OFFLINE

Just when Washington thought the U.S. economy was back on track after dodging a bullet from the now-resolved debt crisis, Wall Street sent a clear signal Thursday that all is not well.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 513 points, or 4.3%, to 11,384, the S&P 500 tumbled 60.3 points, or 4.8%, to 1,200.

Stocks plunged amid worries over new data showing economic weakness in the U.S. and Europe. Investors were spooked by reports showing the number of Americans applying for first-time jobless benefits fell to 400,000 from a revised 401,000 in the prior week.

With the debt ceiling raised, focus on Wall Street has shifted to the beleaguered economy. Essentially every economic sector has shown signs of weakness in recent weeks.  Indeed, economic expansion essentially screeched to a halt in the first quarter of this year, the labor market added a paltry 18,000 jobs in June and many manufacturing gauges have shown only slow expansion in that industry.

Data released on Thursday showed the number of individuals applying for first-time unemployment benefits fell to 400,000 from a revised 401,000 in the prior week, slightly better than the 405,000 economists were expecting.  However, claims have remained right around the 400,000-level for weeks, leading economists to question the robustness of the recovery in the labor markets.

OFFLINE

Yeah, if folks want something to be angry at, this is ti.  Lol!  By now you also know we've been downgraded by S&P, so apparently all that bickering and closed door meetings was unnecessarily.  They were gonna downgrade us anyway i guess.

Imo, not only should Tim Geithner be fired, but Obama should pull a LBJ and tell us that he will not seek, and will not accept the nomination of his party for a 2nd term.  In fact, imo, both Obama and Biden should resign.  

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Dennis Young:
Yeah, if folks want something to be angry at, this is ti.  Lol!  By now you also know we've been downgraded by S&P, so apparently all that bickering and closed door meetings was unnecessarily.  They were gonna downgrade us anyway i guess.

Imo, not only should Tim Geithner be fired, but Obama should pull a LBJ and tell us that he will not seek, and will not accept the nomination of his party for a 2nd term.  In fact, imo, both Obama and Biden should resign.  

How do you figure?  This is a result of  congress, not the executive branch.  Mass resignations from both sides of the isle in both houses would be appropriate, but the ones responsible are likely too self righteous to step down.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Bryant Platt:

Originally Posted by Dennis Young:
Yeah, if folks want something to be angry at, this is ti.  Lol!  By now you also know we've been downgraded by S&P, so apparently all that bickering and closed door meetings was unnecessarily.  They were gonna downgrade us anyway i guess.

Imo, not only should Tim Geithner be fired, but Obama should pull a LBJ and tell us that he will not seek, and will not accept the nomination of his party for a 2nd term.  In fact, imo, both Obama and Biden should resign.  

How do you figure?  This is a result of  congress, not the executive branch.  Mass resignations from both sides of the isle in both houses would be appropriate, but the ones responsible are likely too self righteous to step down.

Do you still hold extreme disdain for the Tea Party??? If we would have listened to them and cut what they wanted, we wouldn't have lost our AAA credit rating.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Mark Simmons:

Originally Posted by Bryant Platt:

Originally Posted by Dennis Young:
Yeah, if folks want something to be angry at, this is ti.  Lol!  By now you also know we've been downgraded by S&P, so apparently all that bickering and closed door meetings was unnecessarily.  They were gonna downgrade us anyway i guess.

Imo, not only should Tim Geithner be fired, but Obama should pull a LBJ and tell us that he will not seek, and will not accept the nomination of his party for a 2nd term.  In fact, imo, both Obama and Biden should resign.  

How do you figure?  This is a result of  congress, not the executive branch.  Mass resignations from both sides of the isle in both houses would be appropriate, but the ones responsible are likely too self righteous to step down.

Do you still hold extreme disdain for the Tea Party??? If we would have listened to them and cut what they wanted, we wouldn't have lost our AAA credit rating.

