Those with IRAs certainly are better off than those without. Therefore it is only fair that they invest in the future of their country.

The reason to enact such legislation is that markets are driving up the costs of borrowing for the government. By forcing investments from existing IRA funds, the government achieves two objectives:

It reduces the amounts necessary to raise in capital markets and/or
It reduces the amount of new quantitative easing necessary.
Although unnecessary, a special series of Treasury bonds called "Patriot Bonds" could be created. These bonds would be the only ones that counted for IRAs and could have lower interest rates than traditional Treasuries. If so, you would be coerced into funding the government by purchasing bonds for more than how the market values them. But, after all, you are a patriot and one of the "winners in life's lottery." So it is the least you can do.

Over time the required percentage would be raised to, say, 40 or 60 or even 100% as financial conditions worsen. Finally the government defaults, making whatever portion of your IRA represented by government securities worthless.

In effect, that part of your IRA has been confiscated by government.

Is This Possible?

Those who believe our government is too honorable to raid private retirement accounts had better wake up! The seriously dangerous and wounded animal we know as government is fighting for its survival. It will do anything short of dying, reducing spending, or revealing itself as the Ponzi scheme it truly is.

Your notions of integrity, law, and morality do not apply to this animal. The biggest, meanest man in town is trying to escape death and will use whatever means possible. Rightly or wrongly, he believes you are his antidote and he is going after whatever he can get.

One hurdle to preventing government from taking such action might be the stock market. The shift in asset allocations required in retirement accounts would presumably be detrimental to the stock market. Whether it would crash or not is moot. Any such action would certainly reduce its value, which might be the best protection retirees have.

Unless government spending is reduced to the point that new debt grows slower than GDP, most retirement accounts will diminish dramatically. This conclusion is independent of whether government raids your IRA account. Hyperinflation will eventually result from continued quantitative easing (printing of money). That will destroy most savings and all fixed income obligations like bonds and pensions whether these funds are in or out of IRA accounts.

Things are going to get ugly. Prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/is_your_ira_going_to_be_raided.html

 

[busybody..]

Reid and REPOZ had a deal

Obama killed it

HE WANTS TO DESTROY AMERICA!

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

obama is awesome! obama is the first president to declare war on the middle class

Kinetic action against the wealthy with acceptable collateral damage...

 

[busybody..]

Where did the money go?

Look at this

and

WORRY

http://www.slate.com/id/2299845/

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

July 25, 2011
Is Your IRA Going To Be Raided?
By Monty Pelerin



http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/is_your_ira_going_to_be_raided.html

OMG!
The Gubmint is gonna steal all your moneys!
Quick!
Cash in your IRA!
Buy more gold!

 

[busybody..]

OMG!
I must PROTECT the NIGGER

I like it on the PLANTATION!

Hey, anyone seen my DOUGH!

NUT?:

No,

we havent!

 

[NeverEndingMe]

Kinetic action against the wealthy with acceptable collateral damage...

when will people in government learn the basic economic principle...that one should only spend what he or she takes in?

that revenue must equal expenses (in the case of government)

clearly obama things that government should spend double what they take in revenue.

government doesn't have a lack revenue issue; government has a spending issue

 

[busybody..]

MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY: President Obama Says “No” To A Bipartisan Debt Plan. “It appears the three key Congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle reached a tentative agreement yesterday and the President blew it up.”

 

[mercury14]

July 25, 2011
Is Your IRA Going To Be Raided?
By Monty Pelerin



http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/is_your_ira_going_to_be_raided.html

It's not possible to be more paranoid.

 

[mercury14]

The people who are in control of your messaging content...

Those who seek to destroy that which was.

Let me get this straight. You spam your message content from the american thinker and other trashcan blogs all day, every day. Then you attack people for not thinking - even when they've never (that I can recall) shown that they're just repeating someone else's message?

You know, just because someone has the same thoughts as someone else, it doesn't mean they let other people think for them. But when you spend your time C&Ping other people's thoughts without even adding your own much of the time, guess what that means?

Hypocrite.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

......

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

When we quote those C&Ps, they are echoing what we think.

When you fail to quote anyone, we understand that it is because you are embarrassed over who tells you how to think, and who you agree with.

We're just not ashamed...

The Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin reports that President Obama nixed a bipartisan debt agreement that was forged by leaders of the House and Senate over the weekend. If Jen's sources are correct, this would be a genuine political jaw-dropper:


A Republican aide e-mails me: “The Speaker, Sen. Reid and Sen. McConnell all agreed on the general framework of a two-part plan. A short-term increase (with cuts greater than the increase), combined with a committee to find long-term savings before the rest of the increase would be considered. Sen. Reid took the bipartisan plan to the White House and the President said no.”

If this is accurate the president is playing with fire. By halting a bipartisan deal he imperils the country’s finances and can rightly be accused of putting partisanship above all else. The ONLY reason to reject a short-term, two-step deal embraced by both the House and Senate is to avoid another approval-killing face-off for President Obama before the election. Next to pulling troops out of Afghanistan to fit the election calendar, this is the most irresponsible and shameful move of his presidency.


According to this account, with the clock ticking down to 0:00, the President of the United States pulled the rug out from under a bipartisan proposal to address the debt crisis. His administration has been arguing -- correctly -- that a partial default and/or credit downgrade could trigger a financial "armageddon" for the country. Why in the world would Obama threaten to veto a solution that averts that fate, and does so with broad cross-party agreement? I can think of two reasons: Because a thumbnail sketch of the thwarted deal suggests it would (a) decline to raise taxes, and (b) involve a legislative two-step that revives the sticky issue during next year's election season. In other words, the Boehner/Reid gambit would violate the president's ideological obsession with tax "fairness," and would inject another inconvenient narrative into his re-election campaign. These strike me as stunningly ideological and myopic justifications for scotching the first consensus deal to arise on this issue. Again, if this report is accurate, President Obama has positioned himself all alone in the driver's seat of an 18-wheeler speeding toward a cliff. He's offered no plan of his own, he's undermined a developing plan by shifting his demands late in the game, and he's rejected two separate proposals offered by Congress. Jen concludes that Obama is "playing with fire." Indeed. If his intransigence and double-dealing prevents a deal, he could singlehandedly ignite a financial brush fire that decimates the economy and burns his re-election campaign to the ground.

In public, the White House says the president would sign any bipartisan agreement that emerges from Congress. In private, the president is threatening to do the opposite. Congress should pass the deal its leaders crafted, and call Obama's bluff. An exasperated John Boehner rebuked the president for his reckless political posturing on Fox News Sunday:





Speaking of Obama's 2012 fortunes, where is the president today? Giving a speech to La Raza.


UPDATE - New Hampshire Senator Kelly Ayotte is tweeting about this story, lending it additional credence -- and Jamie Dupree of the Atlanta Journal Constitution says his sources confirm Rubin's scoop:


The agreement involved Speaker Boehner, Senate Majority Leader Reid and Senate GOP Leader McConnell - in fact, staffers from Reid and McConnell's offices were working on the legislative language together on Sunday. But when Reid took the bipartisan/bicameral plan down to the White House, it was rejected by the President. "The Speaker, Sen. Reid and Sen. McConnell all agreed on the general framework of a two-part plan," a senior Republican aide on Capitol Hill told me. Another senior Republican aide in a different office and a GOP lawmaker confirmed the story as well.



FLASHBACK - President Obama, almost two weeks ago:


"I have shown enormous willingness to compromise and have taken huge heat for it," he said, "but my responsibility is to the American people and there comes a point when I need to say, 'Enough.'...This may bring my presidency down, but I will not yield on this,” he said.


UPDATE II - A senior GOP aide emails me with yet another confirmation of Rubin's initial report:


“Sen. Reid actually agreed with Speaker Boehner and Sen. McConnell on the general framework of a two-part plan that included no tax increases. A short-term increase (with cuts greater than the increase), combined with a committee to find long-term savings before the rest of the increase would be considered. Sen. Reid took the bipartisan proposal to the White House and the President said no.”


This looks terrible for the president. Byron York has more details.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2011/07/25/report_obama_rejects_bipartisan_debt_deal

 

[Sean Renaud]

Ladies and gentlemen the ideal conservative.

When we quote those C&Ps, they are echoing what we think.

When you fail to quote anyone, we understand that it is because you are embarrassed over who tells you how to think, and who you agree with.

We're just not ashamed...

