Sorry for the length, but please read and please give feedback to my opinions below.

It's starting to look like 2011 and 2012 will become a replay of Reagan's first 2 years in office from an economic standpoint. I've seen a number of journalists try to compare Obama to Reagan in this regard - especially when we were in "The Summer of Recovery" in 2010 where many were predicting that unemployment would fall just in time to get Obama reelected - just like Reagan. However, there is an obvious difference between Obama's decisions vs. Reagan's economic decisions during their first 2 years in office.

When Reagan came into office, He and Paul Volcker elected to engineer a recession in order to fix the economy in the medium and longer term. To do this, the Fed jacked up the Fed Funds Rate in order to deflate the money supply. By doing this, it flushed out the root problem to the economic malaise from Nixon thru Carter - too much money in the economy. Brief background: Inflation was out of control due to the previous policy of the Fed trying to achieve "full employment", Carter attempting to insulate the people from the oil supply shocks by implementing price controls and the idea that Keynesian economics were implemented during this period that resulted in higher inflation. Basically, fiscal policy via stimulus was heaping more money into a system that was already oversupplied by the Fed through a loose money supply.

Now Obama came into office with similar issues with a serious recession. The housing market failed due to bad loans, which started the recession. TARP I and II helped to save a majority of the banks due to a liquidity problem; however, there are a significant number of assets out there that are impaired. On top of that, there is too much consumer debt out there that is, IMO, most likely the biggest barrier to consumer spending. But the bottom line is that what Obama should have done in his first 2 years of office was to ensure that the banks had enough liquidity and then allow the impaired assets to be flushed out of the economy. We are starting to finally address the true root causes of this recession by tackling the debt problems that both the governments (Fed, State and Municipalities) have as well as the consumers.

In summary, I think we are on the cusp of a great economic boom for the next decade. However, since everyone is beginning to pay off their debts and the states/municipalities are balancing their budgets, we will see another recession that will be very similar to what happened when Volcker jacked up the Fed Funds Rate. We will see the economy finally flush out the bad debt, and this is happening at the worst possible time for Obama.

(08-03-2011 09:25 AM)miko33 Wrote:  In summary, I think we are on the cusp of a great economic boom for the next decade. However, since everyone is beginning to pay off their debts and the states/municipalities are balancing their budgets, we will see another recession that will be very similar to what happened when Volcker jacked up the Fed Funds Rate. We will see the economy finally flush out the bad debt, and this is happening at the worst possible time for Obama.

No, we're not.

Reagan and Obama took dramatically different steps to address the economy.

Obama has raised taxes on business, increased regulation, increased government spending. All of which have been proven to be folly and have made things worse, not better.

Reagan cut taxes, cut regulation and got government out of the way. That is what it takes to foster an environment for economic growth.

We're now in the double dip recession, and right now there is nothing on the horizon to bring us out save an Obama defeat in 2012.

(08-03-2011 09:48 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 09:25 AM)miko33 Wrote:  In summary, I think we are on the cusp of a great economic boom for the next decade. However, since everyone is beginning to pay off their debts and the states/municipalities are balancing their budgets, we will see another recession that will be very similar to what happened when Volcker jacked up the Fed Funds Rate. We will see the economy finally flush out the bad debt, and this is happening at the worst possible time for Obama.

No, we're not. I think we are, but not for another 2 years

Reagan and Obama took dramatically different steps to address the economy. I agree

Obama has raised taxes on business, increased regulation, increased government spending. All of which have been proven to be folly and have made things worse, not better. I agree here as well. But what you are seeing now is that consumers, state and local gov'ts are doing what the Fed refuses to do - take money out of the system to engineer a second recession. With the 2nd recession, I anticipate the inevitable will occur - the economy will flush out the impaired assets and the poor decision makers will finally suffer real consequences of their actions.

Reagan cut taxes, cut regulation and got government out of the way. That is what it takes to foster an environment for economic growth. Yes, but at the same time he engineered a recession. You guys fail to remember this, but Volcker jacked up the Fed Funds Rates to do this. He needed to deflate the money supply to stop inflation. Analogous to this, the belt tightening by the gov'ts and consumers is doing the same thing.

We're now in the double dip recession, and right now there is nothing on the horizon to bring us out save an Obama defeat in 2012. That's what I have been saying in my OP. But this will be Obama's downfall and any GOP candidate will do the right things to turn this back around - just like Reagan

(08-03-2011 10:02 AM)miko33 Wrote:  Analogous to this, the belt tightening by the gov'ts and consumers is doing the same thing.[/i][/b]

Except the Fed has been able to outpace this to date. Only when Fed gov't spending is reigned in will this have effect.

Just more Raygun worshipping crap.

(08-03-2011 10:05 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 10:02 AM)miko33 Wrote:  Analogous to this, the belt tightening by the gov'ts and consumers is doing the same thing.[/i][/b]

Except the Fed has been able to outpace this to date. Only when Fed gov't spending is reigned in will this have effect.

It won't for long. The Fed Gov't Debt is at a tipping point now that it's around 90 - 95% of GDP. The Fed Reserve will not pursue another quantitative easing approach. They realize that one more attempt will do nothing but make inflation go out of control. There's nothing more the Gov't can really do anymore. It's constrained.

(08-03-2011 10:13 AM)RobertN Wrote:   Just more Raygun worshipping crap.

I don't think you understand what I wrote at all. Please give me your interpretation of the Fed moves in '81 and '82 and how it affected our economy in the short and long term. I bet you can't do it.

(08-03-2011 10:16 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 10:05 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 10:02 AM)miko33 Wrote:  Analogous to this, the belt tightening by the gov'ts and consumers is doing the same thing.[/i][/b]

Except the Fed has been able to outpace this to date. Only when Fed gov't spending is reigned in will this have effect.