It wasn't meant to be an exclusive shot at the Tea Party, or even the Republicans.  Both the Reptards and the Democraps played a dangerous game that only served to hurt the average American.  As for the second part of your post, we may have retained our AAA rating, but at a great expense to a very large number of Americans.  I would imagine that there are better plans than what Paul Ryan proposed or what was passed that would have allowed us to retain our credit rating without gutting some essential government services (there is no worse time to tear apart safety nets than in the midst of a recession when many rely on them and lack immediate opportunity to get off).

OFFLINE

if we're still talking about the debt deal, all that was was a big waste of time and a show. just look how it played out. originally, as of april, obama's position was that he wanted a clean increase. then, over the budget "battle" ( which was just a prologue to the debt debate) the republicans made it clear that they wanted to go after serious cuts, and that obama's blank check days were over. but they sort of folded a bit then, saying that the real coming battle was the dreaded debt ceiling debate.

so we have all of this brinksmanship set in on both sides, and it was a little bit of a "let's see who flinches first" atmosphere. the republicans passed two proposals (actually on paper and in law, and everything), while harry reid takes them off the table. meanwhile, obama still hasn't let out on any of the exact details in a plan which he would support. then, as was so predictable,  washington found a way to pull off another amazing miracle, to divert default, which itself was never really an issue. how did this happen? well boehner found an avenue to appease the tea party, by getting "major cuts" on paper, but having them so far spaced out and back loaded, that they're subject to future congresses, and will only see a total of $22 billion, out of next year's $3.7 trillion dollar budget outlook. kind of the same thing happened with those "historic" and "unprecedented cuts" (in the words of a proud proud obama) that arised from the supposed budget "battle."

so here we are. i feel so incredibly confident in this, that i'll just go ahead and say it, but in my mind popped the melody:

"it's the end of obama's re-election bid.

  it's the end of obama's re-election bid.

  it's the end of obama's re-election bid, and i feel fiiiiine......"

i don't think ANY president, in our history, could withstand such a dismal and humiliating state of decline over our nation. period. whether you want to try to comfort yourself by blaming all this on bush, that's fine, but this so-called "man" has severely failed to live up to ANYTHING that was on the ballot in late 08. and with this, he will now be a one and done prez, and when history records all of this - this entire period in time - he will take over the mantle of worse living president in history, now held by a nobel peanut farmer.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Bryant Platt:

It wasn't meant to be an exclusive shot at the Tea Party, or even the Republicans.  Both the Reptards and the Democraps played a dangerous game that only served to hurt the average American.  As for the second part of your post, we may have retained our AAA rating, but at a great expense to a very large number of Americans.  I would imagine that there are better plans than what Paul Ryan proposed or what was passed that would have allowed us to retain our credit rating without gutting some essential government services (there is no worse time to tear apart safety nets than in the midst of a recession when many rely on them and lack immediate opportunity to get off).

dude, this is what gets me. you're buying into the whole liberal idea that we're going to be just gutting programs, and "irresponsibly just slashing spending," and "wounding millions of innocent americans in the process."

the very first thing you have to understand is that these are all just liberal talking points. none of that reflects the realities of the budgetary process. you HAVE TO UNDERSTAND how baseline budgeting tilts the entire game toward ever increasing government.

let me just say it this way. S&P said we would have had to "cut" at least $4 trillion in spending to avoid a downgrade, right? and we could only get just over a trillion, spaced out over a decade. BUT if we simply froze spending to 2011 levels for a decade (even after president obama has already added $4 trillion to the nat. debt)  this would have counted as $9.5 trillion cut. a cut. why? because thanks to baseline budgeting (which automatically adjusts for annual percentage increases to all departments, programs, and agencies) this is how much we would spend over the coming decade, just on annual increases. this is why a $4 trillion dollar plan, or a $6 trillion dollar plan, were really all farce anyway, when it comes to there being any kind of impact on any of the services or obligations that the current government guarantees. bottom line.