Of the millions of Americans who watched President Obama get reelected, one group above all others should be cheering the loudest. And which group is that? Poor people? No. The middle class? No. Blacks? No. Try this on for size – rich people. That’s right, the richest of the rich. The super rich should be doing back flips right now. Despite all the ridiculous crap from conservatives, the rich have done pretty damn good during these past four years that President Obama has been in office. In fact, the rich are doing better now than ever before. Rich people are making more money than even during the best days of President George W. Bush’s two terms. I know, stats bore a lot of people. But some figures can’t be ignored. Consider recent stats that show the top one-percent made a wopping 93 percent of all income gains in the United States from 2009-2010. Read that again and then try to make a case that the American economic system isn’t rigged. It doesn’t matter where you stand politically . These figures should be both frightening and embarrassing. You would think they were plucked out of the time of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette not the industrialized nation in the 21st Century.
This dose of reality would be ugly enough to look at, without also having to listen to a constant barrage of lies and misinformation put out by defenders of the status quo. Why do we have to listen to these leeches squawk about the current system supposedly penalizing those who benefit the most. Of course, not all rich people are conservatives. Not all rich people oppose President Obama. To the contrary, he gets remarkably enthusiastic support among some of America’s economic elite. How the hell do you think he got reelected? Not everyone listens to, watches, and believes the Fox news crap. But to listen to many rich people in America or Pundits,Fox News, and talk radio rich guys that lead you to believe we’re headed on the path towards socialism. Since the facts clearly demonstrate otherwise, there’s only one thing left to say. Here’s a message to rich concervative republicans who are upset with President Obama and his economic policies: Shut the ef up and count your earnings.
Dalla------------------ 84 Show winner 88 LT1
[This message has been edited by bonzo (edited 03-17-2013).]
IP: Logged
11:38 PM
Mar 17th, 2013
rinselberg Member
Posts: 16118 From: Sunnyvale, CA (USA) Registered: Mar 2010
President Bush said he's looking forward to signing $170 billion economic stimulus package passed last week by Congress. Consumers could see tax rebate checks by May
IP: Logged
07:58 PM
Apr 6th, 2013
fierobear Member
Posts: 27083 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
Originally posted by bonzo: Since the facts clearly demonstrate otherwise, there’s only one thing left to say. Here’s a message to rich concervative republicans who are upset with President Obama and his economic policies: Shut the ef up and count your earnings.
Dalla
I don't think you get it. The middle class has shrunk considerably, while the wealthy liberals like Soros, Buffet, Gates, etc... increase their wealth.
Republicans support the ability for all Americans to achieve wealth through hard work. The aristocratic liberal Democrats support the ability to prevent the middle class from ever attaining their wealth through increased regulation, taxes, etc.
So maybe you need to shut the "ef" up?
IP: Logged
06:49 PM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
You fail at politics and math. The sequester was NOT a spending cut. It reduced the amount spending was to be INCREASED. Spending still went UP, not down, but the increase was less than originally planned.
[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 05-01-2013).]
IP: Logged
08:51 PM
Jun 25th, 2013
fierobear Member
Posts: 27083 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
President Bush said he's looking forward to signing $170 billion economic stimulus package passed last week by Congress. Consumers could see tax rebate checks by May
Which has absolutley nothing to do with whether the stimulus was success or failure unless one is just all wrapped up with a "don't look here--look over there" type mentality.
Which has absolutley nothing to do with whether the stimulus was success or failure unless one is just all wrapped up with a "don't look here--look over there" type mentality.
yes the right never does look at their own record ether in the long or short term I guess when their record is so amazingly poor they need the BIG LIE as they don't have much else
IP: Logged
12:05 PM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27083 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
Marc Faber was characteristically pessimistic during his interview with Sprott Money late last month.
“I don’t think they will end QE. I rather think they will have to increase it, because as you print money or as you purchase assets, from a central banking point of view, it loses its impact over time. In order to keep the impact going, you have to essentially increase it. I believe that the dovish members of the Fed will print more money. Especially after the resignation of Mr. Bernanke early next year, when he will be replaced, there will be even more dovish members.”
Bernanke will retire in January 2014. Former White House economic adviser Lawrence Summers and Federal Reserve vice chair Janet Yellen, a strong dove, are considered the leading contenders.
A check through Google suggests the media, both large and small, seem to overwhelmingly favor Yellen. “Her notable achievement,” explains Steve Chapman in Reason magazine, “has been to assess the dangers faced by the Fed and to distinguish the real from the bogus. Since the financial meltdown of 2008, Bernanke’s critics have been haunted by the specter of inflation. Yellen has seen it for the illusion it is.”
Faber, naturally, is no Janet Yellen fan. “As far as the eye can see, interest rates under Bernanke will stay at zero and below,” he said during an interview with Kitco News in 2010. “Janet Yellen, another totally ignorant economist removed from any reality, said herself six months ago, ‘If I could implement interest rates below zero, I would do it.’ So now you know what the policy in the U.S. will be.”
He was, of course, correct. In the last three years, easy money has been the rule. It is expected to remain unchanged for at least the next year.
While many in the media are focused on Yellen’s gender (and Summers’ history with the president), there is a much more compelling reason that the Obama administration will pick her: Yellen is an easy money disciple. As Faber predicts, she is the more likely candidate to keep the money flowing for years to come. As we noted on July 29 , Summers is much more likely to let the market take its medicine. His bias will almost certainly tip the scales in favor of Yellen.
Faber will likely be right again. Don’t expect easy money to end with Chairman Bernanke’s reign.
Jason Farrell
About the Source The Daily Reckoning is a free newsletter which has been published for more than 10 years by Agora Financial LLC. They accurately predicted the Internet bubble, housing bubble and credit crisis of ’08. With enough notice for their readers to prepare and protect themselves.
If you haven’t signed up for Daily Reckoning yet, we urge you to do so right here. And don’t worry. It’s 100% free – no credit card is required.
That's the problem with QE--once begun, you almost always have to keep it up to some degree for as long as the economy itself is still below the historical target of about 2.5%-3% annual growth. Once that desired taret has been reached tho, it becomes apparent to all, that a portion of that growth was propped up by easy money. The ending of quantitative easing (easy $) has to coincide with 100% of that target being "real" growth--jobs, manufactoring, agriculture output, services, exports vs imports--the whole 9 yards. We are a long long ways from both the target and real growth. Real growth means that every sector, every working class and every geographical area has to see and benefit more or less equally from that expansion in economics. That, is not apt to happen any time soon--it can't. There are too many outliers, too many variables. Too much competition both from outside the country and too much inequality in quantities of goods and services produced in the more macro viewed areas of the nation.
In the perfect world, one sector of any given region (nation, hemisphere, or globally--we'll use nation here) would produce all the widgets the nation needs, and another would produce all the gizmos the nation needs, another produces the raw materials for each of these while another produces all the gadgets. A balanced trade program, but all it takes is for the gadget maker to open a plant in the gizmo region, and the original area that made the gadgets sees a decline in the real juggernaught of economic expansion--jobs. QE can't make a $ for $ return in the number of jobs--it can just throw $$ out there in the hopes that the easy cheap dollars will be used for jobs within each regions, state, or city. That never happens.
IP: Logged
12:26 PM
Oct 8th, 2013
fierobear Member
Posts: 27083 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
