AlphaSeeker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > True to a certain degree. > > Yet his populist talks created such a amount of > uncertainty that sucks the confidence and > visibility of businesses and they are sitting on > their hands. > > The single most important word in economics is > “EXPECTATION”. People make most decsions based on > their expections. > > If they expect uncertainties, no matter how goods > the current state is, they are likely to take > less action. > > Reagon was such a popular president among left and > right, not because he racked up the country’s > debt. > > Mainly becase he gave Americans a sense of hope. > And a strong expectatinon that their better days > are ahead of them. > > Not behind them I don’t think you understand what populism is.
What do you mean by populism? I mean, how do you define it? Is it jackbooted soldiers marching the streets? Is it suggesting that the middle class may be eroding in the US? Is it the idea that Clinton-era tax rates were not completely un-American? Or maybe the idea that the middle class got its rear end ripped off by the banking class due to complacency during the boom times and maybe needs to rethink whether complete deregulation has been a benefit to them? You throw the term around a lot, so what do you mean by populism?
AlphaSeeker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ^ Palantir, don’t digress > 2. tea party rose to the national popularity in > reaction to B.O.'s left policy Would you mind elaborating which specific policies? Was it overspending? Then where were they during the Bush administration? Wars of choice? Really want to go there? How about illegal immigration…checked out Bush’s policies?
bchadwick Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What do you mean by populism? I mean, how do you > define it? > > Is it jackbooted soldiers marching the streets? > > Is it suggesting that the middle class may be > eroding in the US? > > Is it the idea that Clinton-era tax rates were not > completely un-American? > > > What do you mean by populism? Here is populism at work… In Latin America http://www.economist.com/node/6802448
AlphaSeeker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ^ Palantir, don’t digress > > 1. not a fan of tea party > 2. tea party rose to the national popularity in > reaction to B.O.'s left policy > 3. In response to natrallight = even though B.O. > kept some GWB era policy. His talks/plans is to > got the populist route. That scares businesses and > investors fundementally. > > Question, why aren’t all these clear to you after > all these years of study and practice in the > investment field? @alphaseeker what exactly is this populist route that has business/investors scared ‘fundamentally’? and please explain what are B.O’s “left policies”. most of us who believes in progressive ideas/policies don’t consider current policies to be liberal ideas.
AlphaSeeker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > bchadwick Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > What do you mean by populism? I mean, how do > you > > define it? > > > > Is it jackbooted soldiers marching the streets? > > > > Is it suggesting that the middle class may be > > eroding in the US? > > > > Is it the idea that Clinton-era tax rates were > not > > completely un-American? > > > > > > What do you mean by populism? > > Here is populism at work… In Latin America > > http://www.economist.com/node/ Sigh. I still don’t think you know what populism is. Let me help you, the Tea Party is populist movement.
recycler Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > AlphaSeeker Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > bchadwick Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > What do you mean by populism? I mean, how do > > you > > > define it? > > > > > > Is it jackbooted soldiers marching the > streets? > > > > > > Is it suggesting that the middle class may be > > > eroding in the US? > > > > > > Is it the idea that Clinton-era tax rates > were > > not > > > completely un-American? > > > > > > > > > What do you mean by populism? > > > > Here is populism at work… In Latin America > > > > http://www.economist.com/node/ > > Sigh. > > I still don’t think you know what populism is. > > Let me help you, the Tea Party is populist > movement. Sigh too. I am so disappointed that I didn’t get your endorsement… Let’s agree on some other stuff then - Ginger or Mary Ann?
I don’t think there is much we’re going to agree on. I have a tendency to understand the words that I use.
recycler Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don’t think there is much we’re going to agree > on. Agree. Finally.
AlphaSeeker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > Ginger or Mary Ann? Mary Ann fo sho!
I used to be a Mary Ann guy, but as I age, I start to see the Ginger appeal.
Just looked at old pictures, that’s actually a much tougher question than I thought. I’m leaning towards Ginger for a fling, but Mary Ann for the extended work
So back on topic. So today House should pass Boehner’s measure, and on Monday, Senate should reject it after debate. After that happens. Assuming they can put together a joint compromised plan, how are they going to come up with a plan within a day and get it through both chambers of Congress by end of August 2?
Meanwhile interest rates keep falling.
Palantir Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So back on topic. > > > So today House should pass Boehner’s measure, and > on Monday, Senate should reject it after debate. > After that happens. Assuming they can put together > a joint compromised plan, how are they going to > come up with a plan within a day and get it > through both chambers of Congress by end of August > 2? They are scheduled to work over the weekend… If they need some bills to fill the time while they deal in the backroom, they will debate on Ginger or Mary Ann.
Palantir Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Now that it’s pointed out that O’s policies are pretty centrist > and to some extent even conservative Without going into each individual policy, why is it that the political left seems to praise him while the political right abhor him on a daily basis? Also, stop with the personal attacks, things like “eyeroll” is exactly why congress is in this mess.
MCalamari Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Palantir Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Now that it’s pointed out that O’s policies are > pretty centrist > > and to some extent even conservative > > Without going into each individual policy, why is > it that the political left seems to praise him > while the political right abhor him on a daily > basis? > > Also, stop with the personal attacks, things like > “eyeroll” is exactly why congress is in this mess. Logic doesn’t follow here. I might as well say: Why is it that racists like the Tea Party, whereas liberals hate them. I have therefore PROVED that the Tea Party is racist???
bchadwick Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > MCalamari Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Palantir Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > Now that it’s pointed out that O’s policies > are > > pretty centrist > > > and to some extent even conservative > > > > Without going into each individual policy, why > is > > it that the political left seems to praise him > > while the political right abhor him on a daily > > basis? > > > > Also, stop with the personal attacks, things > like > > “eyeroll” is exactly why congress is in this > mess. > > > Logic doesn’t follow here. I might as well say: > > Why is it that racists like the Tea Party, whereas > liberals hate them. > > I have therefore PROVED that the Tea Party is > racist??? No, but it is strong evidence that the president’s stances and policies (or overall image) appeals to certain groups. We can cherry pick the groups that support each political entity and say that’s what they are, but favor/disfavor of large blocks of the country’s political groups is much more telling information.
OK, then I’ll bite. Liberals like Obama because they understand that a quarter of a cookie is better than no cookie. But that doesn’t mean that the two sides are meeting in the middle to split things up.
Or you could you know, empirically look at the policies actually pursued by the President as basis for your argument?