Bush's "conversation" w/troops staged

[sodaseller]

The Fed has been raising the Prime Rate due the improving and growing economy (which is certainly part of the reason for the increase in short-term rates.)

As for credit card debt (and over extension), yes it has become for many the American way of life, but it that started a long time ago. In most cases, I question whether is out of necessity or people who just want, want, want. (When some of these chickens will come home to roost and its significance on the US economy is hard to say.) As far as minimum payments doubling -- I think that's a good thing -- the minumin is too low and encourages people to overextend.

Yes, there are people out there who are hurting (as sadly there always is), but I don't share your pessimism about the economy overall.

The rates were kept artificially low for awhile due to some political machinations. The economy has been growing without inflation due to the Republican dream economy - high growth and profits while workers' wages stay low or decline in purchasing power. The rates will likely increase now due to inflation scares due to energy spikes and an increase in the risk component in i (before someone gets snarky and corrects me, I know that in most equations i is just TVM and not risk, but go with me here).

Remember there is no greater bogeyman than inflation (even though the Fed's enabling statute prioritized full employment). We must find NAIRU, because unemployment is acceptable to keep inflation low- that hurts the investor class. As Bush jokes "Some call you the elite - I call you my base". Down with the sans cullotes

 

[sodaseller]

Please, Puffy, do tell, how will democrats who have been stonewalling the building to additional refinaries in this country, who want to obstruct the drilling of additional oil in Alaska, who will not permit anymore off shore drilling in Calf, Fla, etc, who want to tax businesses, individuals and confiscate more of your money, going to improve your standard of living and lower energy prices. Energy prices is a function of supply and demand. Its a world market and China and India are consuming more and more oil every day. We had a supply interuption issue. We have limited refinary capacity because the Democrats have not permitted an additional refinary to be built in this country in 30 years, yet demand has gone up. We need oil for plastics, getting goods to market, air travel, etc. Conservation alone will not solve the problem. When you vote democratic, you are voting for more restrictions on the economy, more restrictions on the individual and someone in Washington deciding that they can spend your money better than you. BTW, I see gas prices going down. I filled up for $2.56 yesterday.

That's as false as most of your posts, including your Laffer nonsense - check the GAO report and antitrust enforcement

 

[sodaseller]

No it's not. It is a legal term with a legal defination.

Whiel I do not share the view that impeachment should be pursued, be aware that the term "misdemeanors" does not mean today what it did in 1787-89.

As a practical matter, an impeachable offense was aptly defined by then House member Gerald Ford in the 70s - "whatever a majority of the House thinks it is", or words to that effect. I don't agree with that sentiment, as it is plain that it was intended to be a high high standard. But given the fact that it is not subject to judicial review, the distinction is functionally meaningless

 

[DawnCt1]

The stock market still suffers from high and low fluctuations. So while it does not effect every stock the Nasdaq does still have 100 point drops in a day. These types of fluctuations make novice investors a tad bit nervous and keeping their money out of play. Or at least this is what the 197 Financial Consultants in L.A. that I work with tell me.


~Amanda

Please tell me what day the Nasdaq dropped 100 points in a day. I am waiting for the S&P to drop below 1180 and stay there so I can put more $$$ in the market. There was only two days last week and its up to 1186 yesterday. Maybe next week. We have an overall unemployment rate of 5.1, AFTER the hurricanes. 2.8 for college grads, 3.8 for high school grads with 16 to 19 year olds and blacks at .8.2. Germany is still suffering from double digit unemployment at the highest level since WWII. That's what socialistic rule will get for you.

 

[DawnCt1]

That's as false as most of your posts, including your Laffer nonsense - check the GAO report and antitrust enforcement

Open your eyes! Do you see the democrats encouraging increasing refinary capacity and drilling? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the obvious.

 

[sodaseller]

That does outrage me. Not just against the President however. That outrage belongs to his President and his predecessor, as well as the Congresses who were in session.

I will disagree. The problem is that we changed our warfare paradigm. There si no front line now. Thus everything has to be armored. Our Humvees etc were't armored before becuaes they weren't supposed to be in unsettled zones.