Clearly not yet able to either think for itself nor the self awareness to at least be ashamed at the lack of independent thought and being just part of the collective.

http://www.gifsoup.com/imager.php?id=2868363&t=o GIFSoup

Man we gotta get some actual liberals around here and ones that throw softballs so I don't feel so guilty watching what passes for conservative thought getting ripped to bloody shred without any ripping on the other end. Why don't we have a global warming fanatic or maybe an actual commie?

 

[mercury14]

When we quote those C&Ps, they are echoing what we think.

When you fail to quote anyone, we understand that it is because you are embarrassed over who tells you how to think, and who you agree with.

We're just not ashamed...

Are you even listening to the shit you're saying??

1) If I quote someone else's opinion I'm guilty of parroting someone else's opinion.

2) And if I give my own opinion I'm "guilty" of not posting other people's opinions.



No, the reality is that I'm a free thinker. I read ZERO partisan blogs and I get my news from a range of outlets from across the political spectrum and make up my own mind. When I provide links they're never from some partisan opinion site (right or left wing). You just can't deal with the fact that some people can think for themselves.

All you have are these boring character assassination attempts. The truth is, you stutter and stammer when someone counters your argument and backs it with facts. You're routinely COMPLETELY disarmed whenever facts show that the sewage you drink off the NRO's website is inaccurate. You just... vanish and pretend like facts don't exist.

We're just not ashamed...

You should be. You get your information from extremist sources that seek to propagandize, not inform. That's a mentally-deficient thing to do.

 

[RightField]

Clearly not yet able to either think for itself nor the self awareness to at least be ashamed at the lack of independent thought and being just part of the collective.

You don't believe that we think, that we just repeat we hear on the radio? My esteemed colleague Mr. AJ has a lifetime of valuable experience which he shares with you and others here from time to time including a long and difficult transition from unthinking and emotionally-driven liberal to conservative/libertarian. He regularly shares his thoughts and the reasons and justifications for his change in philosophy. He easily quotes well known philosophers and relates the approporiate lesson the the issue or challenge du jour. Virtually every post is clearly articulated and to the point.

You say he is just parroting conservative media? That's laughable. You should thank him for sharing his wisdom with you.

 

[eyer]

U.S. Government Loses $1.3 Billion After Selling Chrysler Shares

The U.S. government has sold its shares in Chrysler to Italian automaker Fiat SpA, according to Fox News. The news source reports that this sale has resulted in the government losing an estimated $1.3 billion in taxpayer dollars.

A recent report from the White House National Economic Council indicates that the government will lose an estimated $14 billion from the bailout of the auto industry, according to The New York Times. The newspaper reports that the government is also expected to begin selling its remaining 26 percent of General Motors, even though the sale will most likely result in an additional loss of revenue.

http://www.personalliberty.com/news...lion-after-selling-chrysler-shares-800558429/



American taxpayers have already spent more than $13 billion bailing out Chrysler. The Obama administration already forgave more than $4 billion of that debt when the company filed for bankruptcy in 2009. Taxpayers are never getting that money back. But how is Chrysler now paying off the rest of the $7.6 billion they owe the Treasury Department?

The Obama administration’s bailout agreement with Fiat gave the Italian car company a “Incremental Call Option” that allows it to buy up to 16% of Chrysler stock at a reduced price. But in order to exercise the option, Fiat had to first pay back at least $3.5 billion of its loan to the Treasury Department. But Fiat was having trouble getting private banks to lend it the money. Enter Obama Energy Secretary Steven Chu who has signaled that he will approve a fuel-efficient vehicle loan to Chrysler for … wait for it … $3.5 billion.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/u-s-government-sells-chrysler-stake-losses-higher-than-reported/

 

[mercury14]

You don't believe that we think, that we just repeat we hear on the radio? My esteemed colleague Mr. AJ has a lifetime of valuable experience which he shares with you and others here from time to time including a long and difficult transition from unthinking and emotionally-driven liberal to conservative/libertarian. He regularly shares his thoughts and the reasons and justifications for his change in philosophy. He easily quotes well known philosophers and relates the approporiate lesson the the issue or challenge du jour. Virtually every post is clearly articulated and to the point.

You say he is just parroting conservative media? That's laughable. You should thank him for sharing his wisdom with you.

