|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
and the congress was controlled by the Democrats during the Reagan years.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hill, Ernest E" <ernie.hill@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2003 6:09 PM
Subject: RE: [RT] spx daily
> No President Republican or Democrat has ever spent "the money" only
> congress can fund federal spending. Gov. 101.
>
> E
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/snpforecasts/
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Johnson [mailto:dsj000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2003 6:32 PM
> To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [RT] spx daily
>
>
> Reagan spent the money -- not Congress. He forced HUGE defense and
> related spending, and ran up the largest deficits ever as a result.
>
> This congress-spending stuff is a myth of the Reagan years, propagated
> by those involved, and also those who don't know anything about
> economics, but believe anything they are told by their own politically
> correct info sources. Reagan practiced Keynes theory big time, but
> preached supply side. Biggest con job ever. Congress actually did not
> want to spend as much money at that time. Revenue went way up --
> exactly according to Keynesian principles.
>
> It may have been the right thing to do, but the misrepresentation was
> (and
> is) very cynical, and plays on the educational ignorance of the USA
> public.
>
> If a so-called "liberal" (the reduction of all viewpoints to a
> one-dimensional right vs. left alignment is in itself idiotic, worthy
> only of the Fox channel) had proposed the same programs at that time, he
> would have been blocked by the Republicans.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "sptrader" <sptrader@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2003 6:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [RT] spx daily
>
>
> > That's what happened in the Regan years- revenue went way up due to
> > the
> tax
> > cuts, it's just that congress spent the additional revenue Plus alot
> > more. Steve
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "BobsKC" <bobskc@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Monday, May 26, 2003 2:52 PM
> > Subject: Re: [RT] spx daily
> >
> >
> > > I believe his thinking is that if you reduce unemployment via the
> creation
> > > of jobs via spending by the public, you get a lot more tax money
> > > coming
> > in.
> > >
> > > 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-unsubscr
> >>>>ibe@
> > yahoogroups.com
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>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-unsubscri
> >>>be@x
> > ahoogroups.com
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>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-unsubscri
> >>>be@x
> > ahoogroups.com
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>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-unsubscrib
> >>e@xx
> > hoogroups.com
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>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-unsubscrib
> >>e@xx
> > hoogroups.com
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>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=170
> >5001
> >
> 779:HM/A=1482387/R=0/*http://ads.x10.com/?bHlhaG9vaG0xLmRhd=1053966084%3
> eM=2
> >
> 47865.3355058.4641699.1512248/D=egroupweb/S=1705001779:HM/A=1482387/R=1=
> 1053
> >
> 966084%3eM=247865.3355058.4641699.1512248/D=egroupweb/S=1705001779:HM/A=
> 1482
> > 387/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.
> > >
> > >
> > > 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/
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > 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/
> >
> >
>
>
>
> 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/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ******************************************************************
> This email and any files transmitted with it from the ElPaso
> Corporation are confidential and intended solely for the
> use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
> If you have received this email in error please notify the
> sender.
> ******************************************************************
>
>
>
> 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/
>
>
------------------------ 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/
|