So Obama voters....

[LL2]

Do you like Obama's Cabinet so far? So far it has many Clinton era folks (Clinton, Rahm), and a Bush hold over (Gates). It doesn't seem to have to "Change" he was going to bring. I read an article he may even extend the Bush tax cuts now, and abandoning the gays in the military issue. It appears Obama is bring himself to the center. It's a move that helped Bill win re-election so probably a smart move.

[MadScientist]

He comes in with a two front war and an economic collapse. There is no margin for error, so experience to run the bureaucracy is critical. That limits his options to existing Bush appointees like Gates, or people who worked in the Clinton administration. As Obama said, the change will come form him.

I am not in favor of allowing the Bush tax cuts on the top to continue to their official expiration. They should be ended right away to help pay for all the stimulus packages that are needed.

[SkinBasket]

I am not in favor of allowing the Bush tax cuts on the top to continue to their official expiration. They should be ended right away to help pay for all the stimulus packages that are needed.

Surprise surprise, you want your handout faster. It's not enough to take it, you want to take it as fast as possible. It's like that reparations Chappell skit. "I'm rich bitch!" Madscientist's itchin' to go buy himself a truckload of Cools.

[MadScientist]

I am not in favor of allowing the Bush tax cuts on the top to continue to their official expiration. They should be ended right away to help pay for all the stimulus packages that are needed.

Surprise surprise, you want your handout faster. It's not enough to take it, you want to take it as fast as possible. It's like that reparations Chappell skit. "I'm rich bitch!" Madscientist's itchin' to go buy himself a truckload of Cools.

No ShitHeadBasket, I won't be getting any hand out. Stick to porn, when you talk politics you sound as dumb as Tex.

[Freak Out]

It's "Kools" isn't it?

[LL2]

I will say that there is one thing that I like, if true, about Obama’s economic plan. His “stimulus” plan will include billions for new road, bridges, transportation networks, and energy projects. Handing out checks is fine, but we can’t keep trying to “buy” our way out an economic problem. Peter Schiff probably said it best when he said we are a “borrow and spend” economy and need to get back to a “save and produce” economy. You can find his stuff here http://www.europac.net/. His article on China is pretty good. The most important thing Americans need to do is get off the credit addiction.

China Plays a Better Long Term Hand

As Peter Schiff and I have long warned, America’s reliance on borrowing and consumption to fuel economic activity would result in the wholesale destruction of national wealth. Until recently, the dissipation was largely invisible to most consumers. However, the ongoing plunge in real estate and equity prices and newly released statistics concerning retail sales, consumer confidence and employment have now made it plain to most Americans that their own wealth has been seriously, and perhaps permanently, degraded. In response, they are now hoarding cash and reevaluating their spending habits.

The immediate result is that the large retailers, such as Circuit City, Best Buy and Mervyn’s, have gone under completely or have closed a significant percentage of their locations. Indeed, on November 17th, Moody’s warned of an epidemic of corporate bankruptcies. America is facing a severe recession that, if wrongly handled, will likely lead to a depression as bad, if not worse than those of the South Sea Bubble (1720) or the Great Depression of the early 1930’s.

Such a depression will affect most of the developed world. But countries will not suffer equally. In a depression, wealth vanishes. Therefore, wealth accumulation will be even more acutely divided between those nations that are, like America, net consumers and those who, like China, are producers. The contrast will become increasingly stark and will likely be reflected in the value of equities within the two economies.

For instance, contrast the recent economic stimulus packages of the two countries.

In America, President Bush’s first stimulus package amounted to some $172 billion. However, it was geared 87 percent to consumers and only some 13 percent to producers. This was in keeping with the fact that consumption accounts for 72 percent of the American economy, as measured by Gross Domestic Production. In contrast, China’s stimulus package is to be some $600 billion, roughly four times larger than the equivalent program in the United States. However, the American economy is five times the size of that of China, so in relative terms the Chinese package is the equivalent of some $3 trillion. In other words, to stimulate its economy China is spending some 17.4 times more than America, on a relative basis.

Furthermore the Chinese spending package is far more likely to have counter recessionary benefits than the American stimulus programs. Whereas the American package was geared to consumers, the Chinese package is geared to productive infrastructure projects that will add to the long term competitiveness of its economy. In China, real wages will filter down to consumers in the form of real wealth, as China’s economy gears itself up to become an increasingly effective challenger to American superpower status.

Whereas the Bush Administration has spent only some $22 billion on economic production, it spent some $150 billion on consumers and a staggering $2.8 trillion to bail out the financial industry. The strategic emphasis of the Administration’s spending of taxpayers’ funds is clear for all to see. If you lend money we will support you, if you make things, you are on your own.

