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.
All the leading Investment Banks taken out either through bankruptcy or distressed sales. Significant companies like AIG and GM bankrupt. Middle Class losing trillions of dollars of wealth and for many their jobs.
Health industrials collapsing (which happened), especially those flush with forms of cash on Balance Sheet, was an over-reaction.
Any POTUS sees the latter reverse in 2009.
Whether you want to grant the recovery to Obama or not, I really not care. However, the recovery starting in 2009 was not a given. The US could have easily descended into a depression or extended recession. Once the capital markets start to break down and economic activity stalls then even otherwise healthy companies can be taken out.
The fact the free market guys like Paulson were pushing for government bailouts should tell you all you need to know about the severity of the situation by late 2008.
Your questions have little to do with the market but are more political.
You seem to take issue with my politics and who I support. That's fine.
I'm not a socialist or communist nor do I stand in the shade of them with terms like liberal or progressive or any other combination of bull crap. I don't wave the Mexican flag. I don't support giving money to terrorists or giving concessions to Cuba or So. American Dictators or Iranian religious fanatics, with nothing in return.
I don't support apologizing for America or appeasement in foreign policy.
I'm against weakening the country and making it less as a means to make it better. I'm against transforming the country through anarchy as an means to remodel it into some leftist utopia, based on a failed fantasy, that has never been successful or prosperous.
I support border security and it includes a wall and the idea that citizens should have more rights than non citizens and all politicians should support that too, IMO, because no country will survive without the trust of the citizen.
The rooster crows at the first light of sunup. Its been that way all my life. If people don't like it they can stay in bed or genocide the rooster. I wouldn't have gotten out of bed to vote for anyone in the GOP until Trump ran with the agenda I liked. Is that clear ?
Thank you for the transparency! Not much we haven't all heard before, particularly from the more conservative/Trump side of the divide, but thanks for the effort in any case...
When discussing politics, in person or in this forum, I spend most of my time pointing at how two people can see the same thing and draw two entirely different conclusions about that same thing. Your reply here is a perfect example of how different perspectives (resulting from bias, personality, upbringing, understanding) will lead you to view the world and what is going on around you very differently than I do, and so we have the great difference in perspective that divides America.
Then I go on to note that no exchange of facts, reason or logic makes a bit of difference in terms of changing anyone's perspective, forever begging the question, "why bother?" Hence as well, my Cement Theory.
I've got a little more time before signing off this morning, however, and you seem accepting of further exchange, so I'm going to take your comments one-by-one and point out how I don't agree, don't share your perspective, and best I can explain why...
Your questions have little to do with the market but are more political.
You seem to take issue with my politics and who I support. That's fine.
Thought it was you who was noting the stock market highs and giving Trump credit for them. Isn't that where and how you began the connection between the market and politics? And isn't that what I have been pointing out is mistaken on your part and others commenting here who want to give Trump credit for all that?
I "take issue" with politics or views about politics that I think are based on faulty premise, misguided or actually wrong for America in general, and of course "that's fine" that people be allowed to disagree about politics, or else what? Disagreement is not allowed? That's not the American way in my opinion either.
What I really "take issue" with is stubborn repetition of "opinion" that really makes no sense all considered, misinformed opinion, that only tends to generate more misguided opinion and people who stand in the way of progress. Even worse, have us going backwards. Even more a problem is the inability (or unwillingness) to consider what facts, reason and logic might intelligently determine the right or wrong of these opinions, because ultimately, we can't all think so differently and all be right!
We disagree? Yes, fine. Why we disagree, maybe not so fine...
I'm not a socialist or communist nor do I stand in the shade of them with terms like liberal or progressive or any other combination of bull crap.
I am not a socialist or communist either. I am also not a conservative by most measures if any...
Here again, however, invoking these terms already establishes a clear bias and misunderstanding about what we're debating here in America versus what is socialism and what is communism. That's a common tactic among conservatives who really don't understand as much as they need to about our differences.
