How is Richardson...
- Thread starter Cancel 2016.2
- Start date
doniston
Aint I a cutie? HEH HEH
I thought that was obvious.
your welcome onedumbass, I'm here to teach you gerber dems about money.
If you listen to any reputable economist on TV you will here the same
You mean the reputable economists who have been saying for years that housing is what was propping up the economy, and who blamed the recent market downslide on what's been happening w/ housing, and the effect it's having on credit (which you laughed at me about, btw - you didn't understand how it related to anything in the economy outside of the housing market)?
Those economists?
It's not ALL housing. The deficit is also part of the Bush economy, and that's gonna weigh us down for awhile.
Here's how the housing thing works, toppy: consumer spending is one of the real pillars of the economy. When it's up, everyone does well. Over the past few years, consumer spending has been propped up by overinflated home values and overeager lenders. Now, it's all coming home to roost; as home values decrease, and foreclosures increase, not as much of that lovely consumer money is ending up in the marketplace. We have record levels of credit debt, and an economic house of cards which we're currently watching take a bit of a fall.
Bush never had an ECONOMIC POLICY. "Cut taxes" is NOT an economic policy. It's like everything else he has done - reckless, short-term & rife with consequences, most of them negative.
uscitizen
Villified User
I have told Spinner this repeatedly and all he says is I need to take economics 101 grasshopper.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Bottom line top... the Bush tax cuts certainly were a plus for the markets... in the short term. But in the long term, you HAVE to have spending cuts to coincide with the tax cuts.... otherwise it falls in on itself. If the housing market were not in trouble, the economy probably could have cruised along a few more years before being in trouble. But we haven't even begun to see the downfall of housing yet and the effects it will have on the economy.
Topspin
Verified User
and where you two morons are on desh's level of economics is this.
Yes you are right on the housing and consumer spending. The other side of the equation is consumer wealth has gone up WAY more than debt.
the average 401k is now 125,000 a couple years ago it struggled to get to 100,000. Yes morons will be jacked out of houses they couldn't afford. And greedy bankers lending to homeless bums will lose billions.
The economy will keep on chugging at 2 to 3% growth because of our great companies
Yes you are right on the housing and consumer spending. The other side of the equation is consumer wealth has gone up WAY more than debt.
the average 401k is now 125,000 a couple years ago it struggled to get to 100,000. Yes morons will be jacked out of houses they couldn't afford. And greedy bankers lending to homeless bums will lose billions.
The economy will keep on chugging at 2 to 3% growth because of our great companies
That's totally naive; you have no idea what you're talking about.
And you always bring up 401k's. For the vast majority of Americans, the 401K represents a RETIREMENT fund.
I did talk facts, and you ignored them, for the most part. What is wealth? Much of it is investment, which is propped up by the economy, which is propped up by consumer spending, which is propped up by overinflated home values & debt.
You always fall back on 401K's, as though they add anything to the consumer spending equation.
Buying shares is spending.
Again, not even something I think about.
Topspin
Verified User
401ks is the wealth of much of the nation moron.
propped up us you wussy as way of saying you don't understand
Housing prices will NOT crash they will dip and then go up less than average for a few years. Maybe morons like you spend based on their housing price educated people don't
propped up us you wussy as way of saying you don't understand
Housing prices will NOT crash they will dip and then go up less than average for a few years. Maybe morons like you spend based on their housing price educated people don't
Top, the entire middle class was spending based on the increasing values of their homes. Stop being in denial.
"Maybe morons like you spend based on their housing price educated people don't"
Um, actually, it's been widely reported over the past 5 years that we're at record levels of debt because of people borrowing against overinflated home values. Maybe all of those people are just "dumbasses," but there are millions of them, and if you can't add 2 + 2 on how they're over-borrowing will effect the economy, I can't do much for you....
Um, actually, it's been widely reported over the past 5 years that we're at record levels of debt because of people borrowing against overinflated home values. Maybe all of those people are just "dumbasses," but there are millions of them, and if you can't add 2 + 2 on how they're over-borrowing will effect the economy, I can't do much for you....
Topspin
Verified User
again onedumbass, in a capitalist economy there are winners and losers. This time the losers are the ones borrowing against their overinflated houses and SHOULD be tossed out on their asses.
Again, vs record debt. Please take an accounting class if assets go up twice as much as debt your better off. Assets have gone up more than debt.
Class dissmissed
Again, vs record debt. Please take an accounting class if assets go up twice as much as debt your better off. Assets have gone up more than debt.
Class dissmissed
AnglScarlett
New member
The stupitity of you never ceases to amaze? Two days ago I find you all hepped up on Obama weed, one day ago, you were pushing The Hillary, and today you are ranting about Richardson, all the while claiming you are not a lefty? You are not only a lefty, you are not a very stable one, butt, what is new? Richardson is more likely to sell you your next hotdog at a roadside stand, than he is to be President?...Thank you.
Darla's right - you are in complete denial.
You talk about overborrowers as though they're a small, insignificant slice of the population, who have little effect on the overall economy.
They're the majority; the record assets you refer to are the minority. And their assets won't look as good as the credit crunch digs its roots deeper (check the market today, tops...)
You talk about overborrowers as though they're a small, insignificant slice of the population, who have little effect on the overall economy.
They're the majority; the record assets you refer to are the minority. And their assets won't look as good as the credit crunch digs its roots deeper (check the market today, tops...)
They're such a large group, that they are the people who have been driving consumer spending these past years, and that is what has propped this economy up. I don't know what Top is thinking, because I am not an economist, but it's been written about for years in the business sections, which, by the way, he claims he reads. I'm wondering if he has them confused with the comics.