I happen to sympathize with much of Rumsfeld's RMA vision, and maybe he would never have been able to impose that vision (which is his right) without just going to war, but he and this President bear responsibility for directing a strategy that we were not equipped for, because we equipped ourselves fora different strategy

 

[sodaseller]

Open your eyes! Do you see the democrats encouraging increasing refinary capacity and drilling? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the obvious.

You have zero idea what you are talking about. You are repeating Talking points which are false. The GAO reported otherwise. And the FTC tried to make your point, but failed. And dven they didn't go as far as you do, bexcause they know it can't be supported factually. You are mindlessly repeating stuff you hear, but that's not the real world

 

[sodaseller]

Here's the report - GAO

What GAO Found:

Mergers have altered the structure of the U.S. petroleum industry,
including the refining market. Over 2,600 mergers have occurred in the
U.S. petroleum industry since the 1990s, mostly later in the period.
Industry officials cited various reasons for the mergers, particularly
the need for increased efficiency and cost savings. Economic literature
also suggests that firms sometimes merge to enhance their ability to
control prices.

Partly because of the mergers, market concentration has increased in
the industry, mostly in the downstream (refining and marketing)
segment. For example, market concentration in refining increased from
moderately to highly concentrated in the East Coast and from
unconcentrated to moderately concentrated in the West Coast.
Concentration in the wholesale gasoline market increased substantially
from the mid-1990s so that by 2002, most states had either moderately
or highly concentrated wholesale gasoline markets. Anecdotal evidence
suggests that mergers also have changed other factors affecting
competition, such as the ability of new firms to enter the market.

Two major changes have occurred in U.S. gasoline marketing related to
mergers, according to industry officials. First, the availability of
generic gasoline, which is generally priced lower than branded
gasoline, has decreased substantially. Second, refiners now prefer to
deal with large distributors and retailers, which has motivated further
consolidation in distributor and retail markets.

Based on data from the mid-1990s through 2000, GAO’s econometric
analyses indicate that mergers and increased market concentration
generally led to higher wholesale gasoline prices in the United States.
Six of the eight mergers GAO modeled led to price increases, averaging
about 1 cent to 2 cents per gallon. Increased market concentration,
which reflects the cumulative effects of mergers and other competitive
factors, also led to increased prices in most cases. For example,
wholesale prices for boutique fuels sold in the East and Gulf
Coasts—fuels supplied by fewer refiners than conventional
gasoline—increased by about 1 cent per gallon, while prices for
boutique fuels sold in California increased by over 7 cents per gallon.
GAO also identified price increases of one-tenth of a cent to 7 cents
that were caused by other factors included in the models, particularly
low gasoline inventories relative to demand, supply disruptions in some
regions, and high refinery capacity utilization rates. For example, we
found that a 1 percent increase in refinery capacity utilization rates
resulted in price increases of one-tenth to two-tenths of a cent per
gallon.

FTC disagreed with GAO’s methodology and findings. However, GAO
believes its analyses are sound.

 

[DawnCt1]

"Anecdotal evidence"? That is essentially an opinion piece that accounts for no more than a one to two cent increase. Clearly its an issue of supply and demand. I find it completely ironic that the Dems/liberals and Al Gore were demanding a BTU tax and increased gasoline tax because fuels didn't "cost enough" in the USA and now, when the price has increased due to demand, that are crying foul!.

 

[sodaseller]

No it's not. There are people out there that do real analysis with real numbers. And they have integrity. All foreign concepts, I realize, especially in the last 5 years when the traditional objectivity of reports from agencies like GAO and CBO have been compromised in the name of creating a false reality. But GAO did an econometric analysis (I have the full repirt at the office - the FTC one also, and have also attended a debate between the two sets of authors). Their econometrics (esp. compared with the merging parties' Hart Scott Rodino filings) don't lie. The anecdotes are only the explanations of why the behavior that the numbers show occurred, because GAO doesn't have subpoena power (and the FTC, which does, conspicuously refused to exercise that power in trying to rebut). Don't forget the Cal electric wheeling fixes that FERC claimed didn't exist either (under Ken Lay's suggested appointees), until the documents came out

You are presuming that everyone lies and BSes conclusion because ya'll do, but there those with minds and integrity out there

 

[dcentity2000]

George Bush has a truly awful team of spin doctors; stuff like this just shouldn't be seen to happen.