In America, the government both encouraged and allowed the financial system to engage in highly leveraged lending. In addition, the financial industry was permitted to hide the risk by using ‘off-balance-sheet’ accounting and fictitious capital asset classification. A classic example of the latter was the classification of a tax credit as ‘capital’ by Fannie Mae. This allowed Fannie Mae to leverage its mortgage investments by some one hundred times its ‘true’ capital, while disclosing only some fifty times in its accounts.

China allowed no such deceptive ‘financial engineering’. It has therefore not had to spend on salvaging its banking system.

In the meantime, both the American and Chinese stock markets have suffered falls of some 50 percent. But given the far wiser policy initiatives of their government, Chinese equities appear to offer much better growth prospects than their American counterparts.

[SkinBasket]

I am not in favor of allowing the Bush tax cuts on the top to continue to their official expiration. They should be ended right away to help pay for all the stimulus packages that are needed.

Surprise surprise, you want your handout faster. It's not enough to take it, you want to take it as fast as possible. It's like that reparations Chappell skit. "I'm rich bitch!" Madscientist's itchin' to go buy himself a truckload of Cools.

No ShitHeadBasket, I won't be getting any hand out. Stick to porn, when you talk politics you sound as dumb as Tex.

Sorry, I meant your "redistribution." I won't make that mistake again.

It's hard to stick to porn when I'm stuck in your dad's ass. He's no looker (especially from the backside), but he sure can move those hips and that poop chute's like a steel trap... thus my being stuck. Unfortunate really. Ah well, I'm sure he'll get explosive gas soon from the pepper I shoved in there before I spread and speared him, so I'll be free soon.

I'll take you thinking I sound dumb as a good thing considering your amazing rebuttal skills. They fall far short of your dad's butthole skills.

[sheepshead]

There really needs to be better vetting for presidential candidates and a written test in order to vote.

If anyone thinks this group is going to march to Barry's tune for four years youre crazy.

and we're in deep shit in the process.

I never thought he would pull the trigger on Hil. There's something behind the scenes we dont know about. In any event, political posturing is not what this country needs. He promised change, this is nothing but an on going SNL skit right before our eyes.

[MadScientist]

There really needs to be better vetting for presidential candidates and a written test in order to vote.

If anyone thinks this group is going to march to Barry's tune for four years youre crazy.

and we're in deep shit in the process.

I never thought he would pull the trigger on Hil. There's something behind the scenes we dont know about. In any event, political posturing is not what this country needs. He promised change, this is nothing but an on going SNL skit right before our eyes.

The voting test has a bit of a bad reputation from times past. Things that would help along those lines for general elections would be to eliminate straight party option, not show party affiliation on the ballot at all, and (like CA does) distribute a pamphlet to all registered voters that contains a statement from each candidate, and description including budget impacts and pro and con arguments for each ballot proposition.

I don't see it as political posturing as much as political calculation. Bring together as much political power from as wide a reach as possible while still agreeing to follow Obama's lead, will produce one formidable executive branch without bending the constitution. It's logical, but we'll have to see how well it works in reality. Along those lines, picking Napolitano is also a favor to McCain, as she would have run against him in '10 and would have a decent chance of winning.

[Harlan Huckleby]

you fools.

there is nothing political going on. Its called dealing with serious problems, and finding the most serious, experienced people available to deal with them.

Sorry I called you fools.

[BallHawk]

All good except for the most important position of all, Secretary of State.

Of all the choices possible, Hillary was arguably the worst.

[retailguy]

All good except for the most important position of all, Secretary of State.

Of all the choices possible, Hillary was arguably the worst.

I think it's awesome. really I do. You elected a "career politician". What did you expect? The most politically correct choice, of course. As Rush says, "keep your enemies closer".

Hillary can't run against Obama in 4 years. Now she's part of his administration.

It was a stroke of brilliance.

[hoosier]

All good except for the most important position of all, Secretary of State.

Of all the choices possible, Hillary was arguably the worst.

I think it's awesome. really I do. You elected a "career politician". What did you expect? The most politically correct choice, of course. As Rush says, "keep your enemies closer".

Hillary can't run against Obama in 4 years. Now she's part of his administration.

It was a stroke of brilliance.

You're not as clever as you think. When was the last time a sitting president eligible for reelection got serious competition from his own party?

[sheepshead]

Ted Kennedy 1980

[packinpatland]

All good except for the most important position of all, Secretary of State.

Of all the choices possible, Hillary was arguably the worst.

I think it's awesome. really I do. You elected a "career politician". What did you expect? The most politically correct choice, of course. As Rush says, "keep your enemies closer".

Hillary can't run against Obama in 4 years. Now she's part of his administration.

It was a stroke of brilliance.

You lost all credibility when you said "As Rush says...."