# The Dow goes up 497 points



## Truthmatters

Why?


----------



## xsited1

Truthmatters said:


> Why?



Because the American Taxpayer (that's you and me) is pumping trillions into the banking industry.  Thanks Obama!


----------



## Truthmatters

It just closed up over 500.


Yeah it would be horrible if the stimulus and bailout worked huh?

then you party would truely have nothing.


----------



## driveby

Bear Rally .....


----------



## xsited1

Truthmatters said:


> It just closed up over 500.
> 
> 
> Yeah it would be horrible if the stimulus and bailout worked huh?
> 
> then you party would truely have nothing.





Just make sure you tell your kids to tell their kids to tell their kids that they'll all be paying for this.


----------



## Chris

I know the Republicans are disappointed.


----------



## Maple

Yes, and I am betting that it will go down about 1,000 points tomorrow, when they figure out that private investors are not going to invest when the government writes the rules, this ain't over yet. I hope I am wrong for the benefit of all of us, but I sure can't get my hopes up with this liberal, socialistic President and congress.


----------



## manu1959

Truthmatters said:


> Why?



private money......


----------



## ABikerSailor

Tell ya what........in the next 2 weeks, I'd be willing to bet that the Dow goes up over 8,000.  Many of the economic people on the news today have been saying that one reason is because of the banks getting rid of their toxic assets.

Kinda like a bee sting actually.  Once you remove the stinger (toxic assets), the swelling goes down quickly and you start to recover.  Until then?  Hurts like hell.


----------



## xsited1

ABikerSailor said:


> Tell ya what........in the next 2 weeks, I'd be willing to bet that the Dow goes up over 8,000.  Many of the economic people on the news today have been saying that one reason is because of the banks getting rid of their toxic assets.
> 
> Kinda like a bee sting actually.  Once you remove the stinger (toxic assets), the swelling goes down quickly and you start to recover. * Until then?  Hurts like hell*.



Correction:  It will continue to hurt like hell for years to come because we are paying for it.


----------



## wimpy77

Truthmatters said:


> Why?



there is uncertainy has been taken of the market. they were waiting for a plan to get rid toxic assets. they got it, now there could be one problem. banks might not be willing sell them especially if mark to market is parred back.


----------



## Annie

manu1959 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> private money......
Click to expand...


That and the existing home sales up, significantly.


----------



## Chris

Maple said:


> Yes, and I am betting that it will go down about 1,000 points tomorrow, when they figure out that private investors are not going to invest when the government writes the rules, this ain't over yet. I hope I am wrong for the benefit of all of us, but I sure can't get my hopes up with this liberal, socialistic President and congress.



Get over it.

Bailing out the banks helps all of us, as much as we hate to do it.

Now we need to re-regulate the markets, so this does not happen again.


----------



## Chris

Truthmatters said:


> It just closed up over 500.
> 
> 
> Yeah it would be horrible if the stimulus and bailout worked huh?
> 
> then you party would truely have nothing.


----------



## mash107

INO Equities Stocks Indexes - U.S $ INDEX (NYBOTX) Price Chart and Quote

Wall Street gains, the Dollar and the American people lose.

It's apparent Obama and Bernanke made clear who they favor... (hint: it's not us)


----------



## raceright

ABikerSailor said:


> Tell ya what........in the next 2 weeks, I'd be willing to bet that the Dow goes up over 8,000.  Many of the economic people on the news today have been saying that one reason is because of the banks getting rid of their toxic assets.
> 
> Kinda like a bee sting actually.  Once you remove the stinger (toxic assets), the swelling goes down quickly and you start to recover.  Until then?  Hurts like hell.




Guess who is going to buy the Toxic assets..Hint it ain't the poor.
But there going to make Obama squirm a bit first  some very pissed at being considered evil  rich.


----------



## Chris

mash107 said:


> INO Equities Stocks Indexes - U.S $ INDEX (NYBOTX) Price Chart and Quote
> 
> Wall Street gains, the Dollar and the American people lose.
> 
> It's apparent Obama and Bernanke made clear who they favor... (hint: it's not us)



The American people made their choice in November.

I'll call you a whaambulance.


----------



## Toro

Because

- Obama said he'd oppose the 90% tax
- The government detailed its banking plan
- Housing data was better than expected
- Shorts are covering and running to the hills.
- the double and triple moving ETFs bought at the end of the day to cover their positions.


----------



## FactFinder

Toro said:


> Because
> 
> - Obama said he'd oppose the 90% tax
> - The government detailed its banking plan
> - Housing data was better than expected
> - Shorts are covering and running to the hills.
> - the double and triple moving ETFs bought at the end of the day to cover their positions.



Fiat money. An illusion.


----------



## ABikerSailor

Wonder if the Limbidiot still wants Obama to fail, and if so, what's he gonna do now?


----------



## dilloduck

ABikerSailor said:


> Wonder if the Limbidiot still wants Obama to fail, and if so, what's he gonna do now?



Maybe point out that the Democrats are thrilled about the rich getting richer ?


----------



## Pyrite

dilloduck said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wonder if the Limbidiot still wants Obama to fail, and if so, what's he gonna do now?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe point out that the Democrats are thrilled about the rich getting richer ?
Click to expand...


Yeah, 'cause it's just the rich who are invested in the stock market. It's not everyone with a retirement account or anything.

It's not like the stock market has any effect on people's jobs or anything.

that would be ridiculous.


----------



## dilloduck

Pyrite said:


> dilloduck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wonder if the Limbidiot still wants Obama to fail, and if so, what's he gonna do now?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe point out that the Democrats are thrilled about the rich getting richer ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, 'cause it's just the rich who are invested in the stock market. It's not everyone with a retirement account or anything.
> 
> It's not like the stock market has any effect on people's jobs or anything.
> 
> that would be ridiculous.
Click to expand...


right-----retirement accounts are all safe now and unemployment will drop like a lead balloon.  Fool me twice------


----------



## raceright

dilloduck said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wonder if the Limbidiot still wants Obama to fail, and if so, what's he gonna do now?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe point out that the Democrats are thrilled about the rich getting richer ?
Click to expand...


Just gonna happen no matter witch way it goes


----------



## Truthmatters

Maple said:


> Yes, and I am betting that it will go down about 1,000 points tomorrow, when they figure out that private investors are not going to invest when the government writes the rules, this ain't over yet. I hope I am wrong for the benefit of all of us, but I sure can't get my hopes up with this liberal, socialistic President and congress.





You people are fucking insane.

You cheer for years while the assholes tear our coutnry to shreads and "get all worried" when it has to be fixed.

just fucking amazing.


----------



## Yurt

when the dow goes down the dems cry its not obama's fault....now it goes up and somehow its now obama's fault....


----------



## DiveCon

ABikerSailor said:


> Wonder if the Limbidiot still wants Obama to fail, and if so, what's he gonna do now?


why dont you actually listen and find out


----------



## Alpha1

Why did the market go up ???

The taxpayers just  spent billions of dollars to purchase worthless mortgages from banks. Mortgages, that Democrats  forced the  banks to give to ...lets just say the wrong customers...
And let there be no doubt, Democrats did force the banks to give these loans

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivmL-lXNy64&feature=related]YouTube - EVIDENCE FOUND!!! Clinton administration's "BANK AFFIRMATIVE ACTION" They forced banks to make BAD LOANS and ACORN and Obama's tie to all of it!!![/ame]
Banking Affirmative action....by Democrats...1998


----------



## manu1959

Annie said:


> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> private money......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That and the existing home sales up, significantly.
Click to expand...


seems the evil rich in the private sector have come to the rescue yet again..........


----------



## manu1959

Truthmatters said:


> It just closed up over 500.
> 
> 
> Yeah it would be horrible if the stimulus and bailout worked huh?
> 
> then you party would truely have nothing.



yep the rich get richer under obama ...... i am sure the gop is thrilled....


----------



## editec

Good news.

Let's hope this is a recovering market and not just another bear rally.


----------



## DiveCon

manu1959 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> It just closed up over 500.
> 
> 
> Yeah it would be horrible if the stimulus and bailout worked huh?
> 
> then you party would truely have nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yep the rich get richer under obama ...... i am sure the gop is thrilled....
Click to expand...

Obama better hurry up and increase their taxes


----------



## DiveCon

editec said:


> Good news.
> 
> Let's hope this is a recovering market and not just another bear rally.


thats why its too early to say either way
there were some claiming this when it blipped up a couple weeks ago, then it went back down


----------



## Alpha1

manu1959 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> It just closed up over 500.
> 
> 
> Yeah it would be horrible if the stimulus and bailout worked huh?
> 
> then you party would truely have nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yep the rich get richer under obama ...... i am sure the gop is thrilled....
Click to expand...


Millions of people that should never have qualified for a mortgage to buy a home they couldn't afford in the first place, just got bailed out by the taxpayers, fool....

The rich didn't get richer and US tax payers just got poorer..(..unless you mean that only the rich pay taxes in the first place...)


----------



## Yurt

Yurt said:


> when the dow goes down the dems cry its not obama's fault....now it goes up and somehow its now obama's fault....



so when the dow goes back down, i fully expect the dems who said the dow going up is because of obama....to be honest and say obama caused the dow to fall....


----------



## DiveCon

Yurt said:


> Yurt said:
> 
> 
> 
> when the dow goes down the dems cry its not obama's fault....now it goes up and somehow its now obama's fault....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so when the dow goes back down, i fully expect the dems who said the dow going up is because of obama....to be honest and say obama caused the dow to fall....
Click to expand...

nope, that will be Bush's fault


----------



## ScreamingEagle

Oh boy.....from toxic assets to toxic inflation....when is Oblama's printing ma$hine ever going to wear out.....?


----------



## dilloduck

manu1959 said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> 
> private money......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That and the existing home sales up, significantly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> seems the evil rich in the private sector have come to the rescue yet again..........
Click to expand...


say it loudly and several times , Manu.----The hard working entrepeneurs and those they hire in the private sector have temporarily saved those who can't cut the mustard.


----------



## jeffrockit

Chris said:


> mash107 said:
> 
> 
> 
> INO Equities Stocks Indexes - U.S $ INDEX (NYBOTX) Price Chart and Quote
> 
> Wall Street gains, the Dollar and the American people lose.
> 
> It's apparent Obama and Bernanke made clear who they favor... (hint: it's not us)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The American people made their choice in November.
> 
> I'll call you a whaambulance.
Click to expand...


A little over 1/2 of the american people made their choice and a little under 1/2 have to live with it....for many generations to come.


----------



## Chris

Alpha1 said:


> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> It just closed up over 500.
> 
> 
> Yeah it would be horrible if the stimulus and bailout worked huh?
> 
> then you party would truely have nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yep the rich get richer under obama ...... i am sure the gop is thrilled....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Millions of people that should never have qualified for a mortgage to buy a home they couldn't afford in the first place, just got bailed out by the taxpayers, fool....
> 
> The rich didn't get richer and US tax payers just got poorer..(..unless you mean that only the rich pay taxes in the first place...)
Click to expand...


How long did the taxpayer pay your salary?