It won't for long. The Fed Gov't Debt is at a tipping point now that it's around 90 - 95% of GDP. The Fed Reserve will not pursue another quantitative easing approach. They realize that one more attempt will do nothing but make inflation go out of control. There's nothing more the Gov't can really do anymore. It's constrained.

I don't think the Fed agrees w/ you re: inflation. Last month prices were down, and home prices are still falling. With the recent drop in oil prices, and low car sales, I think they understand their models are telling them to do more "easing".

What business taxes has Obama raised?

(08-03-2011 10:27 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  What business taxes has Obama raised?

You don't want to wake them up from their slumber. They are having wet dreams about Raygun again.

(08-03-2011 10:32 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 10:27 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  What business taxes has Obama raised?

You don't want to wake them up from their slumber. They are having wet dreams about Raygun again.

I'm still waiting for an answer to my question above.

(08-03-2011 10:57 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 10:32 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 10:27 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  What business taxes has Obama raised?

You don't want to wake them up from their slumber. They are having wet dreams about Raygun again.

I'm still waiting for an answer to my question above.

I don't know what the damn fed did when I was 9 years old. Just commenting on the love for Raygun.

(08-03-2011 11:04 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 10:57 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 10:32 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 10:27 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  What business taxes has Obama raised?

You don't want to wake them up from their slumber. They are having wet dreams about Raygun again.

I'm still waiting for an answer to my question above.

I don't know what the damn fed did when I was 9 years old. Just commenting on the love for Raygun.

I was 7 years old back then, but I didn't use that as an excuse to declare ignorance. I decided to do my own research about historical facts. So are you ignorant of history in general or do you not want to bother with doing your own research on historical issues - especially those related to economics? It sounds like you don't have enough knowledge to talk intelligently about a lot of issues on here. That makes you look like nothing more than a shill.

I heard a great comment today. The fed knows they have to move but their hands are tied. They are pushing on a string. I'm pretty sure on the next bounce I'm selling out. We only go down from here. 9 straight days of selling off. Hasn't happened since 78'.

(08-03-2011 11:09 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 11:04 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 10:57 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 10:32 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 10:27 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  What business taxes has Obama raised?

You don't want to wake them up from their slumber. They are having wet dreams about Raygun again.

I'm still waiting for an answer to my question above.

I don't know what the damn fed did when I was 9 years old. Just commenting on the love for Raygun.

I was 7 years old back then, but I didn't use that as an excuse to declare ignorance. I decided to do my own research about historical facts. So are you ignorant of history in general or do you not want to bother with doing your own research on historical issues - especially those related to economics? It sounds like you don't have enough knowledge to talk intelligently about a lot of issues on here. That makes you look like nothing more than a shill.

I was a Senior in college in 82. I can tell you now that the economy was no where as bad then as today. The housing mess has caused almost all of our problems today.

70% of market trades are done by a computer. At some point the pessimism becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Alot of charts are below there 200 day moving averages. Not a good sign. Computers don't reason. Computers react. Me may have a massive sell off. Flash crash.

What's crazy is corporate profits are flush. If that money on the sidelines comes in. You could lose if you sell out now. I want a bear rally. I will sell on any bounce and keep my powder dry. Scary times.

(08-03-2011 11:09 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 11:04 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 10:57 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 10:32 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 10:27 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  What business taxes has Obama raised?

You don't want to wake them up from their slumber. They are having wet dreams about Raygun again.

I'm still waiting for an answer to my question above.

I don't know what the damn fed did when I was 9 years old. Just commenting on the love for Raygun.

I was 7 years old back then, but I didn't use that as an excuse to declare ignorance. I decided to do my own research about historical facts. So are you ignorant of history in general or do you not want to bother with doing your own research on historical issues - especially those related to economics? It sounds like you don't have enough knowledge to talk intelligently about a lot of issues on here. That makes you look like nothing more than a shill.

How does it make me look like a schill? I never said anything about what the fad did in hte first post. You did. I just said the love affair with Raygun continues.

I don't understand the contempt for Robert. If you hold his opinions in low regard put him on ignore.

(08-03-2011 11:12 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I heard a great comment today. The fed knows they have to move but their hands are tied. They are pushing on a string. I'm pretty sure on the next bounce I'm selling out. We only go down from here. 9 straight days of selling off. Hasn't happened since 78'.

Oil is back below $92/barrel too.

(08-03-2011 11:20 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 11:09 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 11:04 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 10:57 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(08-03-2011 10:32 AM)RobertN Wrote:   You don't want to wake them up from their slumber. They are having wet dreams about Raygun again.

I'm still waiting for an answer to my question above.

I don't know what the damn fed did when I was 9 years old. Just commenting on the love for Raygun.

I was 7 years old back then, but I didn't use that as an excuse to declare ignorance. I decided to do my own research about historical facts. So are you ignorant of history in general or do you not want to bother with doing your own research on historical issues - especially those related to economics? It sounds like you don't have enough knowledge to talk intelligently about a lot of issues on here. That makes you look like nothing more than a shill.

How does it make me look like a schill? I never said anything about what the fad did in hte first post. You did. I just said the love affair with Raygun continues.

From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shill

Quote:"Shill" can also be used pejoratively to describe a critic who appears either all-too-eager to heap glowing praise upon mediocre offerings, or who acts as an apologist for glaring flaws.

I used a quotation for a response for independent corroboration. A shill does not have to be an enthusiastic supporter. It can also be a person who will go out of their way to shoot down things they disagree with in order to be an apologist for another group. I define you as a shill for the progressives because you go out of your way to attack anyone or anything that rocks your world view. You do a piss poor job of this because you can't back up your views with rational thought. All you do is provide ad-hominem replies in an attempt to discredit view points.