User Tag List

First 45678 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 147

  1. #51
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Antisocial one View Post
    Probably we have communication problem here.
    I was judging on the basis of my own country and across the Europe it is probably similar situation. In my country the only side that is ready to support Republicans is the most conservative side on the "table" and people see it as far right. But for you the far right is a bunch of street bullys.

    Am I right?
    I was thinking more along the lines of the Danish People's Party, National Front, etc. Part of the communications problem might be that I group socialist parties as left-wing rather than centrist (eurocommunist and red/green alliance parties would be far left), while I consider social-liberal parties to comprise the center-left.

  2. #52
    mountain surfing nomadic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Posts
    1,709

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    um, you do realize that the Democrats have controlled both houses of congress for the past two years, right? I sincerely hope you are right about Obama, but his history leaves me no reason to believe he will pursue centrist policies unless political conditions leave him no other option. Unless the national polls turn out to be as messed up as the primary polls, it seems we'll find out over the course of the next two years.
    Well, yeah. Im pretty sure he will be centrist, and he seems to rely on his advisors for subjects he doesn't know as much about. To me, his opinion on national issues really does remind me of Clinton. Another reason I believe he will be more centrist than you think is because he likes having people around him who disagree with him. As opposed to Bush, who just fires those that do disagree with him.

    Btw, in case u are interested, here are some interesting articles about stock market returns under a Democratic vs. Republican presidency. You would imagine its better under republican cus of tax cuts, but its actually better under democratic presidents.

    History shows Democratic sweep better for stocks

    NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. investors are worried about a combination of a Barack Obama administration and a Democrat-controlled Congress. But history shows that of the two likely election outcomes, that scenario is better for stocks.

    Their tax rates may go up after a Democratic sweep, but experience shows their stock portfolios could give them more of a cushion than under the alternative: Republican John McCain in the White House with Democrats running Capitol Hill.
    That goes against conventional wisdom that so-called "gridlock" is best for markets, a situation in which neither party can make sweeping policy changes that can upset markets.
    That said, Bespoke's founders Justin Walters and Paul Hickey added that a Republican Congress and Democratic president -- highly unlikely this year -- would be the best- case scenario for stocks.

  3. #53
    Queen hunter Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    8,670

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    I was thinking more along the lines of the Danish People's Party, National Front, etc. Part of the communications problem might be that I group socialist parties as left-wing rather than centrist (eurocommunist and red/green alliance parties would be far left), while I consider social-liberal parties to comprise the center-left.
    When it comes to politics in Europe you must push entire scale to the left.
    For example, in my country almost all partys are "children" of the communist party so we have no real right.

    For example our right is liberal enough to even give some rights to gay people.
    About 90% of our parlament is for entering and merging with the EU.

    So people who don't agree with this and think that familiy is sacred and that people should go to church every sunday are idiots(far right).


    This probably sounds quite strange by US standards.

  4. #54
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Generally, gridlock is good for financial markets, especially (as they stated) a Republican or split Congress and a Democratic POTUS. Of course, Wall Street is just one consideration when it comes to how the economy is doing in the U.S., so there are other factors to consider. Also, people to tend to throw out the party in power, so that tends to sway results. The economy was weak when we had George H.W. Bush in the White House, facing a Democratic Congress, but, in short order, Clinton replaced him. Things still weren't great, and then the Republicans swept to power, and things improved. It had far more to do with timing (recessions almost never last long in the U.S.) and with technology-based productivity gains (the Internet, mostly) than it did with government policy.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  5. #55
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    3,187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Modern Nomad View Post
    Well, yeah. Im pretty sure he will be centrist, and he seems to rely on his advisors for subjects he doesn't know as much about. To me, his opinion on national issues really does remind me of Clinton. Another reason I believe he will be more centrist than you think is because he likes having people around him who disagree with him. As opposed to Bush, who just fires those that do disagree with him.

    Btw, in case u are interested, here are some interesting articles about stock market returns under a Democratic vs. Republican presidency. You would imagine its better under republican cus of tax cuts, but its actually better under democratic presidents.

    History shows Democratic sweep better for stocks
    Even if history tells us that democrat policies have been somewhat helpful to stocks, that has no bearing whatsoever in the current econimic/political climate we're in. They are worried, and rightfully so, that Obama and the democrats will do things to damage the entire economy even further. I've been hearing nothing but bad predictions from most economists over Obama's plans. They are particularly worried about the sharp rise in the capital gains tax Obama promises. Every informed person with half a brain in this country sees what's coming with Obama (including Biden). But for the rest, Obama is the messiah of hope, a politician like none other because politicians like none other actually exist and make it to the presidency.... right.