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> Alpha1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> 
> yep the rich get richer under obama ...... i am sure the gop is thrilled....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of people that should never have qualified for a mortgage to buy a home they couldn't afford in the first place, just got bailed out by the taxpayers, fool....
> 
> The rich didn't get richer and US tax payers just got poorer..(..unless you mean that only the rich pay taxes in the first place...)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How long did the taxpayer pay your salary?
Click to expand...

you're one to talk

how many times have you bragged about how the $8k tax credit was helping you sell houses to people that really cant afford em


----------



## auditor0007

Chris said:


> Maple said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and I am betting that it will go down about 1,000 points tomorrow, when they figure out that private investors are not going to invest when the government writes the rules, this ain't over yet. I hope I am wrong for the benefit of all of us, but I sure can't get my hopes up with this liberal, socialistic President and congress.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get over it.
> 
> Bailing out the banks helps all of us, as much as we hate to do it.
> 
> Now we need to re-regulate the markets, so this does not happen again.
Click to expand...


The bail out will help.  As much as I dislike the idea of throwing this money at the banks, I supported it from the beginning.  I really don't think there was a choice.  However, just because the market jumped 500 points due to investors feeling a glimmer of hope, it doesn't mean everything is all of a sudden okay on Main Street.  

We're not done seeing all of the foreclosures, and with more people losing jobs, we're likely to see a lot more.  And because we over built in the first place, it's going to take a hell of a lot more than a few people jumping back into the housing market before the economy can stand on it's own feet again.

Some people here talking about the market hitting 8000 as a sign that everything is on it's way back are not thinking clearly.  The market was at 14,000; remember?  More likely than not, the next time the DOW hits 14,000, we're going to have a different President.


----------



## manu1959

Alpha1 said:


> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> It just closed up over 500.
> 
> 
> Yeah it would be horrible if the stimulus and bailout worked huh?
> 
> then you party would truely have nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yep the rich get richer under obama ...... i am sure the gop is thrilled....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Millions of people that should never have qualified for a mortgage to buy a home they couldn't afford in the first place, just got bailed out by the taxpayers, fool....
> 
> The rich didn't get richer and US tax payers just got poorer..(..unless you mean that only the rich pay taxes in the first place...)
Click to expand...


well as far as i can tell barry is passing out money to banks and auto companies.....

those folks ain't the po.....fool.....

now he is asking private folks to buy toxic debt using govt' funds......sounds like another loan to the rich......

how about you google the group of thirty the google all the banks that got tarp funds then come back and tell me the rich aint gettin richer under barry.....


----------



## DiveCon

manu1959 said:


> Alpha1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> 
> yep the rich get richer under obama ...... i am sure the gop is thrilled....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of people that should never have qualified for a mortgage to buy a home they couldn't afford in the first place, just got bailed out by the taxpayers, fool....
> 
> The rich didn't get richer and US tax payers just got poorer..(..unless you mean that only the rich pay taxes in the first place...)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> well as far as i can tell barry is passing out money to banks and auto companies.....
> 
> those folks ain't the po.....fool.....
> 
> now he is asking private folks to buy toxic debt using govt' funds......sounds like another loan to the rich......
> 
> how about you google the group of thirty the google all the banks that got tarp funds then come back and tell me the rich aint gettin richer under barry.....
Click to expand...

sounds like that to me too


----------



## Chris

DiveCon said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alpha1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Millions of people that should never have qualified for a mortgage to buy a home they couldn't afford in the first place, just got bailed out by the taxpayers, fool....
> 
> The rich didn't get richer and US tax payers just got poorer..(..unless you mean that only the rich pay taxes in the first place...)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How long did the taxpayer pay your salary?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you're one to talk
> 
> how many times have you bragged about how the $8k tax credit was helping you sell houses to people that really cant afford em
Click to expand...


Wrong.

You have to buy a home to get the credit, so you have to qualify for the home without the $8K.

Nice try, though.


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> How long did the taxpayer pay your salary?
> 
> 
> 
> you're one to talk
> 
> how many times have you bragged about how the $8k tax credit was helping you sell houses to people that really cant afford em
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong.
> 
> You have to buy a home to get the credit, so you have to qualify for the home without the $8K.
> 
> Nice try, though.
Click to expand...

yeah sure


----------



## Chris

DiveCon said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> you're one to talk
> 
> how many times have you bragged about how the $8k tax credit was helping you sell houses to people that really cant afford em
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong.
> 
> You have to buy a home to get the credit, so you have to qualify for the home without the $8K.
> 
> Nice try, though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> yeah sure
Click to expand...


As usual, you don't have the balls to admit you are wrong. 

Coward.


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong.
> 
> You have to buy a home to get the credit, so you have to qualify for the home without the $8K.
> 
> Nice try, though.
> 
> 
> 
> yeah sure
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As usual, you don't have the balls to admit you are wrong.
> 
> Coward.
Click to expand...

asshole, you know what you bragged about
so fuck off
i'm NOT wrong


----------



## Old Rocks

DiveCon said:


> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> It just closed up over 500.
> 
> 
> Yeah it would be horrible if the stimulus and bailout worked huh?
> 
> then you party would truely have nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yep the rich get richer under obama ...... i am sure the gop is thrilled....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Obama better hurry up and increase their taxes
Click to expand...


Excellant idea!


----------



## Old Rocks

Alpha1 said:


> Why did the market go up ???
> 
> The taxpayers just  spent billions of dollars to purchase worthless mortgages from banks. Mortgages, that Democrats  forced the  banks to give to ...lets just say the wrong customers...
> And let there be no doubt, Democrats did force the banks to give these loans
> 
> YouTube - EVIDENCE FOUND!!! Clinton administration's "BANK AFFIRMATIVE ACTION" They forced banks to make BAD LOANS and ACORN and Obama's tie to all of it!!!
> Banking Affirmative action....by Democrats...1998



It Was Bush Who Pushed Minority Home Buying, Not Clinton!
Knowledge is power and that is why there was very little reporting done by the Republican-owned media, that it was George Bush who pushed for minority home buying.... not Clinton as they love to distort about, and gave Speculators the go ahead to get minorities to buy homes in the hundreds of thousands.

Bush - "Calling a home the "foundation for families and a source of stability for communities," President Bush proposed three new initiatives designed to enhance existing federal home buyer assistance programs by helping African- and Hispanic-Americans buy homes. According to the White House, fewer than half of all African and Hispanic Americans currently own their homes, compared to nearly three-fourths of white Americans. "We must begin to close this homeownership gap by dismantling the barriers that prevent minorities from owning a piece of the American dream," said the President in a nationwide radio address. To close the homeownership gap, President Bush proposed legislation funding the following new initiatives:

American Dream Down Payment Fund

This program would provide money to qualified low-income families to assist in making the down payment on a home. "The single greatest hurdle to first time homeownership is a high down payment requirement that can put a home out of reach," said President Bush. White House analysts estimate that the American Dream Fund will assist some 40,000 low-income families annually in making down payments on homes.

Letters: Predatory lending with a smiley face - Salon


----------



## Old Rocks

jeffrockit said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mash107 said:
> 
> 
> 
> INO Equities Stocks Indexes - U.S $ INDEX (NYBOTX) Price Chart and Quote
> 
> Wall Street gains, the Dollar and the American people lose.
> 
> It's apparent Obama and Bernanke made clear who they favor... (hint: it's not us)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The American people made their choice in November.
> 
> I'll call you a whaambulance.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A little over 1/2 of the american people made their choice and a little under 1/2 have to live with it....for many generations to come.
Click to expand...


Less than half of the American People made their choice in 2000, and we will live with the results of incompetance, corruption, and lies from that administration for many generations. President Obama is doing all that he can to prevent idiocies of the previous administration from economically destroying this nation. But you people would rather see the nation fail than see the President succeed.


----------



## Old Rocks

auditor0007 said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maple said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and I am betting that it will go down about 1,000 points tomorrow, when they figure out that private investors are not going to invest when the government writes the rules, this ain't over yet. I hope I am wrong for the benefit of all of us, but I sure can't get my hopes up with this liberal, socialistic President and congress.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get over it.
> 
> Bailing out the banks helps all of us, as much as we hate to do it.
> 
> Now we need to re-regulate the markets, so this does not happen again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The bail out will help.  As much as I dislike the idea of throwing this money at the banks, I supported it from the beginning.  I really don't think there was a choice.  However, just because the market jumped 500 points due to investors feeling a glimmer of hope, it doesn't mean everything is all of a sudden okay on Main Street.
> 
> We're not done seeing all of the foreclosures, and with more people losing jobs, we're likely to see a lot more.  And because we over built in the first place, it's going to take a hell of a lot more than a few people jumping back into the housing market before the economy can stand on it's own feet again.
> 
> Some people here talking about the market hitting 8000 as a sign that everything is on it's way back are not thinking clearly.  The market was at 14,000; remember?  More likely than not, the next time the DOW hits 14,000, we're going to have a different President.
Click to expand...


Funny, this is exactly what the President has said. It is a good sign, but the worst is not over. 

We have a tremendous backlog of unemployed and under employed Americans. Untill they can get work at real jobs paying reasonable money, this economy cannot come back. 

The next part that needs to be done, and ASAP, is the rebuilding of existing infrastructure. And the start of building an energy infrastructure that will make us independent of foriegn energy, while eliminating pollution.

That will cost money, but like the WPA and CCC projects, will be an investment that will be used for many genertations to come.


----------



## editec

One TRILLION DOLLARS = Every mortgage in American paid for 14 months.

You want to jump start MY economy?

Pay my (pay all our) mortgage(s) for 14 months. 

That'll do it.


----------



## Indiana Oracle

We need forward progress along many economic fronts.  Right now, how we do that is pretty much immaterial.

We also need to stay away from new spending amd borrowing which do not have a direct, positive impact on the economy.  On this front Obama is off the rails.  Even many Democrat policy thinkers are starting to become loud about this.  auditor2007 and a couple of others have the right viewpoint.  

In the for-what-it-is-worth column, who really cares about Bush or Obama?  Who cares whose fault all of this is?  People exercised at this level are nothing more than foot soldiers for idealogues. 

Investigate and decide these issues for yourself.  Think out of your current framework.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Truthmatters said:


> The DOW is up over 450pts.  Why?



Because people can buy equity in stocks that were trading for $85 a year ago for $2.50, which means that they're $2.50 from doubling their money... 

In short order, when ever their profit goal is met, they'll sell off all or a portion of those shares and that will send the dow down again...

People are thinking "SHORT TERM" at the moment, and for very good reasons; which is a condition that describe a "bear" market...  

The economic policy of the ideological left, which punishes performance, or 'success' makes long term gains 'unlikely'... so people work to capitalize on short term gains which can be reasonably predicted by cause and effect of common reports.

Now that answers your question... but it doesn't BEGIN to answer THE Question which is WHY ARE PEOPLE NOT THINKING LONG TERM?  

The answer to which is that LEFTISTS ARE IN CONTROL OF THE ECONOMY AND THINKING 'LONG-TERM' HURTS TOO MUCH...

This gaggle of idiots which have been elected by the larger gaggle of IMBECILES, are bankrupting the US... 


FOR GOD'S SAKE< EVEN THE IMBECILES THAT ELECTED THEM ARE PISSED!  And kids... that is a VERY BAD SIGN!

*IF you TRIED to imagine a scheme wherein a conspiracy was PLOTTED AND EXECUTED to destroy the US economic engine, you'd be hard pressed to think of one which would be more effective than what we're watching take place right now.*

The Fed just wrote checks for 4 trillion dollars, on an account which has NOTHING in it, and is now BORROWING against those worthless checks.  

Now when those dollars hit the market and go into distribution, the value of the dollars you have are going to be DEVALUED by the exact percentage which that 4 trillion represents against the volume of currency which is presently circulating in the market.

What YOU IDIOTS DID TO THE US, THROUGH YOUR ELECTING PROGRESSIVES>> MARXISTS... and this includes all of the PROGRESSIVE>> Marxists which you've placed in the legislature for 60 years...  The Bawney Fwanks, the Maxine Waters... who are DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COLLAPSE OF THE FINANCIAL MARKETS, is that you've subjected the US market to the idiots that believe that the US should not be the worlds super-power; Marxists who believe in the absurd notion of fairness that requires PRIVATE BANKS BE COERCED INTO LOANING MONEY AGAISNT NO PERCEPTION OF RISK; THRESHOLDS WHICH CANNOT POSSIBLY BE SUSTAINED; and who project a mythical Federal guarantee... which those psuedo-federal banks and their insurance vehicles CANNOT POSSIBLY HOPE TO COVER.

Those idiots of which YOU are one... are now driving, or HAVE DRIVEN the US economy into bankruptcy where their solution TO THE PROBLEMS THEY HAVE CAUSED, is to shut down the bankrupt US Currency and replace it with an international currency... which is *BASED UPON THE SAME THING THAT KILLED THE US CURRENCY!* And in so doing they are striking AT the sovereignty of the US.

There is virtually NO MEANS to measure the damage that you idiots have done to this country.  And whether you've done so through 'good intentions' or through overt subversion of nefarious intent is MEANINGLESS...  as the result is the same.

The DOW up 500 yesterday, it's presently down 100pts... and it will conitnue to bounce along this false bottom until the framework which you idiots have set us in finally succumbs to it's obvious structural flaws...  You've dug the foundation out from under the Market, through your absurd regulations and PILED IT ON TOP OF THE MARKET THROUGH YOUR ATTEMPTS TO FINANCE YOUR STUPIFYINGLY ABSURD SOCIAL CONTRACT...

Brace yourself spanky...  this one's gonna HURT; and there's no one else to hang on to sis, because we're ALL standing under the SAME collapse...



> *Idealogues Wrong *
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> We need forward progress along many economic fronts. Right now, how we do that is pretty much immaterial.
> 
> We also need to stay away from new spending amd borrowing which do not have a direct, positive impact on the economy. On this front Obama is off the rails. Even many Democrat policy thinkers are starting to become loud about this. auditor2007 and a couple of others have the right viewpoint.
> 
> In the for-what-it-is-worth column, who really cares about Bush or Obama? Who cares whose fault all of this is? People exercised at this level are nothing more than foot soldiers for idealogues.
> 
> Investigate and decide these issues for yourself. Think out of your current framework



And THAT is part of the problem RIGHT THERE!

We want to know who is responsible, BECAUSE THEY AND THEIR ACTIONS CAUSED THE PROBLEM... AND TO FIX THE PROBLEM YA HAVE TO KNOW THE CAUSE TO EXECUTE A SOLUTION!  

The problem is leftism... PERIOD AND WITHOUT EXCEPTION.  The Federal Reserve... while the left today LOVES to toss that idiocy upon the RIGHT... the federal reserve was and remains a FUNCTION OF SOCIAL SCIENCE...  It was created by good ole President Wilson and represents the FOUNDATION of how we got to where we are today.

The Federal Reserve was sold as the means by which the SCIENCE of 'Economics' would create a sound economic foundation that would spare the world economy the agony of the Boom-Bust cycle...  The Federal Reserves, created in 1913, took a while to get going and didn't really begin to do it's thing, until Goold Ole' Presidents Hoover and FDR used it control the recession of '29... it's FIRST outing the Federal reserve which was sold as the means by which SCIENCE WOULD CONTROL THE WORLD ECONOMY (for the good of all mankind, of course...) lead the world into a DEPRESSION on it's first time at bat.

And the COOL part is that it did pretty much the same thing then, that it's doing NOW... only with a neat twist... Along with the US treasury, it's decided to do the same thing the German Weirmar Government did which resulted in ruinous hyper-inflation, which set Germany up for the glory days of the THOUSAND YEAR REICH...  Which of course, didn't actually last QUITE a full thousand years... and the glory sorta petered out in the smoldering rubble that was Germany after it's people conceded their freedom to those who came along to SAVE it from the VERY SIMILAR ECONOMIC POLICIES WHICH THIS ADMINISTRATION AND THE FEDERAL RESERVE ARE PRESENTLY IMPLEMENTING...

So yeah... don't get all caught up in whose responsible...  or how we got here... or what happened to people who didn't worry about who caused THEIR problems or how they GOT THERE... THAT'S ALL ANCIENT HISTORY...  The thing to do now is to BRACE YOURSELF FOR IMPACT...  

To stop this looming trainwreck would require the kind of leadership which is no where to be found on the national seen.  The stage is set to destroy anyone who might try, before they ever get close enough to do anything about it...  

Such leadership would require an IMMEDIATE, COLD TURKEY RETURN TO Bed-rock economic principle which leaves the fate of the individual TO THE INDIVIDUAL and a shut down of the Federal Reserve; the return of the US Dollar to a tangible value base and the shutting down of most of the federal goverment.

And since that is that is the solution and there is no one who can make that happen, that means that nature is on her own and she'll have to do it herself.

Here's how it's going to go down...

The phoney baloney money that the Left and the Fed have printed up hits circulation over the next 6 months, the US cdolalr goes to Zilch, US Federal dent instruments; Bonds, notes, bills... are recognized as worthless, the holders of which run to cash them in... and the US government prints more cash to pay those instruments off...  the non-idiots see where this is going and there's no point bothering the idiots with what they can't understand.  

The whole house of 'SOCIAL SCIENCE' Cards, come crashing down and along with it, the US Federal Government.

On one hand it's terrifying and on the other, its exillerating... because it's an actual means to rebuild a nation... to put her back on the tracks which sustained her into unprecedented prosperity LONG before the Advocates of Social Science began to undermine her foundation with their insidous arrogance.

the REALLY bad news here is that the Left will not admit that it's their fault; they will not acknowledge that it was THEIR POLICY which DESTROYED US and we'll have two choices before us:

Choice #1: Let the left apply MORE of that which destroyed us, except on a MUCH LARGER GLOBAL SCALE... which will leave us to watch the WHOLE THING HAPPEN AGAIN, WITH EXPONENTIALLY GREATER DESTRUCTIVE POWER... Destruction on a scale which I do not believe we can even BEGIN to get our heads around... Or...

Choice #2... STOP THEM COLD by whatever means is necessary and return the United States to it's core principles... re-establish a Federal government which OPERATES ON THE SAME US CONSTITUION THROUGH WHICH SHE WAS BORN... only this time on the understanding that THOSE ARE THR RULES... WRITTEN IN STONE AND NOT SOME ABSURD 'LIVING DOCUMENT' which can be manipulated to fit whatever soft-headed rationalization we happen to be hearing at any given point in time...


----------



## Yurt

the dow is down nearly a 100....

i wonder why?  i wonder why the same libs who said yesterday that the rise was all obama's doing are silent today....


----------



## Sarah G

Yurt said:


> the dow is down nearly a 100....
> 
> i wonder why?  i wonder why the same libs who said yesterday that the rise was all obama's doing are silent today....



It was this morning.  It's struggling but it is easing up there today.  64.60 now.


----------



## Indiana Oracle

There are basically three kinds of idealogues in my view.  


Those who believe in a set of values, try to live by them and mind their own business
Those who want to bring everything down to establish a new utopia (lots of variations)
Those who believe in a set of values, may or may not live by them, but spend their time trying to take over.
I may have missed one, but most of the noise is from number 3.


----------



## Yurt

Sarah G said:


> Yurt said:
> 
> 
> 
> the dow is down nearly a 100....
> 
> i wonder why?  i wonder why the same libs who said yesterday that the rise was all obama's doing are silent today....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was this morning.  It's struggling but it is easing up there today.  64.60 now.
Click to expand...


i just checked bloomberg, down 46


----------



## Sarah G

Yurt said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yurt said:
> 
> 
> 
> the dow is down nearly a 100....
> 
> i wonder why?  i wonder why the same libs who said yesterday that the rise was all obama's doing are silent today....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was this morning.  It's struggling but it is easing up there today.  64.60 now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i just checked bloomberg, down 46
Click to expand...


Wall St. likes that Geitner brought a plan.  We'll see how it goes after Obama's news conference tonight.

God help him if he laughs..


----------



## editec

I believe that you folks who think the market is enitrely moving based on the day-to-day events in the news are being mislead by your theories that the government has total control over the market.

Certainly sometimes that might be true but every damned say?

I do not think the market works that way, folks.


----------



## Indiana Oracle

As an S&P futures day-trader of many years, I can assure you that a individual day's price movement is determined by news, actions by the Fed, and then market operators mostly when the other two are not operative.

Lately it has been all Fed.  Most S&P traders have been out of the S&P since it looked like The Prophet was going to be elected.  Everything now is based on news and the Fed. The Wall Street houses, who often maintain a semblence of order, are either gone or in such bad shape they are not really driving the market on a consistent basis either.

And the market is coming off an extreme over-sold condition.  Perhaps we are turning around.  Who knows.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

editec said:


> I believe that you folks who think the market is enitrely moving based on the day-to-day events in the news are being mislead by your theories that the government has total control over the market.
> 
> Certainly sometimes that might be true but every damned say?
> 
> I do not think the market works that way, folks.



Well said...

The market moves on the means by which those in the market, feel that it serves their individual best interests.

Now does it serve reason that those in the market would feel that their individual interests are served by a treasury Department which is so screwed up that THEY CAN'T EVEN DISCUSS THE SPECIFIC OF THEIR PLANS?

I rather doubt it...

So when the Sec of Treasury FINALLY comes along and lays out his plan, it serves reason that JUST KNOWING THAT THEY HAVE A PLAN... would come as some relief.  

The plan itself is a disaster... it can only make things worse, but at LEAST knowing what it IS, is a place to start trying to fix it. 

But as buying opportunities GO... right now the equity market is having a fire sale...  It's a "70% off EVERYTHING IN STOCK" sale...   and they're damn near GIVING AWAY some items...  

Imagine that your grand parents put the equivilent of $10,000 in todays dollars into the stock market in 1931...  Assuming that you had not pissed off old Grand Dad... you'd be a VERY wealthy man today; and by TODAY I mean *TODAY*; and by that I mean that you had not taken a dime out of the market during the peaks around 14,000... and let it all ride down to present values.  Of course you were TWICE as wealthy THEN, back when BUSH Policy had RUINED the economy, before the Marxists rode into power and saved us from those crazy ass numbers..

The Dow hovered around 169... in 1931.  Last month it hovered in the low 6000s...  it's better by more than a thousand points today... and that is going to remain the same or get worse as "progressive policy' punishes production and profits.  But that was the case throughout the 30s as well.

The bad news here is this current strain of "Progressive' is MUCH more of a threat to the individual, and thus the means of private market to PRODUCE a profit.   But the GOOD news is that if they screw it up, any money that's in the market will be just as worthless as the money ya have buried in the back yard... so it's a push; the only distinction is that the money in the market has a CHANCE for growth, while that money which hides from risk, has NO chance of growth while suffering the certainty of devaluation.


----------



## editec

Indiana Oracle said:


> As an S&P futures day-trader of many years, I can assure you that a individual day's price movement is determined by news, actions by the Fed, and then market operators mostly when the other two are not operative.
> 
> Lately it has been all Fed. Most S&P traders have been out of the S&P since it looked like The Prophet was going to be elected. Everything now is based on news and the Fed. The Wall Street houses, who often maintain a semblence of order, are either gone or in such bad shape they are not really driving the market on a consistent basis either.
> 
> And the market is coming off an extreme over-sold condition. Perhaps we are turning around. Who knows.


