Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-09-2009, 01:00 PM
 
77,907 posts, read 60,063,004 times
Reputation: 49253

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by floridasandy View Post
i believe that the people actually voted for change, but got more of the same in terms of the war(s). i would like to see a poll if americans would be willing to pay more to fund these wars......
as far as the VAT, i don't think any americans would support the VAT as an addition to the tax burden, even though i have heard that some members of congress feel that it would be a good way to pay for national healthcare.
There was very little difference between the two presidential candidates in this election. (Except for talking points to the base that they can ignore after the election). I voted for Obama but have to laugh at my starry eyed niece and her friends that voted for *change*...

Say <> Do
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-09-2009, 01:18 PM
 
28,455 posts, read 85,071,081 times
Reputation: 18726
Default While I understand that this is Business, Finance & Investing....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
There was very little difference between the two presidential candidates in this election. (Except for talking points to the base that they can ignore after the election). I voted for Obama but have to laugh at my starry eyed niece and her friends that voted for *change*...

Say <> Do

... I do feel that it is not at all correct that there "was very little difference" between the GOP and Dem presidential candidates. In fact there were MANY difference and clearly the level of support that Sen. McCain was able to garner was not enough to overcome those devoted to Sen Obama.

McCain would almost certainly have vetoed anything that was as covered in special appropriations as the rescue plan that passed, even I fear if that meant a much harsher down turn than we have seen.
Similarly, had Justice Souter tendered his resignation to McCain I think that we would be looking at another nominee from the Alito or Roberts mold.

This sorts of things WOULD HAVE A BIG IMPACT ON BUSINESS, FINANCE & INVESTING as the tone / tenor would be VERY different when it comes to many things HOWEVER, the shear lack of calmness that Sen McCain displayed in the face of the shocking developments close to the election with Wall Street imploding doomed him in the eyes of too many.

I do not wish to see a "rematch" but I am very concerned that MANY peopled who merely wanted a calm, collected President to make things less volatile is rapidly becoming a President that is piling on too much debt and extending the reach of government into far too many areas far too quickly...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2009, 07:56 PM
 
Location: Heartland Florida
9,324 posts, read 26,679,052 times
Reputation: 5038
Mc Cain and Obama are the same. They are both big government debt builders. Both supported bailouts and both lie to your face. The economy has already gone over the cliff and nobody will care till it hits the ground below.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2009, 04:40 AM
 
12,867 posts, read 14,871,134 times
Reputation: 4459
budget deficits drive up interest rates so we need to be prepared for inflation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2009, 04:45 AM
 
12,867 posts, read 14,871,134 times
Reputation: 4459
allan meltzer:

It doesn’t help that the administration’s stimulus program is an obstacle to sound policy. It will create jobs at the cost of an enormous increase in the government debt that has to be financed. And it does very little to increase productivity, which is the main engine of economic growth.

Indeed, big, heavily subsidized programs are rarely good for productivity. Better health care adds to the public’s sense of well-being, but it adds only a little to productivity. Subsidizing cleaner energy projects can produce jobs, but it doesn’t add much to national productivity. Meanwhile, higher carbon tax rates increase production costs and prices but do not increase productivity. All these actions can slow productive investment and the economy’s underlying growth rate, which, in turn, increases the inflation rate.

Some of my fellow economists, including many at the Fed, say that the big monetary goal is to avoid deflation. They point to the less than 1 percent decline in the consumer price index for the year ending in March as evidence that deflation is a threat. But this statistic is misleading: unstable food and energy prices may lower the price index for a few months, but deflation (or inflation) refers to the sustained rate of change of prices, not the price level. We should look instead at a less volatile price index, the gross domestic product deflator. In this year’s first quarter, it rose 2.9 percent — a sure sign of inflation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2009, 08:28 AM
 
77,907 posts, read 60,063,004 times
Reputation: 49253
Quote:
Originally Posted by floridasandy View Post
budget deficits drive up interest rates so we need to be prepared for inflation.
side note:

If you live in Florida, you should seriously go read up on what has gone on in your own state with regards to Citizens Insurance. If a hurricane hits in the next few years.... the state is financially toast.

Crist has stolen your credit card to gamble at the casino....and is doing so wrapped in the guise of "helping the little guy". What a piece....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2009, 08:54 AM
 
12,867 posts, read 14,871,134 times
Reputation: 4459
i am no fan of crist and he won't be getting my vote. florida paid huge money to warren buffett last year for "hurricane coverage protection".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2009, 09:35 AM
 
77,907 posts, read 60,063,004 times
Reputation: 49253
Quote:
Originally Posted by floridasandy View Post
i am no fan of crist and he won't be getting my vote. florida paid huge money to warren buffett last year for "hurricane coverage protection".
The money was basically to guarantee a $4billion fast cash infusion if needed.
Otherwise, had a hurricane hit....the state would really not be able to sell bonds (if at all) fast enough to pay the policy holders. Such is the beauty of government operated insurance when it runs afoul of politics.

Sad fact, but if another Andrew hits Citizens is going to have to pay out 40billion or so and they only have <10bil on hand.

Also, citizens rates are artificially low so everyone in FL continues to subsidize the southern part of the state and coastal properties like they've done for decades.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2009, 10:37 AM
 
12,867 posts, read 14,871,134 times
Reputation: 4459
all i know is that it sure worked out well for warren! citizens is increasing their premiums on their 1 million customers by 10%, but i agree that it certainly does not even begin to address the shortfall should a hurricane hit since florida has nearly $2 trillion in coastal property, more than any other state in the nation. the sad part is that, despite two active hurricane seasons, the value of insured coastal property increased 20 percent. why are they allowing building and rebuilding along the coast anyhow?
sorry about hijacking my own thread here......
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2009, 11:27 AM
 
77,907 posts, read 60,063,004 times
Reputation: 49253
Quote:
Originally Posted by floridasandy View Post
all i know is that it sure worked out well for warren! citizens is increasing their premiums on their 1 million customers by 10%, but i agree that it certainly does not even begin to address the shortfall should a hurricane hit since florida has nearly $2 trillion in coastal property, more than any other state in the nation. the sad part is that, despite two active hurricane seasons, the value of insured coastal property increased 20 percent. why are they allowing building and rebuilding along the coast anyhow?
sorry about hijacking my own thread here......
Seems like it fits with the theme of the thread though...

-Warren gambled and won that time. Other times he will lose.
-Citizens needs to raise rates 10% EACH YEAR for the next 5 years.
-Coastal building should be done with stricter codes. They passed these after Andrew and THEN RESCINDED them because it was "too expensive" to build places that way.

Best of luck and hopefully no hurricanes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top