You "stand in the shade" of that bias and misunderstanding. More like deep darkness if you ask me, but how to bring light to any of this for you is probably not possible, because it seems you are most likely to dismiss any different explanation as "bull crap." That sort of rhetoric tends to send a strong signal that further discussion has about as much chance as all exchange in this forum that goes nowhere...
Maybe I'll do as you do to demonstrate a point. Say I take all you describe as your opinion and start by explaining I'm not a racist or a fascist. That work any better for you than you explaining in reply to me that you're not a socialist or communist?
PS: I'm not a sexist or a racist or a wife-beater either...
See how those intros are "loaded" and either misinformed about what these terms mean or purposely insulting regardless?
Thought it was you who was noting the stock market highs and giving Trump credit for them. Isn't that where and how you began the connection between the market and politics?
If the President's policies are not partly responsible for the overall state and health of the U.S. economy, then what is his job actually? Why do we even elect a President?
If that were the case, then I could care less about who is President to be honest. lol.
I don't wave the Mexican flag. I don't support giving money to terrorists or...
with nothing in return.
I don't wave the Mexican flag either!!! And we're just getting weird as we explain we don't support giving money to terrorists...
I do, however, have good friends who are Hispanic Americans, and I have had much experience with Hispanic Americans, enough to respect their love of country, where they are from and where they live now. What's wrong with that? My parents happen to be immigrants too. Good Americans but also with pride about the country they knew as home when they were children, the culture they grew up in.
Is that a bad thing or not American far as you are concerned? Heaven forbid we see a flag waving in America that is not American?
I once saw an opening to a rodeo that included people on horses carrying all the flags that once flew over California, from countries where a lot of American immigrants once considered home. Is that offensive to you? And we wonder why so many conservatives seem to be intolerant blowhards about such things?
Sure seems like it from reading your comments, and so begins that divide of perspective that makes so many conservatives, Trump and his supporters seem very intolerant of those around them they don't understand, because they are different; color, ethnicity, language, culture, perspective...
There is a term for that and it's a negative term that seems to apply no matter how hard many conservatives and Trump supporters try to deny it. Easy to understand, however, because they can't see it in themselves even when making themselves all too obvious with the words they use to explain themselves.
"With nothing in return" is also very interesting!
Are you okay to wave the Mexican flag and give money to terrorists if you DO get something in return? That the "bottom line" far as you are concerned?
Not that you are alone here if we really do look at global politics. Take our support of the Shah of Iran, Saddam Hussein, the rulers of Saudi Arabia...
We're against all things we consider anti-American, undemocratic, until or unless we get something in return...
If the President's policies are not partly responsible for the overall state and health of the U.S. economy, then what is his job actually? Why do we even elect a President?
If that were the case, then I could care less about who is President to be honest. lol.
Good question...
The POTUS, with Congress of course, can and do set policies that can and will affect what happens in our country and economy to more or less an extent over time. Yes of course, but when people don't understand how these policies are actually affecting us -- when, where and how -- and actually misapplying credit where none is due, then we've got a serious problem. That sort of confusion is what leads people to draw incorrect conclusions about what is happening around them and who should get credit (or not).
At a minimum, forgetting about all that DOES actually determine the state of our nation and economy, with an ongoing $20 trillion dollar per year economy always in motion, intermixed with the global economy, to suggest that Trump is a factor of much significance in only his first year is simply "dumb struck" with the same sort of nonsense that seems to inspire too many Trump supporters. "Wishful thinking" at best, but still simply wrong...
What the POTUS does (or doesn't) has much to do about many things, including a significant influence when appointing Supreme Court justices, for example. There is much reason "to care less about who is President." Even what they say (or Tweet) has much to do with representing who we are as Americans. Not sure that's the entire job description, but no doubt the job of POTUS is far beyond what you seem to think it is.
The limits of what a POTUS can do are not what many Americans seem to believe as well. Thank goodness for that as now we've got someone like Trump in the Oval office. Thank goodness we've got 535 other federal government representatives involved, not to mention those at the state and local levels who are also able to resist what wrongs Trump and his supporters continue to promote as "making America great again."
Mind numbing!
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.
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.