  6. #56
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Risen View Post
    I've been hearing nothing but bad predictions from most economists over Obama's plans.
    Polls taken of economists tend to show the opposite.

    N.B.E.R. Economists on the Candidates Economic Plans - Freakonomics - Opinion - New York Times Blog

  7. #57
    mountain surfing nomadic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Posts
    1,709

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    Generally, gridlock is good for financial markets, especially (as they stated) a Republican or split Congress and a Democratic
    Well the interesting part of that article isn't that Dem Prez Rep Congress is best for the stock market. That news came out a while ago...

    For that article that came out today, its more interesting that a Dem prez Dem congress does better than Rep pres Dem congress, which is one form of "gridlock".

    Quote Originally Posted by Risen View Post
    Even if history tells us that democrat policies have been somewhat helpful to stocks, that has no bearing whatsoever in the current econimic/political climate we're in. They are worried, and rightfully so, that Obama and the democrats will do things to damage the entire economy even further. I've been hearing nothing but bad predictions from most economists over Obama's plans. They are particularly worried about the sharp rise in the capital gains tax Obama promises. Every informed person with half a brain in this country sees what's coming with Obama (including Biden). But for the rest, Obama is the messiah of hope, a politician like none other because politicians like none other actually exist and make it to the presidency.... right.
    whenever i hear a no named economist talk on politics, i always wonder whose contributing to their foundations... a lot of middle tier economists are whores for money donations. upper tier means your brains carry you, not the money donations (as much). i almost did a phd in economics, some of what i saw in academia in general disgusted me thoroughly (not just economics)

    I haven't seen any study on the effects of differing levels of capital gain's taxes on stock market performance. But you would imagine by now, there would be plenty of money being thrown at THAT study ALREADY to fund it (hence big corporations making contributions to academic foundations), if the results of it supported what the foundation donors wanted.

    of course I would rather there be zero capital gains taxes for just me and only me. LOL but i am not disingenous enough to say that the entire economy will crash from it. i would rather see a valid study on it first before assuming anything. but such a study does not exist. that makes me wonder why.

  8. #58
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    3,187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Modern Nomad View Post
    Well the interesting part of that article isn't that Dem Prez Rep Congress is best for the stock market. That news came out a while ago...

    For that article that came out today, its more interesting that a Dem prez Dem congress does better than Rep pres Dem congress, which is one form of "gridlock".



    whenever i hear a no named economist talk on politics, i always wonder whose contributing to their foundations... a lot of middle tier economists are whores for money donations. upper tier means your brains carry you, not the money donations (as much). i almost did a phd in economics, some of what i saw in academia in general disgusted me thoroughly (not just economics)

    I haven't seen any study on the effects of differing levels of capital gain's taxes on stock market performance. But you would imagine by now, there would be plenty of money being thrown at THAT study ALREADY to fund it (hence big corporations making contributions to academic foundations), if the results of it supported what the foundation donors wanted.

    of course I would rather there be zero capital gains taxes for just me and only me. LOL but i am not disingenous enough to say that the entire economy will crash from it. i would rather see a valid study on it first before assuming anything. but such a study does not exist. that makes me wonder why.
    In terms of the credibility of economists, I'd have to state that the economists I mostly listen to and whose opinions I respect are the economists who were able to predict the crisis that we're in now, unlike the majority of other economists who had their heads in the sand and said everything was all lolipops and gumdrops.

  9. #59
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    977

    Default

    Cause if you don't support Obama YOU A RACIST

  10. #60
    Seriously Delirious Udog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INfp
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INFp None
    Posts
    5,295

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    Only economists that appear on Fox News count.

Similar Threads

  1. Why do you do it?
    By Mycroft in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 10-27-2016, 01:17 PM
  2. [ENFP] Why Do you love ENFP's?
    By littledarling in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 399
    Last Post: 07-13-2009, 11:00 PM
  3. Why do you have deficit of self-esteem?
    By Virtual ghost in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: 02-05-2009, 03:25 AM
  4. Why do you procrastinate?
    By Lateralus in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 11-27-2008, 12:49 PM
  5. Why do you give rep points?
    By ThatsWhatHeSaid in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 98
    Last Post: 01-30-2008, 02:08 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO