Obama Declares War on Investors

bugscoe · Feb 28, 2009

That letter is always a good slap in the face for those who simply love to point the finger a Bush.

What's worse now though is that the Gov is having to again get their fingers in the mess in an effort to solve the bubble they helped to create and pop.

And in doing so this time, it's the American governent that will be the next bubble to pop.

Free Thinker · Feb 28, 2009

Quote from Lucrum:

vhehn, other than maybe your political views, you've always struck me as a pretty smart guy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxMInSfanqg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPSDnGMzIdo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nU3fNh-PRk

While Bush and co certainly share the blame, the dems are AT LEAST as much to blame maybe more.

If you had a problem with the spending of the last 8 years but are willing to accept the spending Osama and Pelosi are engaging in, you're being hypocritical.

Especially considering that much of the current spending is pork and or liberal pet projects with little real benefit to the economy.

even pork spending is better than needless war spending. there was another time in our history when war spending was followed by a spike in oil that was followed by a recession. it was viet nam and lbj lbj guns and butter policies. much is the same this time.

ProfitMania · Feb 28, 2009

I can tell who are elite traders and who is just investors from their post in this thread.
If you are an elite trader, then you should want lower income tax and hence higher capital gain tax if necessary.
If you are an investor, then you want a lower capital gain tax rate.

jaley · Feb 28, 2009

what if you're a futures trader?

trader_arb · Feb 28, 2009

Quote from vhehn:

even pork spending is better than needless war spending. there was another time in our history when war spending was followed by a spike in oil that was followed by a recession. it was viet nam and lbj lbj guns and butter policies. much is the same this time.

This is the problem though, everyone assumes "change" will be better... what if it isn't? What proof do you have that these garbage projects will be better than war spending? At least there is some actual manufacturing left in this country via government funded defense. This is also one of the only sources of research/development funding.

texrex2002 · Feb 28, 2009

Quote from jamis359:

Obama's proposed top rate is 39.6%, bringing back up exactly where it was under Clinton. Hmm, I seem to recall that the wealthy got wealthier and businesses grew just fine during the Clinton years. This proves Kudlow wrong, and exposes his tirade to be nothing but propaganda and FUD to try to undermine Obama.

Hmm, how would you feel about going back to the salary you had in the Clinton years? that wouldn't be a paycut, right? that would be allowing those un-tenable pay raises and promotions (that you worked your ass of to get and keep up with inflation) to expire and return to normalcy.

Landis82 · Feb 28, 2009

Quote from jficquette:

LOL, Rush is right 99% of the time.

The only thing that Rush Limpbone is good at is Self-Promotion. Unfortunately, you aren't smart enough to have figured that out yet.

Landis82 · Feb 28, 2009

Quote from swtrader:

it's the laziest kind of thinking there is

Why do you think he's called Captain Obvious???

Landis82 · Feb 28, 2009

Quote from bugscoe:

That letter is always a good slap in the face for those who simply love to point the finger a Bush.

And yet this piece of legislation back in 2000 by one of Bush's buddies from Texas, Phil Gramm trumps anything that came out of Fannie and Freddie . . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_Futures_Modernization_Act_of_2000

Cleverly pushed into the "FY2001 Appropriations Act" without even a committee hearing OR a recorded vote.

But leave it to the Joe Six-Packs of the world to think that our current banking crisis is the result of Fannie and Freddie.

Get real.

CaptainObvious · Feb 28, 2009

Quote from swtrader:

without commenting on the specific issue, why is it that so few people get it that the truth is based on whether something is the truth, not on who says it?

soooooo many people will hear something, then someone tell you all about the person who said it - pro or con

it's the laziest kind of thinking there is

Because character is easier to attack than the facts are. All of us have some shit in our game from time to time. The truth just is! Hard to formulate an argument against that.