114
   

Where is the US economy headed?

 
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 10:59 am
@cicerone imposter,
So you are saying that a "few days" outweighs the total drop since Jan 20?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 11:01 am
@mysteryman,
Since Jan? What the hell does that mean? This economic crisis started in 2007.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 11:23 am
@cicerone imposter,
From AP:
Quote:
Fed reports record fall in household net worth
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer Martin Crutsinger, Ap Economics Writer 46 mins ago

WASHINGTON " The net worth of American households fell by the largest amount in more than a half-century of record keeping during the fourth quarter of last year.

The Federal Reserve said Thursday that household net worth dropped by a record 9 percent from the level in the third quarter.

The decline was the sixth straight quarterly drop in net worth and underscored the battering that U.S. families are undergoing in the midst of a steep recession with unemployment surging and the value of their homes and investments plunging.

Net worth represents total assets such as homes and checking accounts minus liabilities like mortgages and credit card debt.

Family net worth had hit an all-time high of $64.36 trillion in the April-June quarter of 2007 but has fallen in every quarter since that time.

The record 9 percent drop in the fourth quarter pushed total net worth down to $51.48 trillion, a level that is 20 percent below the third quarter 2007 peak.


That's the reason why the $2 trillion stimulus plan is not enough to help reverse this financial crisis.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 11:35 am
@cicerone imposter,
And the market has dropped by almost %25 since Obama was sworn in.
So, I repeat my question...
Has the last "few days" erased the drop in the market since Jan?

And if not, why not?
Or are you saying that "any good news matters more then bad news"?
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 11:39 am
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:

And the market has dropped by almost %25 since Obama was sworn in.
So, I repeat my question...
Has the last "few days" erased the drop in the market since Jan?

And if not, why not?
Or are you saying that "any good news matters more then bad news"?


Sure, but it dropped more than 40% in the months leading up to that.

Just b/c Obama got elected doesn't mean things are going to turn around immediately; why would you think it did?

Cycloptichorn
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 11:49 am
@mysteryman,
Obama was sworn in less than two months ago. If you want miracles, go to your church, and pray to your god.
okie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 11:51 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

Sure, but it dropped more than 40% in the months leading up to that.

Cycloptichorn

As it became more and more likely Obama would win the election. It was called the Obama market effect. The market is sensitive to future projections.
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 11:51 am
@cicerone imposter,
I'm not expecting miracles.
But if his economic plan was so good, it would be showing that in the markets.
The market doesnt seem to be to positive about the Obama plan.

If his plan is so good, the market would be showing that.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 11:52 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Sure, but it dropped more than 40% in the months leading up to that.

Cycloptichorn

As it became more and more likely Obama would win the election. It was called the Obama market effect. The market is sensitive to future projections.


What a moronic thing to say. Do you have any clue what actually led to the market plummeting, Okie? Or do you just say **** like this to rile me up? Please, be honest.

Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 11:54 am
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:

I'm not expecting miracles.
But if his economic plan was so good, it would be showing that in the markets.
The market doesnt seem to be to positive about the Obama plan.

If his plan is so good, the market would be showing that.


It's almost as if you think everything is just hunky-dory, and Obama's decisions are what drive the market.

This is 100% not the case. The market is drowning in toxic assets, Obama has a fine line to walk and very little he personally could do will raise the market at this time.

Cycloptichorn
okie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 12:03 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
I don't say these things to rile you up. I think its a fact. To be accurate, the market would have dropped, perhaps significantly without Obama, however, I do not think it would have been this severe. The reason is I have talked to a number of people that feel that alot of people began to bail out when it became increasingly obvious Obama would be elected, for the simple fact that it is no secret now, and it wasn't then, that Obama is not big on capitalism, he loves government solutions and punishing profitable businesses. It is simply common sense to take no risks when the market is dampened by an incoming administration that is not friendly to capitalism and profits.

Squeal all you want, cyclops, but reality is reality.
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 12:05 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
This is 100% not the case. The market is drowning in toxic assets, Obama has a fine line to walk and very little he personally could do will raise the market at this time.


You just shot yourself in the foot.
I know the market is drowning in toxic assets, and I dont expect that to change anytime soon.

What funny is that you are saying that there is little that Obama can do personally to raise the markets, yet you were sure happy to blame Bush for the decline in the markets.
You cant have it both ways.

Of course, maybe if Obama actually had people in the Treasury dept working that might help...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4950518/Three-more-Obama-nominees-withdraw-from-running.html

Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 12:15 pm
@okie,
It is not a 'fact,' Okie. You don't know what you are talking about. The drop in the market has nothing to do with Obama at all, and everything to do with bad investments made by the big players in the market.

These 'people' you have talked to; are they as uninformed as you are? I suspect they are fellow Oklahomans who are uninformed about matters financial whatsoever. Your insistence that Obama is responsible for the market drop is one of the dumbest things I've ever seen you write, bar none.

Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 12:18 pm
@mysteryman,
Quote:


What funny is that you are saying that there is little that Obama can do personally to raise the markets, yet you were sure happy to blame Bush for the decline in the markets.
You cant have it both ways.


Of course I can. It was the Bush SEC which failed to regulate the markets and failed to have any clue what was going on at all. They are one of the prime people responsible for creating this mess.

Obama is left trying to clean it up. Your equating the two situations is ridiculous.

Cycloptichorn
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 12:18 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
Your insistence that Obama is responsible for the market drop is one of the dumbest things I've ever seen you write, bar none.


So then you will agree that every member of the left that blamed Bush for the market drop was also dumb, correct?
After all, it cant be both ways.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 12:19 pm
@mysteryman,
See above; it can be both ways, you just don't have a good understanding of the situation.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 12:21 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
If he was trying to clean it up, it would be going up.

You seem to want to judge Bush by his actions, and Obama by his intentions.

you must judge them both by the same standards.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 12:23 pm
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:

If he was trying to clean it up, it would be going up.


This is false. Part of cleaning is exposing the level of rot. That is depressing to investors, b/c it reveals that the vast majority of gains have been false and they are not coming back.

Can you seriously believe that the matters in question are as simplistic as you pretend to here? Seriously?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 01:06 pm
@mysteryman,
"Bush by his actions" is a far gone conclusion; he's failed at most things he tried to "fix," and it cost US taxpayers untold billions - some of which just disappeared.

As for Obama, he's been in office less than two months, AND he has the support of most Americans.

0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 01:16 pm
Moody's new list: http://seekingalpha.com/article/125657-moody-s-bottom-rung-list-283-potential-dead-man-walking-companies][b]283 Potential Dead Man Walking Companies[/b]
 

Related Topics

The States Need Help - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fiscal Cliff - Question by JPB
Let GM go Bankrupt - Discussion by Woiyo9
Sovereign debt - Question by JohnJD
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.11 seconds on 03/19/2025 at 03:40:32