Nope, you must be thinking of a different AJ. This one spams conservative media all day long, just like you do. Most of the time he doesn't even add his own thoughts, he just parrots, C&Ping articles in their entirety.

Both of you willfully choose to get your information from propaganda and it's resulted in both of you being chronically and severely misinformed on an enormous range of topics. Then when you're shown facts, you pretend they don't exist.

Case in point - this just happened. AJ accuses Obama of hacking Medicare reimbursement from doctors and cruelly cutting $500 billion out of the program - because that's what the conservative blogosphere told him to think. He was shown that this was factually not the case. I gave links and facts. Does he change his mind though? Nope - even though he has no rebuttal to the facts I gave, he still clings to what the NRO tells him to believe.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

My esteemed colleague Mr. AJ has a lifetime of valuable experience which he shares with you and others here from time to time including a long and difficult transition from unthinking and emotionally-driven liberal to conservative/libertarian. He regularly shares his thoughts and the reasons and justifications for his change in philosophy. He easily quotes well known philosophers and relates the approporiate lesson the the issue or challenge du jour. Virtually every post is clearly articulated and to the point.

You say he is just parroting conservative media? That's laughable. You should thank him for sharing his wisdom with you.

http://www.meh.ro/original/2010_03/meh.ro3692.jpg

 

[NeverEndingMe]

Sean Renaud believe that welfare is a valid career choice

You don't believe that we think, that we just repeat we hear on the radio? My esteemed colleague Mr. AJ has a lifetime of valuable experience which he shares with you and others here from time to time including a long and difficult transition from unthinking and emotionally-driven liberal to conservative/libertarian. He regularly shares his thoughts and the reasons and justifications for his change in philosophy. He easily quotes well known philosophers and relates the approporiate lesson the the issue or challenge du jour. Virtually every post is clearly articulated and to the point.

You say he is just parroting conservative media? That's laughable. You should thank him for sharing his wisdom with you.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

be a good boy, and run back to the collective for more free uncle obama juice

Nope, you must be thinking of a different AJ. This one spams conservative media all day long, just like you do. Most of the time he doesn't even add his own thoughts, he just parrots, C&Ping articles in their entirety.

Both of you willfully choose to get your information from propaganda and it's resulted in both of you being chronically and severely misinformed on an enormous range of topics. Then when you're shown facts, you pretend they don't exist.

Case in point - this just happened. AJ accuses Obama of hacking Medicare reimbursement from doctors and cruelly cutting $500 billion out of the program - because that's what the conservative blogosphere told him to think. He was shown that this was factually not the case. I gave links and facts. Does he change his mind though? Nope - even though he has no rebuttal to the facts I gave, he still clings to what the NRO tells him to believe.

 

[mercury14]

Anyone not have Jen's alts on iggy?

NeverEndingMe
This message is hidden because NeverEndingMe is on your ignore list.
View Post Unread Today, 05:52 PM
Remove user from ignore list
NeverEndingMe
This message is hidden because NeverEndingMe is on your ignore list.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

God you are stupid

Nope, you must be thinking of a different AJ. This one spams conservative media all day long, just like you do. Most of the time he doesn't even add his own thoughts, he just parrots, C&Ping articles in their entirety.

Both of you willfully choose to get your information from propaganda and it's resulted in both of you being chronically and severely misinformed on an enormous range of topics. Then when you're shown facts, you pretend they don't exist.

Case in point - this just happened. AJ accuses Obama of hacking Medicare reimbursement from doctors and cruelly cutting $500 billion out of the program - because that's what the conservative blogosphere told him to think. He was shown that this was factually not the case. I gave links and facts. Does he change his mind though? Nope - even though he has no rebuttal to the facts I gave, he still clings to what the NRO tells him to believe.

 

[richard_daily]

OMG!
The Gubmint is gonna steal all your moneys!
Quick!
Cash in your IRA!
Buy more gold!

What kind of doofuses do you think are buying gold right now?

 

[NeverEndingMe]

What kind of doofuses do you think are buying gold right now?

clearly what we need is more spending, right! just like in your r.l. you go out and max every credit card you have, then go out and apply for 10 more credit cards with the goal of maxing the credit cards out...right?

clearly, obama has created a massive cluster fuck