Rich::

 

[MizBlu]

No it's not. There are people out there that do real analysis with real numbers. And they have integrity. All foreign concepts, I realize, especially in the last 5 years when the traditional objectivity of reports from agencies like GAO and CBO have been compromised in the name of creating a false reality. But GAO did an econometric analysis (I have the full repirt at the office - the FTC one also, and have also attended a debate between the two sets of authors). Their econometrics (esp. compared with the merging parties' Hart Scott Rodino filings) don't lie. The anecdotes are only the explanations of why the behavior that the numbers show occurred, because GAO doesn't have subpoena power (and the FTC, which does, conspicuously refused to exercise that power in trying to rebut). Don't forget the Cal electric wheeling fixes that FERC claimed didn't exist either (under Ken Lay's suggested appointees), until the documents came out

You are presuming that everyone lies and BSes conclusion because ya'll do, but there those with minds and integrity out there

Frankly, do you expect better from someone who gets her information from "Pill Popping Daddy Limbaugh", "Sean Insanity", "Anthrax Coulter" and Faux News? I mean really.

 

[MizBlu]

George Bush has a truly awful team of spin doctors; stuff like this just shouldn't be seen to happen.



Rich::

Without the spin doctors, George Bush would be another good-for-nothing rich man's son who was born on third base, but thinks he hit a triple.

The spin isn't working anymore. That's why Bush's numbers are in free-fall.

 

[yeartolate]

Maybe when the spotlight is off Rove, he can get back to work.

 

[dcentity2000]

Without the spin doctors, George Bush would be another good-for-nothing rich man's son who was born on third base, but thinks he hit a triple.

Was he ever anything else? You're right - the spin machine does appear to be faltering - the numbers are base fact.



Rich::

 

[DawnCt1]

Without the spin doctors, George Bush would be another good-for-nothing rich man's son who was born on third base, but thinks he hit a triple.

The spin isn't working anymore. That's why Bush's numbers are in free-fall.

President Bush's lows aren't as low as Clinton's were at his low. They aren't as low as his father's, President Reagan's and certainly not near as low as Jimmy Carter's. When I consider how close we almost were to having the lunatic Algore in the White House I shudder. The press gets it's talking points from the DNC and they are definately in sinq. When MOVE ON.org runs the country, you will be singing a different tune.

 

[MizBlu]

President Bush's lows aren't as low as Clinton's were at his low. They aren't as low as his father's, President Reagan's and certainly not near as low as Jimmy Carter's. When I consider how close we almost were to having the lunatic Algore in the White House I shudder. The press gets it's talking points from the DNC and they are definately in sinq. When MOVE ON.org runs the country, you will be singing a different tune.

 

[DawnCt1]

And I'll raise you

 

[Belle for President]

President Bush's lows aren't as low as Clinton's were at his low. They aren't as low as his father's, President Reagan's and certainly not near as low as Jimmy Carter's. When I consider how close we almost were to having the lunatic Algore in the White House I shudder. The press gets it's talking points from the DNC and they are definately in sinq. When MOVE ON.org runs the country, you will be singing a different tune.

I'd call this the "we're bad, but you're worse" defense.

Self-destruction to commence in 5...4...3...2...

 

[TnKrBeLlA012]

A question I would like to ask. If Bush was not your choice to be President was their someone who would have run this country in a different and better way??? Would 9-11 never have happened? Would the hurricanes have never blown in. Would terrorism not exsist? Would unfair trading ,cost millions of people their jobs. Would healthcare be more affordable? Would the price of gas be lower. I think we all know the answers to these questions. Like it or not the world is the way it is because we have made it this way. We can't put blame on one man. This country has been going in this direction for sooooooo long. Greed. Number one factor. Companies stealing hard working people's pensions. Jobs being sent over seas. Bogus insurance claims that cost us Americans millions of dollars. The picture is so much bigger than one President has to take responsiblity for. What is happening now comes from what has happened in the past. If we look back at Clinton's legacy maybe if he ran the country differently alot of what is happening now may have been stopped. Who know's. I just cannot put blame on this President for all that has gone wrong. It took alot of hands in the pot to create what this country has become.