|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Bob
At 12:19 PM 5/26/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>He has also stated a commitment to reduce the budget deficit. It remains
>to be seen how the tax reduction he has argued for would accomplish that.
>I haven't seen a single analysis that explains how this tax cut will
>reduce the deficit.
>
>Regards
>DanG
>
>Kent Rollins wrote:
>>How is it inconsistent? First, he cut taxes. Then he cut taxes
>>again. Seems consistent to me.
>>
>>Kent Rollins
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: <mailto:TheGonch@xxxxxxxxxxx>Dan Goncharoff
>>To: <mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Sent: Monday, May 26, 2003 4:47 AM
>>Subject: Re: [RT] spx daily
>>
>>Bush may (or may not) be smart politically, but there is clearly a
>>difference between his foreign policy team, which incorporates a
>>diversity of views, and his economic team, where very member of the
>>original team has quit or been pushed out. Bush seems to be lacking the
>>economic policy equivalent of Rice, someone who defines a longer-term
>>consistent message. Until he gets one, I will not trust Bush's policy to
>>be well thought-out.
>>
>>That to me is the biggest reason to be worried about the future of the US
>>economy -- a president (or administration) that doesn't understand what
>>it is doing can cause a lot of damage.
>>
>>Regards
>>DanG
>>
>>Kent Rollins wrote:
>>> >The current economic condition is SYSTEMIC....and thus resistant to
>>> "Quick fixes".
>>>
>>>Three years of a down economy is not "quick". And "resistant" is not
>>>impermeable.
>>>
>>> >Bush fired Laurel and Hardy (O'Neill and Lindsay) because they told
>>> him you can't cut taxes, wage expensive war, and continue sponsoring a
>>> huge, costly bureaucracy in Washington....it's economic suicide in the
>>> long run.
>>> >That's why he fired them....but THEY were right.
>>>
>>>If O'Neill and Lindsay were in your opinion right, then why do you refer
>>>to them as Laurel and Hardy. This is part of your problem, MASSIVE
>>>Mark. You are overly critical of everything. We're either going to
>>>have MASSIVE inflation or MASSIVE deflation. You don't care which as
>>>long as it is MASSIVE and destructive.
>>>
>>> >These deficit projections are just the tip-of-the-iceberg.......and
>>> incredibly, there is still no talk of government cut-backs in spending
>>> programs and transfer payments.....just incredible !
>>>
>>>Bush is smart politically. There was a study done in the late 80's that
>>>said for every new dollar of tax money brought to the government by
>>>economic growth, Washington spent $1.30 (or some figure like
>>>that). That was the 80's. I doubt things have changed. Bush is
>>>choking of Washington's money supply. That's the only way to get them
>>>to reduce spending. It's the only way PERIOD. You seem to think that
>>>these bigger deficits are a problem. Recently, there was a book
>>>published that studied the effects of large national debts on
>>>countries. England in the 1800's had a national debt that was 300% of
>>>GDP. THAT'S MASSIVE, MARK. A number even you would appreciate. They
>>>built up that debt thru wars and empire building. But it wasn't a
>>>problem for England. They paid it off and now they are just fine.
>>>
>>>The only way to make Tiny Daschle say "Well, I guess we don't have money
>>>for new social-dependency (aka vote-buying) programs." is to put him in
>>>a deficit position. What are the Dumocrats really complaining about
>>>today? Listen carefully. They are complaining that they can't enact a
>>>drug benenfits program (aka social dependency program, aka vote-buying
>>>program). They are complaining that they can't make healthcare free for
>>>everyone. They don't want to pay down the debt. They want to take our
>>>money from us and use it to make us dependent on a social welfare
>>>State. Despite the fact that we know socialism and welfare failed...MASSIVELY.
>>>
>>>The only way...THE ONLY WAY...to cut Washington's spending habit is to
>>>take away their money. And THAT is exactly what Nucular George is doing.
>>>
>>>Do you see anything in the world today that is going right, MASSIVE
>>>Mark? Anything positive?
>>>
>>>Kent Rollins
>>>
>>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: <mailto:mar.ko@xxxxxxxxxxx>Mark Simms
>>>To: <mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2003 12:55 AM
>>>Subject: RE: Re[3]: [RT] spx daily
>>>
>>>I'm not thinking MASSIVE here, only LONG-TERM.
>>>Part of my bearishness comes from the current high PE Ratios for
>>>one....there just seems to be so much ANTICIPATION for a big recovery here...
>>>I don't see it, quite frankly.
>>>Bush fired Laurel and Hardy (O'Neill and Lindsay) because they told him
>>>you can't cut taxes, wage expensive war, and continue sponsoring a huge,
>>>costly bureaucracy in Washington....it's economic suicide in the long run.
>>>Bush did not want to hear this....moreover, he's "dumb"...economically.
>>>That's why he fired them....but THEY were right.
>>>These deficit projections are just the tip-of-the-iceberg.......and
>>>incredibly, there is still no talk of government cut-backs in spending
>>>programs and transfer payments.....just incredible !
>>>Unfortunately, Bush may be out of office before this is proven correct.....
>>>
>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Kent Rollins
>>>>[<mailto:kentr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>mailto:kentr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>>>>Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 8:16 AM
>>>>To: <mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>Subject: Re: Re[3]: [RT] spx daily
>>>>
>>>>How can YOU ignore everything besides the tech sector? If everything
>>>>but the tech sector has turned the corner on the economy, that sounds
>>>>like a good thing to me.
>>>>
>>>>With respect to the "derivatives bubble", prove to me that there is
>>>>one. This is the first I've heard about it. Lately, Warren Buffet has
>>>>been saying a lot of stuff with which I don't agree.
>>>>
>>>>FYI, consumers have been repairing their balance sheets as well. Sorry
>>>>I can't remember the numbers on that one either. It's not as dramatic
>>>>as the improvements on the corporate side, but it was an improvement.
>>>>
>>>>So you're joining Simms on predicting MASSIVE Great Depression II.
>>>>
>>>>Kent Rollins
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>From: <mailto:bradcline@xxxxxxxxx>Brad Cline
>>>>To: <mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 2:08 AM
>>>>Subject: RE: Re[3]: [RT] spx daily
>>>>
>>>>How can you ignore the tech sector? That's like pro forma accounting.
>>>>If I didn't have to make my house payment everything is rosy. The
>>>>markets have seen their lows only if the derivitivies bubble doesn't
>>>>burst, or consumer debt doesn't come home to roost. Warren Buffet has
>>>>said that derivities are a "time bomb" waiting to happen. Maybe the fed
>>>>will be able to balance everything out over time but I wouldn't bet on it.
>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>From: Kent Rollins
>>>>>[<mailto:kentr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>mailto:kentr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>>>>>Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2003 8:12 PM
>>>>>To: <mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>Subject: Re: Re[3]: [RT] spx daily
>>>>>
>>>>>Corporations have been doing balance sheet repair for 2 years
>>>>>now. AT&T alone has eliminate over $50 BILLION in debt. I saw on the
>>>>>tube last week someone who had a stunning statistic on what the S&P
>>>>>profits are if you ignore the tech sector. Wish I could remember what
>>>>>that statistic was. And the tech sector will fall in line soon
>>>>>enough. You are stuck in a rut. The markets have seen their
>>>>>lows. Shake it off.
>>>>>
>>>>>Kent Rollins
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>>>><mailto:realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
>>>><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>>>
>>>
>>>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>>><mailto:realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
>>><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>>>
>>>
>>>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>>><mailto:realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
>>><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>>
>>
>>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>><mailto:realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
>><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>>
>>
>>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>><mailto:realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
>><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
><http://rd.yahoo.com/M=247865.3355058.4641699.1512248/D=egroupweb/S=1705001779:HM/A=1482387/R=0/*http://ads.x10.com/?bHlhaG9vaG0xLmRhd=1053966084%3eM=247865.3355058.4641699.1512248/D=egroupweb/S=1705001779:HM/A=1482387/R=1=1053966084%3eM=247865.3355058.4641699.1512248/D=egroupweb/S=1705001779:HM/A=1482387/R=2>cb338.jpg
>cb367.jpg
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/CNxFAA/zMEolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Attachment:
Description: ""
Attachment:
Description: ""
|