 

Well I'm certainly NOT arguming that what the FED does or the government does, or even what some foreighn government does will NOT effect the markets, IO.

But can you tell me exactly why the market went up yesterday?

Can you really prove that the day before yesterday's news cause the market to react as it did yesterday?

Because if you could, then you could also never lose a fucking penny in the market, right?

All you'd need do is pay attention the news about what the government is doing and then?

Then you could capitalize on it couldn't you?

Now are telling me that you never guessed wrong about how the market would react?

Never?

Not once?


----------



## Indiana Oracle

I, too, am quite concerned forward from the mid-term.  What Geithner is doing is not really new and, as far as I am aware, has never worked by any objective measurement.

I am actually wondering if anyone in this adminstration, including Geithner, really knows anything about the economy below the financial institution level.  That is just one of a group of disconcerting thoughts.

The whole mix coming out of the perfect storm the brought The Prophet into office has little to recommend it.


----------



## Indiana Oracle

The explanation I provided is accurate.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

editec said:


> Indiana Oracle said:
> 
> 
> 
> As an S&P futures day-trader of many years, I can assure you that a individual day's price movement is determined by news, actions by the Fed, and then market operators mostly when the other two are not operative.
> 
> Lately it has been all Fed. Most S&P traders have been out of the S&P since it looked like The Prophet was going to be elected. Everything now is based on news and the Fed. The Wall Street houses, who often maintain a semblence of order, are either gone or in such bad shape they are not really driving the market on a consistent basis either.
> 
> And the market is coming off an extreme over-sold condition. Perhaps we are turning around. Who knows.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well I'm certainly NOT arguming that what the FED does or the government does, or even what some foreighn government does will NOT effect the markets, IO.
> 
> But can you tell me exactly why the market went up yesterday?
> 
> Can you really prove that the day before yesterday's news cause the market to react as it did yesterday?
> 
> Because if you could, then you could also never lose a fucking penny in the market, right?
> 
> All you'd need do is pay attention the news about what the government is doing and then?
> 
> Then you could capitalize on it couldn't you?
> 
> Now are telling me that you never guessed wrong about how the market would react?
> 
> Never?
> 
> Not once?
Click to expand...



Ed... look... One needs to risk a LOT less today to realize substantial growth TODAY...  thus the volume of people who jump in for quick gains born on temporal 'news', where they anticipate certain reactions, which will induce the usual suspects to buy, thus represents a chance to gain.

For instance, using rough numbers... Three weeks ago, you could buy a block of GM stock for $127.00  Meaning you could buy a thousand shares of GM for $1270.  Had you done so, since then, you'd have turned your $1270 into $3500.

To do the same thing back in 2005 when GM traded for over $50... would have cost ya $5000 for a block and $50,000 for 10 blocks or 1000 shares.  And what's MORE, you risked that investment against the very real liklihood that it would plummet in value, as it did in april of 06.

Today GM is selling for roughly $3.30...  Let's assume you buy a thousand shares for $3300 and GM goes busted; you're out $3300 bucks... and its POSSIBLE that that COULD happen... thus the whole "RISK" thing... but the long odds are that GM will inevitably work its way back up to $30/share...   and IF (and I believe: when) that happens, that $3300 would be valued closer to THIRTY THOUSAND. 

The whole thing boils down to individual interests being key to the movement of the free market; that people buy on news doesn't necessarily mean that they believe that the news is GOOD news... or BAD news... just that THE NEWS will effect the potential for gains.


----------



## DiveCon

editec said:


> One TRILLION DOLLARS = Every mortgage in American paid for 14 months.
> 
> You want to jump start MY economy?
> 
> Pay my (pay all our) mortgage(s) for 14 months.
> 
> That'll do it.


that would have done more for the economy than that bullshit congress passed and Obama signed


----------



## ABikerSailor

Like I said.........within 2 weeks from yesterday, I think the market is gonna be over 8,000.

Any takers?


----------



## editec

Pub,

Yes, had my grandparents been bold enough to invest in the stock market 70 plus years ago and had I cashed in their investment my return on their investment would be quite high, no doubt.  (about 49% simple annual interest per year ) 

However, had my Grandparents invested in 1931 and needed the money BEFORE 1955 their return on investment would have been about $zero, yes?

And that isn't taking the losses they'd have suffered due to inflation, either, would it?

Hey, for all I know the stock market is wildly underpriced, today.

Then too, it might be wildly overpriced,

It really depends on events as yet unfolded, doesn't it?

Events which neither you nor I can predict with_ any_ degree of certainty.

Well...maybe you can predict them, but I'm fairly certain I cannot.

I cannot even figure out if we're about to go into a period of high inflation or not to be honest.

And frankly that's all I need to know to know how to invest (or divest) _right now._


----------



## editec

DiveCon said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> One TRILLION DOLLARS = Every mortgage in American paid for 14 months.
> 
> You want to jump start MY economy?
> 
> Pay my (pay all our) mortgage(s) for 14 months.
> 
> That'll do it.
> 
> 
> 
> that would have done more for the economy than that bullshit congress passed and Obama signed
Click to expand...

 
YUP!

Plus it would have prevented those mortgages which started this landslide from screwing those bonds which broke the banks which screwed the economic pooch, too.

However, it would ALSO have initiated a period of very high inflation, I suspect.

The market, responding to an increase in deamnd, would have responded ion that normal fashion of increased prices.

There's no free lunch, there's only getting somebody else to pick up the check.


----------



## ABikerSailor

Shit.......ya wanna stimulate the economy?  Legalize cannabis.  It is a BILLION DOLLAR A YEAR business in California alone.

I guarantee.......legalize it and within 6 months the economy will be making a strong comeback.  We could get off oil (hemp makes oil), as well as have food and other things.

Additionally, maybe everyone would be able to get the sticks out of their collective asses.

Not only that, but the infrastructure and the legislation ALREADY IS IN PLACE.  All the government has to do is start selling Marijuana Tax stamps.



> Marihuana Tax Act of 1937
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> (Redirected from Marijuana Tax Act)
> Jump to: navigation, search
> HR. 238 [75th]: Marihuana Tax Act
> full text
> Signed by the president.
> Introduced 	August 2, 1937
> Sponsor(s) 	Rep. Robert L. Doughton [-]
> Source: {{{footnotes}}}
> Major U.S. Federal
> narcotic laws
> Image:Marijuana icon.jpg
> 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act
> Regulates labeling of products containing
> certain drugs including cocaine and heroin
> 1914 Harrison Narcotics Tax Act
> Regulate opiates and cocaine
> 1937 Marihuana Tax Act
> Criminalization of marijuana.
> 1964 Convention on Narcotics.
> Treaty to control marijuana
> 1970 Controlled Substance Act
> Scheduling list for drugs
> v  d  e
> 
> In the United States, the 1937 Marihuana Tax Act, Pub. 238, 75th Congress, 50 Stat. 551 (Aug. 2, 1937), was a significant bill on the path that led to the criminalization of cannabis. It was introduced to U.S. Congress by "Drug Czar" Harry Anslinger, then Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics.
> Contents
> [hide]
> 
> * 1 References
> * 2 Further reading
> * 3 External links
> 
> The Act did not itself criminalize the possession or usage of hemp, marijuana or cannabis, but levied a tax equaling roughly one dollar on anyone who dealt commercially in cannabis, hemp or marijuana. It did, however, include penalty provisions and a complex Regulation 1 codifying the elaborate rules of enforcement marijuana cannabis or hemp handlers were subject to. Violation of these procedures could result in a fine of up to $2000 and five years' imprisonment. The net effect was to make it too risky for anyone to deal in the substance until World War II required the United States Department of Agriculture to make its 1942 movie "Hemp for Victory". The film encouraged and taught farmers to grow variants of hemp suitable as raw material for hawsers used by U.S Marines; the hemp was used as a substitute for other raw materials that were blocked by Japan.
> 
> The bill was passed on the grounds of different reports[1] and hearings [2]. Anslinger also referred to the International Opium Convention that from 1928 included cannabis as a drug, and that all states had some kind of laws against improper use of cannabis. Some testimonies included that cannabis caused "murder, insanity and death.[citation needed] Today, it is generally accepted that the hearings included incorrect, excessive or unfounded arguments.[citation needed] By 1951, however, new justifications had emerged, and a bill that superseded the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 was passed.
> 
> The background also included a report about the commercialized hemp reporting that from 1880 to 1933 the hemp grown in the United States had declined from 15,000 acres (61 km2), to 1,200 acres (5 km2), and that the price of line hemp had dropped from $12.50 per pound in 1914 to $9.00 per pound in 1933.[3]
> 
> In 1967, President Johnson's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of justice opined, "The Act raises an insignificant amount of revenue and exposes an insignificant number of marijuana transactions to public view, since only a handful of people are registered under the Act. It has become, in effect, solely- a criminal law, imposing sanctions upon persons who sell, acquire, or possess marijuana."[4]
> 
> In 1969 in Leary v. United States, this act was found to be unconstitutional since it violated the Fifth Amendment, since a person seeking the tax stamp would have to incriminate him/herself.[5] In response the Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act as Title II of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970[6]. The 1937 Act was repealed by the 1970 Act.
> 
> Although the spelling "marijuana" is more common in current usage, the correct spelling for the Marihuana Tax Act is "Marihuana". "Marihuana" was the spelling most commonly used in Federal Government documents at the time. To stay consistent with prior law, it is still spelled "Marihuana" in some congressional bills such as HR 3037, the Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2005.
> 
> In addition... the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 legitimized, made official, the use of the labeling of hemp and cannabis plants and products to be termed/called, "marihuana" or, as it is now said, "marijuana"... prior to 1937, "marihuana/marijuana" was slang, it was not included in any official dictionaries... as a reference (consult any dictionary prior to 1937) the author refers you to Webster's New International Dictionary, 1921, Published by G.&C. Merriam Company, Springfield, Mass., U.S.A., pg. 1318 - which is where if such a official word existed, it would be present, and it's not. The slang word marihuana/marijuana is probably of Mexican origin. In the years leading up to the tax act considerable issues existed involving illegal immigration of Mexicans into the United States, and the one thing Mexicans were identified as being in possession of was cannabis, what they called marihuana. It was the southern, border states that called for action. As documented by the History Channel's documentary, "Hooked: Illegal Drugs and How They Got That Way", copyright 2000, A&E Television Network, Cat. No. AAE-70805, Volume 1, Harry Anslinger resisted the call to even consider criminalizing cannabis... but under considerable pressure by southern states, and recent propaganda/horror movies inspired by, such notable figures as, William Randolf Hearst, Anslinger bowed to pressure, and based on the success of the tax act earlier created to "ban" possession of machine guns, created the tax act to ban what the Mexicans seemed to possess, that being marihuana, and therefor, illegal immigrants could now be arrested for possession of marihuana, as well as all US citizens.


----------



## Caskey100

I am glad that the market is back on the move up (for once) but it is becoming a bit much with amount of money being spent to get us out the issue. Then again if we look way back when the New Deal was criticized for using alot of dough and it ended up saving the entire country in the end. 

We can't take it with us  I guess.


----------



## DiveCon

ABikerSailor said:


> Shit.......ya wanna stimulate the economy?  Legalize cannabis.  It is a BILLION DOLLAR A YEAR business in California alone.
> 
> I guarantee.......legalize it and within 6 months the economy will be making a strong comeback.  We could get off oil (hemp makes oil), as well as have food and other things.
> 
> Additionally, maybe everyone would be able to get the sticks out of their collective asses.
> 
> Not only that, but the infrastructure and the legislation ALREADY IS IN PLACE.  All the government has to do is start selling Marijuana Tax stamps.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Marihuana Tax Act of 1937
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> (Redirected from Marijuana Tax Act)
> Jump to: navigation, search
> HR. 238 [75th]: Marihuana Tax Act
> full text
> Signed by the president.
> Introduced 	August 2, 1937
> Sponsor(s) 	Rep. Robert L. Doughton [-]
> Source: {{{footnotes}}}
> Major U.S. Federal
> narcotic laws
> Image:Marijuana icon.jpg
> 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act
> Regulates labeling of products containing
> certain drugs including cocaine and heroin
> 1914 Harrison Narcotics Tax Act
> Regulate opiates and cocaine
> 1937 Marihuana Tax Act
> Criminalization of marijuana.
> 1964 Convention on Narcotics.
> Treaty to control marijuana
> 1970 Controlled Substance Act
> Scheduling list for drugs
> v  d  e
> 
> In the United States, the 1937 Marihuana Tax Act, Pub. 238, 75th Congress, 50 Stat. 551 (Aug. 2, 1937), was a significant bill on the path that led to the criminalization of cannabis. It was introduced to U.S. Congress by "Drug Czar" Harry Anslinger, then Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics.
> Contents
> [hide]
> 
> * 1 References
> * 2 Further reading
> * 3 External links
> 
> The Act did not itself criminalize the possession or usage of hemp, marijuana or cannabis, but levied a tax equaling roughly one dollar on anyone who dealt commercially in cannabis, hemp or marijuana. It did, however, include penalty provisions and a complex Regulation 1 codifying the elaborate rules of enforcement marijuana cannabis or hemp handlers were subject to. Violation of these procedures could result in a fine of up to $2000 and five years' imprisonment. The net effect was to make it too risky for anyone to deal in the substance until World War II required the United States Department of Agriculture to make its 1942 movie "Hemp for Victory". The film encouraged and taught farmers to grow variants of hemp suitable as raw material for hawsers used by U.S Marines; the hemp was used as a substitute for other raw materials that were blocked by Japan.
> 
> The bill was passed on the grounds of different reports[1] and hearings [2]. Anslinger also referred to the International Opium Convention that from 1928 included cannabis as a drug, and that all states had some kind of laws against improper use of cannabis. Some testimonies included that cannabis caused "murder, insanity and death.[citation needed] Today, it is generally accepted that the hearings included incorrect, excessive or unfounded arguments.[citation needed] By 1951, however, new justifications had emerged, and a bill that superseded the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 was passed.
> 
> The background also included a report about the commercialized hemp reporting that from 1880 to 1933 the hemp grown in the United States had declined from 15,000 acres (61 km2), to 1,200 acres (5 km2), and that the price of line hemp had dropped from $12.50 per pound in 1914 to $9.00 per pound in 1933.[3]
> 
> In 1967, President Johnson's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of justice opined, "The Act raises an insignificant amount of revenue and exposes an insignificant number of marijuana transactions to public view, since only a handful of people are registered under the Act. It has become, in effect, solely- a criminal law, imposing sanctions upon persons who sell, acquire, or possess marijuana."[4]
> 
> In 1969 in Leary v. United States, this act was found to be unconstitutional since it violated the Fifth Amendment, since a person seeking the tax stamp would have to incriminate him/herself.[5] In response the Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act as Title II of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970[6]. The 1937 Act was repealed by the 1970 Act.
> 
> Although the spelling "marijuana" is more common in current usage, the correct spelling for the Marihuana Tax Act is "Marihuana". "Marihuana" was the spelling most commonly used in Federal Government documents at the time. To stay consistent with prior law, it is still spelled "Marihuana" in some congressional bills such as HR 3037, the Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2005.
> 
> In addition... the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 legitimized, made official, the use of the labeling of hemp and cannabis plants and products to be termed/called, "marihuana" or, as it is now said, "marijuana"... prior to 1937, "marihuana/marijuana" was slang, it was not included in any official dictionaries... as a reference (consult any dictionary prior to 1937) the author refers you to Webster's New International Dictionary, 1921, Published by G.&C. Merriam Company, Springfield, Mass., U.S.A., pg. 1318 - which is where if such a official word existed, it would be present, and it's not. The slang word marihuana/marijuana is probably of Mexican origin. In the years leading up to the tax act considerable issues existed involving illegal immigration of Mexicans into the United States, and the one thing Mexicans were identified as being in possession of was cannabis, what they called marihuana. It was the southern, border states that called for action. As documented by the History Channel's documentary, "Hooked: Illegal Drugs and How They Got That Way", copyright 2000, A&E Television Network, Cat. No. AAE-70805, Volume 1, Harry Anslinger resisted the call to even consider criminalizing cannabis... but under considerable pressure by southern states, and recent propaganda/horror movies inspired by, such notable figures as, William Randolf Hearst, Anslinger bowed to pressure, and based on the success of the tax act earlier created to "ban" possession of machine guns, created the tax act to ban what the Mexicans seemed to possess, that being marihuana, and therefor, illegal immigrants could now be arrested for possession of marihuana, as well as all US citizens.
Click to expand...

i wouldnt have a problem with that, it would also kill most of the drug business
then the tobacco companies could switch over a bunch of their crop to MJ and we could cut all the subsidies they are given


----------



## ABikerSailor

Actually, RJ Reynolds has that already in place......they're called "Blackjacks".

They started the program around 1976 when Carter was in office, and all they're doing is waiting for legalization.


----------



## sealybobo

Caskey100 said:


> I am glad that the market is back on the move up (for once) but it is becoming a bit much with amount of money being spent to get us out the issue. Then again if we look way back when the New Deal was criticized for using alot of dough and it ended up saving the entire country in the end.
> 
> We can't take it with us  I guess.



Good points.  

And don't forget all the money we spent in Iraq.  The GOP first said Iraq oil would pay for the war, and then they said the $10 billion a month we were spending was well worth the investment.

So this spending should certainly be considered an investment.  

And it isn't like we don't need bridges/roads and levy's.  

Also, remember the money spent here in America will stay here in America.  So eventually, the government will get it back.

Actually, this spending has more of a stimulative effect than tax breaks.  

PS.  Remember Bush gave the rich a tax break and that made the market happy?  Well we can't pay our bills without their fair share. 

PPS.  Lets not go back to judging the economy based on how Wallstreet did.  Lets focus on mainstreet.  How is unemployment, wages, debt, poverty, consumer spending.

Had the GOP factored in these things the last 8 years, they would have known the economy sucked.  But everytime I would show my right wing friends something bad about the economy, they would show me how great the DOW was doing.

FUCK the dow.


----------



## sealybobo

DiveCon said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shit.......ya wanna stimulate the economy?  Legalize cannabis.  It is a BILLION DOLLAR A YEAR business in California alone.
> 
> I guarantee.......legalize it and within 6 months the economy will be making a strong comeback.  We could get off oil (hemp makes oil), as well as have food and other things.
> 
> Additionally, maybe everyone would be able to get the sticks out of their collective asses.
> 
> Not only that, but the infrastructure and the legislation ALREADY IS IN PLACE.  All the government has to do is start selling Marijuana Tax stamps.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Marihuana Tax Act of 1937
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> (Redirected from Marijuana Tax Act)
> Jump to: navigation, search
> HR. 238 [75th]: Marihuana Tax Act
> full text
> Signed by the president.
> Introduced 	August 2, 1937
> Sponsor(s) 	Rep. Robert L. Doughton [-]
> Source: {{{footnotes}}}
> Major U.S. Federal
> narcotic laws
> Image:Marijuana icon.jpg
> 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act
> Regulates labeling of products containing
> certain drugs including cocaine and heroin
> 1914 Harrison Narcotics Tax Act
> Regulate opiates and cocaine
> 1937 Marihuana Tax Act
> Criminalization of marijuana.
> 1964 Convention on Narcotics.
> Treaty to control marijuana
> 1970 Controlled Substance Act
> Scheduling list for drugs
> v  d  e
> 
> In the United States, the 1937 Marihuana Tax Act, Pub. 238, 75th Congress, 50 Stat. 551 (Aug. 2, 1937), was a significant bill on the path that led to the criminalization of cannabis. It was introduced to U.S. Congress by "Drug Czar" Harry Anslinger, then Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics.
> Contents
> [hide]
> 
> * 1 References
> * 2 Further reading
> * 3 External links
> 
> The Act did not itself criminalize the possession or usage of hemp, marijuana or cannabis, but levied a tax equaling roughly one dollar on anyone who dealt commercially in cannabis, hemp or marijuana. It did, however, include penalty provisions and a complex Regulation 1 codifying the elaborate rules of enforcement marijuana cannabis or hemp handlers were subject to. Violation of these procedures could result in a fine of up to $2000 and five years' imprisonment. The net effect was to make it too risky for anyone to deal in the substance until World War II required the United States Department of Agriculture to make its 1942 movie "Hemp for Victory". The film encouraged and taught farmers to grow variants of hemp suitable as raw material for hawsers used by U.S Marines; the hemp was used as a substitute for other raw materials that were blocked by Japan.
> 
> The bill was passed on the grounds of different reports[1] and hearings [2]. Anslinger also referred to the International Opium Convention that from 1928 included cannabis as a drug, and that all states had some kind of laws against improper use of cannabis. Some testimonies included that cannabis caused "murder, insanity and death.[citation needed] Today, it is generally accepted that the hearings included incorrect, excessive or unfounded arguments.[citation needed] By 1951, however, new justifications had emerged, and a bill that superseded the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 was passed.
> 
> The background also included a report about the commercialized hemp reporting that from 1880 to 1933 the hemp grown in the United States had declined from 15,000 acres (61 km2), to 1,200 acres (5 km2), and that the price of line hemp had dropped from $12.50 per pound in 1914 to $9.00 per pound in 1933.[3]
> 
> In 1967, President Johnson's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of justice opined, "The Act raises an insignificant amount of revenue and exposes an insignificant number of marijuana transactions to public view, since only a handful of people are registered under the Act. It has become, in effect, solely- a criminal law, imposing sanctions upon persons who sell, acquire, or possess marijuana."[4]
> 
> In 1969 in Leary v. United States, this act was found to be unconstitutional since it violated the Fifth Amendment, since a person seeking the tax stamp would have to incriminate him/herself.[5] In response the Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act as Title II of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970[6]. The 1937 Act was repealed by the 1970 Act.
> 
> Although the spelling "marijuana" is more common in current usage, the correct spelling for the Marihuana Tax Act is "Marihuana". "Marihuana" was the spelling most commonly used in Federal Government documents at the time. To stay consistent with prior law, it is still spelled "Marihuana" in some congressional bills such as HR 3037, the Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2005.
> 
> In addition... the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 legitimized, made official, the use of the labeling of hemp and cannabis plants and products to be termed/called, "marihuana" or, as it is now said, "marijuana"... prior to 1937, "marihuana/marijuana" was slang, it was not included in any official dictionaries... as a reference (consult any dictionary prior to 1937) the author refers you to Webster's New International Dictionary, 1921, Published by G.&C. Merriam Company, Springfield, Mass., U.S.A., pg. 1318 - which is where if such a official word existed, it would be present, and it's not. The slang word marihuana/marijuana is probably of Mexican origin. In the years leading up to the tax act considerable issues existed involving illegal immigration of Mexicans into the United States, and the one thing Mexicans were identified as being in possession of was cannabis, what they called marihuana. It was the southern, border states that called for action. As documented by the History Channel's documentary, "Hooked: Illegal Drugs and How They Got That Way", copyright 2000, A&E Television Network, Cat. No. AAE-70805, Volume 1, Harry Anslinger resisted the call to even consider criminalizing cannabis... but under considerable pressure by southern states, and recent propaganda/horror movies inspired by, such notable figures as, William Randolf Hearst, Anslinger bowed to pressure, and based on the success of the tax act earlier created to "ban" possession of machine guns, created the tax act to ban what the Mexicans seemed to possess, that being marihuana, and therefor, illegal immigrants could now be arrested for possession of marihuana, as well as all US citizens.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i wouldnt have a problem with that, it would also kill most of the drug business
> then the tobacco companies could switch over a bunch of their crop to MJ and we could cut all the subsidies they are given
Click to expand...


And the government would make billions in tax revenue.  NEW tax revenue!!!

Legalizing pot is the answer to all our problems.

PS.  The GOP (and probably the dems too), protect the tobacco companies profits by keeping pot illegal.

And the courts make a lot of money on people who got caught smoking a joint. 

Pathetic really.


----------



## DiveCon

sealybobo said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shit.......ya wanna stimulate the economy?  Legalize cannabis.  It is a BILLION DOLLAR A YEAR business in California alone.
> 
> I guarantee.......legalize it and within 6 months the economy will be making a strong comeback.  We could get off oil (hemp makes oil), as well as have food and other things.
> 
> Additionally, maybe everyone would be able to get the sticks out of their collective asses.
> 
> Not only that, but the infrastructure and the legislation ALREADY IS IN PLACE.  All the government has to do is start selling Marijuana Tax stamps.
> 
> 
> 
> i wouldnt have a problem with that, it would also kill most of the drug business
> then the tobacco companies could switch over a bunch of their crop to MJ and we could cut all the subsidies they are given
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And the government would make billions in tax revenue.  NEW tax revenue!!!
> 
> Legalizing pot is the answer to all our problems.
> 
> PS.  The GOP (and probably the dems too), protect the tobacco companies profits by keeping pot illegal.
> 
> And the courts make a lot of money on people who got caught smoking a joint.
> 
> Pathetic really.
Click to expand...

uh, bobo, the tobacco companies would start producing pot


you really dont think through your posts before you make them, do you?


----------



## ABikerSailor

You know.......with all the things that I've seen on the news lately, there are more and more politicians that are turning towards the idea of the legalization of cannabis.

Google "marijuana legalization" sometime........it's pretty eye opening.


----------



## DiveCon

ABikerSailor said:


> You know.......with all the things that I've seen on the news lately, there are more and more politicians that are turning towards the idea of the legalization of cannabis.
> 
> Google "marijuana legalization" sometime........it's pretty eye opening.


hey, i want all you pot smokers to have as much as you want
as long as you arent giving it to kids
same for cigs
smoke all you want


----------



## Indiana Oracle

Agree.  Have all you want.  Want lots of booze?  Have all you want of that as well.  Just stay away from telling everyone else what to do or what values they should have.


----------



## ABikerSailor

Indiana Oracle said:


> Agree.  Have all you want.  Want lots of booze?  Have all you want of that as well.  Just stay away from telling everyone else what to do or what values they should have.



That works both ways though IO.  Usually it's the people who DON'T smoke who are telling others that they can't.

As far as the legal age limit?  Do it just like alcohol.


----------



## Mad Scientist

Truthmatters said:


> It just closed up over 500.
> Yeah it would be horrible if the stimulus and bailout worked huh?
> then you party would truely have nothing.


Uh, the Dow went south 115 points today:
http://www.marketwatch.com/
I forget, is that good or bad news?
Does Obama get credit only when the Dow goes up? Can we still blame George Bush for todays loss? When does it become Obamas Economy? When can we start blaming or crediting him?

Just wanna' know.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Old Rocks said:


> Alpha1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why did the market go up ???
> 
> The taxpayers just  spent billions of dollars to purchase worthless mortgages from banks. Mortgages, that Democrats  forced the  banks to give to ...lets just say the wrong customers...
> And let there be no doubt, Democrats did force the banks to give these loans
> 
> YouTube - EVIDENCE FOUND!!! Clinton administration's "BANK AFFIRMATIVE ACTION" They forced banks to make BAD LOANS and ACORN and Obama's tie to all of it!!!
> Banking Affirmative action....by Democrats...1998
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It Was Bush Who Pushed Minority Home Buying, Not Clinton!
Click to expand...


Well's a prime example of delusion...  

Well done!  People wouldn't believe it if we made the claim that such idiocy was being spewed by you imbeciles...  so it REALLY helps when you come right out and SPEW IT!


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

ABikerSailor said:


> Tell ya what........in the next 2 weeks, I'd be willing to bet that the Dow goes up over 8,000.  Many of the economic people on the news today have been saying that one reason is because of the banks getting rid of their toxic assets.
> 
> Kinda like a bee sting actually.  Once you remove the stinger (toxic assets), the swelling goes down quickly and you start to recover.  Until then?  Hurts like hell.






ROFL...  EIGHT WHOLE THOUSAND?  Sure ya would...  I'M IN! 
I've got $50 to slap on that.  Now all you need to do is to accept the wager that the DOW doesn't close over 8000 at the end of business on Friday, 3 April, 2009.

Meaning that *if* the DOW *closes* at over 8000 *on that date*, that I will, *upon your acceptance of the bet*; a bet which you said that you'd be willing to make, pay you your Pay pal account, a summed total of $50 and where the market fails to close OVER 8000... you pay ME via Pay Pal the sum of $50...

Just go ahead and place your bet Rustpicker.  It's not even 400 pts...  

Of course its worth remembering that the DOW was at +/- 13,000 when the Dems rode in to rescue us from BUSH!  And they've managed to ride it to ride it down to just over 6000. But that's OK, because WOO HOO!  We're HEADIN' TO 8000! and up is good.

The market will remain in a bear state until poilicy is advanced which defends CAPITALISM... OKA: the natural state of economics.  Where socialism is being advanced, the market will succumb to short term speculation, which finds investors looking for short term gains which hinge on temporal events known to trigger anxiety or relief... and the profits of such gains will be quickly gathered and taken out of play.


----------



## Pyrite

well at least this time he's making a reasonable wager, instead of a thousand dollars. But if I was the type to wager on the market, I'd be buying stock instead of making bets.


----------



## DiveCon

Pyrite said:


> well at least this time he's making a reasonable wager, instead of a thousand dollars. But if I was the type to wager on the market, I'd be buying stock instead of making bets.


yeah, if you truely believe the market is going up
it is definatly a buyers market


----------



## jeffrockit

Old Rocks said:


> jeffrockit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> The American people made their choice in November.
> 
> I'll call you a whaambulance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A little over 1/2 of the american people made their choice and a little under 1/2 have to live with it....for many generations to come.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Less than half of the American People made their choice in 2000, and we will live with the results of incompetance, corruption, and lies from that administration for many generations. President Obama is doing all that he can to prevent idiocies of the previous administration from economically destroying this nation. But you people would rather see the nation fail than see the President succeed.
Click to expand...


If quadrupling the deficit in less than 3 months is "doing all he can", you can have it. 
Again with the "you want the nation to fail" bumper sticker slogan of the left. How many time does it have to be said that wanting his bad policies to fail is a far cry from wanting the nation to fail but keep shouting that lie over and over..it still will be a lie.

It is scary that those like you are so blinded by his American Idol personality that you will follow this guy over a cliff. Unfortunately we are chained together with you and have to suffer the same fate. I wish I could say that he is all yours but everything he does affects us all and that is a shame.


----------



## wimpy77

jeffrockit said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jeffrockit said:
> 
> 
> 
> A little over 1/2 of the american people made their choice and a little under 1/2 have to live with it....for many generations to come.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Less than half of the American People made their choice in 2000, and we will live with the results of incompetance, corruption, and lies from that administration for many generations. President Obama is doing all that he can to prevent idiocies of the previous administration from economically destroying this nation. But you people would rather see the nation fail than see the President succeed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If quadrupling the deficit in less than 3 months is "doing all he can", you can have it.
> Again with the "you want the nation to fail" bumper sticker slogan of the left. How many time does it have to be said that wanting his bad policies to fail is a far cry from wanting the nation to fail but keep shouting that lie over and over..it still will be a lie.
> 
> It is scary that those like you are so blinded by his American Idol personality that you will follow this guy over a cliff. Unfortunately we are chained together with you and have to suffer the same fate. I wish I could say that he is all yours but everything he does affects us all and that is a shame.
Click to expand...


did you complain with bush?


----------



## DiveCon

wimpy77 said:


> jeffrockit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Less than half of the American People made their choice in 2000, and we will live with the results of incompetance, corruption, and lies from that administration for many generations. President Obama is doing all that he can to prevent idiocies of the previous administration from economically destroying this nation. But you people would rather see the nation fail than see the President succeed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If quadrupling the deficit in less than 3 months is "doing all he can", you can have it.
> Again with the "you want the nation to fail" bumper sticker slogan of the left. How many time does it have to be said that wanting his bad policies to fail is a far cry from wanting the nation to fail but keep shouting that lie over and over..it still will be a lie.
> 
> It is scary that those like you are so blinded by his American Idol personality that you will follow this guy over a cliff. Unfortunately we are chained together with you and have to suffer the same fate. I wish I could say that he is all yours but everything he does affects us all and that is a shame.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> did you complain with bush?
Click to expand...

when he did stupid shit like Obama is doing now, damn skippy


----------



## ABikerSailor

PubliusInfinitum said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tell ya what........in the next 2 weeks, I'd be willing to bet that the Dow goes up over 8,000.  Many of the economic people on the news today have been saying that one reason is because of the banks getting rid of their toxic assets.
> 
> Kinda like a bee sting actually.  Once you remove the stinger (toxic assets), the swelling goes down quickly and you start to recover.  Until then?  Hurts like hell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROFL...  EIGHT WHOLE THOUSAND?  Sure ya would...  I'M IN!
> I've got $50 to slap on that.  Now all you need to do is to accept the wager that the DOW doesn't close over 8000 at the end of business on Friday, 3 April, 2009.
> 
> Meaning that *if* the DOW *closes* at over 8000 *on that date*, that I will, *upon your acceptance of the bet*; a bet which you said that you'd be willing to make, pay you your Pay pal account, a summed total of $50 and where the market fails to close OVER 8000... you pay ME via Pay Pal the sum of $50...
> 
> Just go ahead and place your bet Rustpicker.  It's not even 400 pts...
> 
> Of course its worth remembering that the DOW was at +/- 13,000 when the Dems rode in to rescue us from BUSH!  And they've managed to ride it to ride it down to just over 6000. But that's OK, because WOO HOO!  We're HEADIN' TO 8000! and up is good.
> 
> The market will remain in a bear state until poilicy is advanced which defends CAPITALISM... OKA: the natural state of economics.  Where socialism is being advanced, the market will succumb to short term speculation, which finds investors looking for short term gains which hinge on temporal events known to trigger anxiety or relief... and the profits of such gains will be quickly gathered and taken out of play.
Click to expand...


Yeah right.......from what I've seen on these boards of your sense of honor, I'm pretty sure that you'd welsh on the bet Infinite Puberty.


----------



## Mad Scientist

ABikerSailor said:


> Yeah right.......from what I've seen on these boards of your sense of honor, I'm pretty sure that you'd welsh on the bet Infinite Puberty.


Yeah that's it, wimp out. It's the Liberal way you know.


----------



## wimpy77

Mad Scientist said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah right.......from what I've seen on these boards of your sense of honor, I'm pretty sure that you'd welsh on the bet Infinite Puberty.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah that's it, wimp out. It's the Liberal way you know.
Click to expand...


just like republicans rehash the same crap over and over and never come up with anything new.


----------



## DiveCon

wimpy77 said:


> Mad Scientist said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah right.......from what I've seen on these boards of your sense of honor, I'm pretty sure that you'd welsh on the bet Infinite Puberty.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah that's it, wimp out. It's the Liberal way you know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> just like republicans rehash the same crap over and over and never come up with anything new.
Click to expand...

yeah, like YOU dont rehash the same old tired talking points
LOL


----------



## wimpy77

DiveCon said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mad Scientist said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah that's it, wimp out. It's the Liberal way you know.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> just like republicans rehash the same crap over and over and never come up with anything new.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> yeah, like YOU dont rehash the same old tired talking points
> LOL
Click to expand...



again come up with something new


----------



## DiveCon

wimpy77 said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> just like republicans rehash the same crap over and over and never come up with anything new.
> 
> 
> 
> yeah, like YOU dont rehash the same old tired talking points
> LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> again come up with something new
Click to expand...

for you???

not a chance in hell
LOL


----------



## ABikerSailor

Anyone notice that the Dow closed 90 points up AGAIN on Wednesday, 25 Mar 2009?


----------



## DiveCon

ABikerSailor said:


> Anyone notice that the Dow closed 90 points up AGAIN on Wednesday, 25 Mar 2009?


so, was that Obama's fault, or Bush's?


----------



## ABikerSailor

Neither.......I'm just saying that by mid next week, it will be above 8,000.


----------



## DiveCon

ABikerSailor said:


> Neither.......I'm just saying that by mid next week, it will be above 8,000.


that is true, neither has that much of an effect either way
but if things being done cause investors to be scared to invest, then that can have its effect


----------



## jeffrockit

wimpy77 said:


> jeffrockit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Less than half of the American People made their choice in 2000, and we will live with the results of incompetance, corruption, and lies from that administration for many generations. President Obama is doing all that he can to prevent idiocies of the previous administration from economically destroying this nation. But you people would rather see the nation fail than see the President succeed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If quadrupling the deficit in less than 3 months is "doing all he can", you can have it.
> Again with the "you want the nation to fail" bumper sticker slogan of the left. How many time does it have to be said that wanting his bad policies to fail is a far cry from wanting the nation to fail but keep shouting that lie over and over..it still will be a lie.
> 
> It is scary that those like you are so blinded by his American Idol personality that you will follow this guy over a cliff. Unfortunately we are chained together with you and have to suffer the same fate. I wish I could say that he is all yours but everything he does affects us all and that is a shame.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> did you complain with bush?
Click to expand...


Of course...wrong is wrong no matter who is doing it. Its just that Obama is making Bush look like a tight wad. 
I am still amazed at how often posters fall back on that "yeah but Bush did it too" line. It still does not make it right and it is a really lame argument.
Obama stated that he wanted to look forward, unfortunately the message board is full of posters that want to continue looking back.


----------



## Silver Diva

The past couple of weeks, the Dow has been up more days than it has been down.  On Jan 20, the Dow was at about 7950.  Today it is about 7750.  These are good signs.  However, whether this is a single swallow....or if Spring is in the air....only time will tell!!


----------



## ABikerSailor

Today, 26 Mar 2009, the Dow closed at 7924.

Hey Infinite Puberty........where's my 50 bucks?  Gonna be above 8,000 tomorrow!


----------



## DiveCon

ABikerSailor said:


> Today, 26 Mar 2009, the Dow closed at 7924.
> 
> Hey Infinite Puberty........where's my 50 bucks?  Gonna be above 8,000 tomorrow!


even if it is, that wasnt the bet
you said april 8th, didnt you?
things can change between now and then


----------



## DiveCon

oops, april 3rd


----------



## ABikerSailor

No, I said WITHIN 2 weeks.

But.......like I said.......Infinite Puberty has no honor, nor is he very honest, so I don't think he was doing anything other than bullshitting for bravado.

Either way......I'm just happy to be right.  All it has to do is close above 8,000 within the 2 week timeframe.

Tell Pubertus Idiotus he's gonna have to eat crow.


----------



## DiveCon

ABikerSailor said:


> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tell ya what........in the next 2 weeks, I'd be willing to bet that the Dow goes up over 8,000.  Many of the economic people on the news today have been saying that one reason is because of the banks getting rid of their toxic assets.
> 
> Kinda like a bee sting actually.  Once you remove the stinger (toxic assets), the swelling goes down quickly and you start to recover.  Until then?  Hurts like hell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROFL...  EIGHT WHOLE THOUSAND?  Sure ya would...  I'M IN!
> I've got $50 to slap on that.  Now all you need to do is to accept the wager that the DOW doesn't close over 8000 at the end of business on Friday, 3 April, 2009.
> 
> Meaning that *if* the DOW *closes* at over 8000 *on that date*, that I will, *upon your acceptance of the bet*; a bet which you said that you'd be willing to make, pay you your Pay pal account, a summed total of $50 and where the market fails to close OVER 8000... you pay ME via Pay Pal the sum of $50...
> 
> Just go ahead and place your bet Rustpicker.  It's not even 400 pts...
> 
> Of course its worth remembering that the DOW was at +/- 13,000 when the Dems rode in to rescue us from BUSH!  And they've managed to ride it to ride it down to just over 6000. But that's OK, because WOO HOO!  We're HEADIN' TO 8000! and up is good.
> 
> The market will remain in a bear state until poilicy is advanced which defends CAPITALISM... OKA: the natural state of economics.  Where socialism is being advanced, the market will succumb to short term speculation, which finds investors looking for short term gains which hinge on temporal events known to trigger anxiety or relief... and the profits of such gains will be quickly gathered and taken out of play.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah right.......from what I've seen on these boards of your sense of honor, I'm pretty sure that you'd welsh on the bet Infinite Puberty.
Click to expand...

here was his bet and your acceptance of it

that says april 3rd


----------



## ABikerSailor

In the next 2 weeks, meaning before 2 weeks are up.

But.........like I said........I don't really expect Puberty Idiot to pay up.


----------



## Toro

Looks like the Dow is going to 8000 pretty quickly.


----------



## ABikerSailor

But.......even if Puberty Idiot doesn't pay up, I'm still gonna win, because then I'll be able to rag his stupid knuckle dragging Jarhead ass forever.

But......if he DOES by some fluke of fate manage to pay up, I'm still gonna have 50 bucks!


----------



## DiveCon

ABikerSailor said:


> But.......even if Puberty Idiot doesn't pay up, I'm still gonna win, because then I'll be able to rag his stupid knuckle dragging Jarhead ass forever.
> 
> But......if he DOES by some fluke of fate manage to pay up, I'm still gonna have 50 bucks!


he hasnt lost yet
the bet he made was for it to be over 8000 on the close of april 3rd


----------



## DiveCon

Toro said:


> Looks like the Dow is going to 8000 pretty quickly.


you never know
it might, it might not


----------



## Toro

DiveCon said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like the Dow is going to 8000 pretty quickly.
> 
> 
> 
> you never know
> it might, it might not
Click to expand...


It might not.

But I'd take that bet.  There's too much power under the market right now and we're only 75 points away.


----------



## DiveCon

Toro said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like the Dow is going to 8000 pretty quickly.
> 
> 
> 
> you never know
> it might, it might not
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It might not.
> 
> But I'd take that bet.  There's too much power under the market right now and we're only 75 points away.
Click to expand...

yeah, but it could dive 200+ points tomorrow
what if N Korea tests its missile and it actually hit Alaska
lol


----------



## Paulie

I think there's going to be some significant resistance around 8500 or so.  We were up at around 9000 during the last bear rally back in november, and I think it's going to take some heavy pressure to push us up to that mark again.  

If we break 9000, I think it's smooth sailing on up to 10k.

I'm skeptical about this being the real deal, though.  Unless something changes drastically, I'm taking some money off the table at 8500 and buying DXD again.  I made a killing off of it these past couple months and I sold it at the precise time.

I'm staying with my long oil position, though.  Commodities are going to reflate heavily.


----------



## wimpy77

$100 a barrell by the end of the year?


----------



## Paulie

wimpy77 said:


> $100 a barrell by the end of the year?



I doubt it.  $70 at the highest, but that would probably be during the summer, not at the end of the year.


----------



## dilloduck

DiveCon said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> you never know
> it might, it might not
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It might not.
> 
> But I'd take that bet.  There's too much power under the market right now and we're only 75 points away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> yeah, but it could dive 200+ points tomorrow
> what if N Korea tests its missile and it actually hit Alaska
> lol
Click to expand...


amazing how a bottle rocket hitting a glacier (melting of course) can ruin a good day on wall street.


----------



## Yurt

the dow is down over a hundred today....where the posters who said obama was responsible for the dow's rise?  are you not going to be honest and now say that obama is causing the market to go down?


----------



## wimpy77

Yurt said:


> the dow is down over a hundred today....where the posters who said obama was responsible for the dow's rise?  are you not going to be honest and now say that obama is causing the market to go down?



are you an idiot. have you ever heard of profit taking? but today there was a little bit of mixed news. while consumer spending went up for the second straight month, incomes were down which isn't good. also there was news that jpmorgan was having a little tougher month in march than in january and feburary. when you have had a rally like we have in the past week usually there will be profits taken.


----------



## Yurt

wimpy77 said:


> Yurt said:
> 
> 
> 
> the dow is down over a hundred today....where the posters who said obama was responsible for the dow's rise?  are you not going to be honest and now say that obama is causing the market to go down?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> are you an idiot. have you ever heard of profit taking? but today there was a little bit of mixed news. while consumer spending went up for the second straight month, incomes were down which isn't good. also there was news that jpmorgan was having a little tougher month in march than in january and feburary. when you have had a rally like we have in the past week usually there will be profits taken.
Click to expand...


you obviously lack reading comprehension skills....go back and reread my post and you will see i am making fun of the people who, when the market is up, claim it is obama's doing but when the market is down it surely is not obama's fault.


----------



## Paulie

wimpy77 said:


> Yurt said:
> 
> 
> 
> the dow is down over a hundred today....where the posters who said obama was responsible for the dow's rise?  are you not going to be honest and now say that obama is causing the market to go down?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> are you an idiot. have you ever heard of profit taking? but today there was a little bit of mixed news. while consumer spending went up for the second straight month, incomes were down which isn't good. also there was news that jpmorgan was having a little tougher month in march than in january and feburary. when you have had a rally like we have in the past week usually there will be profits taken.
Click to expand...


Also it's friday, and a lot of traders don't like holding positions over the weekend.


----------



## wimpy77

Paulie said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yurt said:
> 
> 
> 
> the dow is down over a hundred today....where the posters who said obama was responsible for the dow's rise?  are you not going to be honest and now say that obama is causing the market to go down?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> are you an idiot. have you ever heard of profit taking? but today there was a little bit of mixed news. while consumer spending went up for the second straight month, incomes were down which isn't good. also there was news that jpmorgan was having a little tougher month in march than in january and feburary. when you have had a rally like we have in the past week usually there will be profits taken.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Also it's friday, and a lot of traders don't like holding positions over the weekend.
Click to expand...


paulie how do you think the financials will do monday and tuesday after dimon and lewis said that march was a tougher month than january and february. even though lewis did let it blip out that BAC was still going to post a profit.


----------



## Yurt

Paulie said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yurt said:
> 
> 
> 
> the dow is down over a hundred today....where the posters who said obama was responsible for the dow's rise?  are you not going to be honest and now say that obama is causing the market to go down?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> are you an idiot. have you ever heard of profit taking? but today there was a little bit of mixed news. while consumer spending went up for the second straight month, incomes were down which isn't good. also there was news that jpmorgan was having a little tougher month in march than in january and feburary. when you have had a rally like we have in the past week usually there will be profits taken.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Also it's friday, and a lot of traders don't like holding positions over the weekend.
Click to expand...


thats obama's fault....


----------



## Paulie

wimpy77 said:


> Paulie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> are you an idiot. have you ever heard of profit taking? but today there was a little bit of mixed news. while consumer spending went up for the second straight month, incomes were down which isn't good. also there was news that jpmorgan was having a little tougher month in march than in january and feburary. when you have had a rally like we have in the past week usually there will be profits taken.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also it's friday, and a lot of traders don't like holding positions over the weekend.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> paulie how do you think the financials will do monday and tuesday after dimon and lewis said that march was a tougher month than january and february. even though lewis did let it blip out that BAC was still going to post a profit.
Click to expand...


I have my suspicions for why March was a little tougher, and I don't necessarily think it's going to cause a huge dip in financials.  

Here's the thing with me...I don't agree with ANYTHING the government's done up to this point.  I think this is all going to be so much worse for us down the road.  But from a strictly trading/investing standpoint, I think financials are going to be fine for a while.  Either the reflation is successful, or it's the end of the world as we know it.  I don't see much room for anything else in between.  I'm going to assume the reflation will be successful for the short term, maybe 5 years max.  Just enough time for the next bubble to inflate.  

If I was going to buy financials, I would personally wait and see if they dip on Monday.  If they do, I'd be a buyer.


----------



## DavidS

Yurt said:


> Paulie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> are you an idiot. have you ever heard of profit taking? but today there was a little bit of mixed news. while consumer spending went up for the second straight month, incomes were down which isn't good. also there was news that jpmorgan was having a little tougher month in march than in january and feburary. when you have had a rally like we have in the past week usually there will be profits taken.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also it's friday, and a lot of traders don't like holding positions over the weekend.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> thats obama's fault....
Click to expand...


----------



## wimpy77

Paulie said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paulie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also it's friday, and a lot of traders don't like holding positions over the weekend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> paulie how do you think the financials will do monday and tuesday after dimon and lewis said that march was a tougher month than january and february. even though lewis did let it blip out that BAC was still going to post a profit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have my suspicions for why March was a little tougher, and I don't necessarily think it's going to cause a huge dip in financials.
> 
> Here's the thing with me...I don't agree with ANYTHING the government's done up to this point.  I think this is all going to be so much worse for us down the road.  But from a strictly trading/investing standpoint, I think financials are going to be fine for a while.  Either the reflation is successful, or it's the end of the world as we know it.  I don't see much room for anything else in between.  I'm going to assume the reflation will be successful for the short term, maybe 5 years max.  Just enough time for the next bubble to inflate.
> 
> If I was going to buy financials, I would personally wait and see if they dip on Monday.  If they do, I'd be a buyer.
Click to expand...



why do you think march was a little tougher? btw im convinced the next bubble to pop is credit cards


----------



## Yurt

DavidS said:


> Yurt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paulie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also it's friday, and a lot of traders don't like holding positions over the weekend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thats obama's fault....
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


i guess the uber liberals on this board are so dense they can't see humor


----------



## DiveCon

wimpy77 said:


> Yurt said:
> 
> 
> 
> the dow is down over a hundred today....where the posters who said obama was responsible for the dow's rise?  are you not going to be honest and now say that obama is causing the market to go down?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> are you an idiot. have you ever heard of profit taking? but today there was a little bit of mixed news. while consumer spending went up for the second straight month, incomes were down which isn't good. also there was news that jpmorgan was having a little tougher month in march than in january and feburary. when you have had a rally like we have in the past week usually there will be profits taken.
Click to expand...

ah, but it was Bush's fault when it went down before

hypocrite


----------



## Paulie

Credit cards are already a part of this credit crisis though.  They aren't a bubble, in the sense of an asset that's become over-inflated which is what a bubble is.  I don't know what the next bubble will be.  Maybe treasuries.  Maybe oil.  Maybe something to do with the green initiative.  Who knows.

What I _do_ know is, I'll know it when I see it.


----------



## DiveCon

Yurt said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yurt said:
> 
> 
> 
> thats obama's fault....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i guess the uber liberals on this board are so dense they can't see humor
Click to expand...

yep


----------



## wimpy77

Paulie said:


> Credit cards are already a part of this credit crisis though.  They aren't a bubble, in the sense of an asset that's become over-inflated which is what a bubble is.  I don't know what the next bubble will be.  Maybe treasuries.  Maybe oil.  Maybe something to do with the green initiative.  Who knows.
> 
> What I _do_ know is, I'll know it when I see it.



it will be interesting to see.


----------



## Yurt

wimpy77 said:


> Paulie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Credit cards are already a part of this credit crisis though.  They aren't a bubble, in the sense of an asset that's become over-inflated which is what a bubble is.  I don't know what the next bubble will be.  Maybe treasuries.  Maybe oil.  Maybe something to do with the green initiative.  Who knows.
> 
> What I _do_ know is, I'll know it when I see it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it will be interesting to see.
Click to expand...


...what?  if any of the libs that said obama was the one who made the market shoot up....then say that obama is also responsible for the market shooting down.....

now that would be funny


----------



## Silver Diva

It is tough to look at the market on a daily basis and decide who is responsible for what the market did on a particular day.  This is the third week in a row that the Dow has gained.  That may be the beginning of a trend...or not.  Let's keep our fingers crossed and hope that our 401k plans actually make some money.  Best I can tell, that is the best 3-week gain in at least a year!


----------



## ABikerSailor

Well, if Bush was still in the White House, we'd be going farther down the drain.

As far as Obama making things right?  Nope........he's starting to turn into another Bush Jr. clone, as well as has a very fucking snarky attitude when he's talking to someone that he thinks is beneath him.

If he's not careful, someone may make Biden president.........


----------



## Toro

The market went up 20% in 13 days.

Only four times in 110 years had the market gone up 20% in 20 days.  Three times, the market was higher a month later.


----------



## DiveCon

ABikerSailor said:


> Well, if Bush was still in the White House, we'd be going farther down the drain.
> 
> As far as Obama making things right? Nope........he's starting to turn into another Bush Jr. clone, as well as has a very fucking snarky attitude when he's talking to someone that he thinks is beneath him.
> 
> If he's not careful, someone may make Biden president.........


so, you're actually starting to see what a lot of us have been telling you for about a month


----------



## ABikerSailor

Hey........I can be taken in just like anyone else.

Only thing is.......when I find out I've been lied to, it's open season on whoever lied to me.

Hopefully Obama will pull his head out of his ass before it's too late.


----------



## DiveCon

ABikerSailor said:


> Hey........I can be taken in just like anyone else.
> 
> Only thing is.......when I find out I've been lied to, it's open season on whoever lied to me.
> 
> Hopefully Obama will pull his head out of his ass before it's too late.


the problem is, its not just Obama
its CONGRESS too


----------



## Yurt

Toro said:


> The market went up 20% in 13 days.
> 
> Only four times in 110 years had the market gone up 20% in 20 days.  Three times, the market was higher a month later.



do we blame bush or obama


----------



## ABikerSailor

You know what would be nice?  If the Rapture happened tomorrow, but instead of taking all the good people to Heaven, all the bad people were winked out of existence, leaving the rest of us here to live forever.

It will be noticed by the absence of Obama and the Congress.


----------



## Paulie

Biker let me ask you a question.  Considering that historically, the media driven candidates seem to ALWAYS end up being chumps in the end, what made you somehow fall for Obama THIS time around?


----------



## ABikerSailor

Why did I choose Obama?  Simple.......I didn't want to see the Bush Jr. clone called McStupid in the White House.

Can you imagine how much WORSE the current economic situation would be with McCain and Palin in office?  

I can almost guarantee they wouldn't have put regulations on Wall St., and we'd all end up slaves of the rich.


----------



## DiveCon

ABikerSailor said:


> Why did I choose Obama?  Simple.......I didn't want to see the Bush Jr. clone called McStupid in the White House.
> 
> Can you imagine how much WORSE the current economic situation would be with McCain and Palin in office?
> 
> I can almost guarantee they wouldn't have put regulations on Wall St., and we'd all end up slaves of the rich.


when you think that Obama is doing what Bush did times 4, how could McLame have been worse?


----------



## ABikerSailor

Because, he's in poor health, and then when he dies, Palin would be running things......

Seen the news about that dumb bitch lately?  Now, even her own state is against her.


----------



## DiveCon

ABikerSailor said:


> Because, he's in poor health, and then when he dies, Palin would be running things......
> 
> Seen the news about that dumb bitch lately?  Now, even her own state is against her.


i disagree, i think Palin would be a great POTUS
and you will need a link to prove that, last i heard she still had higher approval rates than Obama has


----------



## ABikerSailor

Might wanna watch the news sometime.  Last week they were showing people who were standing outside, protesting..........one sign said "For sale - the Future - See Sarah Palin"

And that was the nice one.......


----------



## elvis

ABikerSailor said:


> Because, he's in poor health, and then when he dies, Palin would be running things......
> 
> Seen the news about that dumb bitch lately?  Now, even her own state is against her.



McCain's mother is 94.


----------



## elvis

ABikerSailor said:


> Might wanna watch the news sometime.  Last week they were showing people who were standing outside, protesting..........one sign said "For sale - the Future - See Sarah Palin"
> 
> And that was the nice one.......



a few protestors does not substitute for public opinion.  I don't know who is more popular. just sayin.


----------



## Yurt

DiveCon said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because, he's in poor health, and then when he dies, Palin would be running things......
> 
> Seen the news about that dumb bitch lately?  Now, even her own state is against her.
> 
> 
> 
> i disagree, i think Palin would be a great POTUS
> and you will need a link to prove that, last i heard she still had higher approval rates than Obama has
Click to expand...


please tell me you have something more than she has a higher approval rating to qualify her as a "great POTUS".....

i don't see it.


----------



## DiveCon

Yurt said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because, he's in poor health, and then when he dies, Palin would be running things......
> 
> Seen the news about that dumb bitch lately?  Now, even her own state is against her.
> 
> 
> 
> i disagree, i think Palin would be a great POTUS
> and you will need a link to prove that, last i heard she still had higher approval rates than Obama has
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> please tell me you have something more than she has a higher approval rating to qualify her as a "great POTUS".....
> 
> i don't see it.
Click to expand...

thats because you've only seen the media smear machine


----------



## wimpy77

i don't know if the woman is dumb, smart or what ive never met her. i don't think mccann wouldn't be doing anything different than obama.


----------



## Yurt

dow is down over 300 today....why aren't the same people who claimed that it was obama's doing that made the dow rise here now honestly claiming that it is obama's doing that is causing the dow to sink.  

shameful partisan crap that does nothing but harm this country


----------

