A Twitter Moment on Fiscal Conservatives
Sep 18th, 2008 by RSmitty
note: we aren’t set up on twitter and it’s too late for me to do it, so consider this a twitter-type of message…a quick blurb intended to make you think…
If you consider yourself a Fiscal Conservative, can you stand in honor with our White House Administration?
My answer in comment #1
Absolutely NOT. We’ve been sold…cheapened…whored out. There are zero fiscal conservatives in that White House. When you cut taxes, YOU CUT SPENDING! Your collective-administration amounts to a fiscal idiot.
McCain or Obama…good luck to either of you. You are being handed shovels-full of shit. I’m voting for Bob Barr.
The republcan philosophy of less oversight and regulation in big business invariably leads to this outcome. You know, less government in big bussiness, more in our personal lives, Ironically, the federal government republicans hate so much is the last stop to save them – an us – from themselves.
The GOP really screwed the pooch in terms of spending over the past eight years. They seem to have lost their way in terms of both spending and small government.
That said, keep in mind that a vote for Bob Barr is essentially the same as a vote for Barack Obama.
I like the way Economist Michael Greenberger put it the other day on Terry Gross’ show on NPR: The Republican governance ideological mantra under Bush/McCain has become “privatize profits, socialize losses”.
This reality is pretty rotten for the taxpayers, just one more major reason why we need to get these Bush/McCain deregulators and supply siders out of power quickly, replaced by those who will judiciously regulate, restore a balanced tax burden, and hold the greedy accountable for their mischief.
That said, keep in mind that a vote for Bob Barr is essentially the same as a vote for Barack Obama.
I hear what you say, Dom, totally, but the line I choose to walk is the one I believe is right and just, not the one I am told to walk.
Hell NO, I can’t stand in honor ! With few exceptions (e.g. Jeff Flake), there is no way to distinguish between D’s and R’s as far as a responsible fiscal policy is concerned. There’s alot of “talk” on either side, but when it comes down to it there is no action. Everyone is protecting their own butts.
And, I agree with Dominique that a vote for Barr is a vote for Obama. Just take a look at Delaware Libertarian. Barr is a joke, and pretty much of a confirmed sleazeball.
They screwed the pooch by not PAYING for the spending. Now the party is over and the bar tab is due. Those who drank the most will now have to pay the most.
Fine! Then I am writing in Shirley’s name! AArrrgghh! (It is Talk Like a Pirate Day).
Seriously, I want to know we will have a tried and true economist coming into the next administration, not a cronie.
Here’s the thing: The fiscal conservative faithful say they want to cut taxes and cut spending. But after they cut taxes to great fanfare, they never get around to cutting spending.
Where are the fiscal conservatives who will run on a platform of specific spending cuts? I guess they aren’t that popular.
Your best shot at re-jiggering government for lower taxes and lower spending was Reagan, and he couldn’t do it. They tried everything to cut spending, even calling ketchup a vegetable. In the end, Reagan admitted defeat and in 1983 signed the biggest tax increase in history.
After that, anyone who thinks they can cut taxes below optimal levels without incurring massive deficits is simply delusional.
I’d really like to see true conservatives take back the Republican Party. We use to debate issues, not ideology. And, imo, it’s ideology that’s led us down this path – Taxes = always bad.
Well, taxes are coming, and unless we suck it up and pay we will be saddling our kids with a big bill and an uncertain future.
In addition to the credit crisis involving investment banks bundling inadequately secured mortgage paper into derivative products that are, as it turns out, impossible to determine value, we also have financial institutions involved in short selling.
Short selling, as I am coming to understand it, is giving permission to investors to borrow stock shares and short sell them, the investor than buying them within the 3 day settlement period at a lower price and returning said shares to the lending institution. If the original transaction is very large, the stock will decrease in price, thus the short seller makes a profit of the difference.
The margin requirement for the above investor is about $1 put up for $37 lent, about 2.7%. For $1,000 you could get $37,000 worth of stock to trade. Of course the risk is that the stock price goes up, then the short trader loses.
As if this is not a bad enough attempt to manipulate the market, we now learn about naked short selling. In this case, the investor does not even borrow the shares, rather, he/she short sells a large number of shares that he does not own, then buys the stock within the 3 day period settlement period, the stock is purchased at a lower price, resulting on a profit from stocks neither originally owned nor borrowed. This is really wild.
I suppose it is possible that there could be no margin requirement at all to participate, just a wink and a nod from the broker.
This naked short selling is the practice that has been banned by the SEC.
I have wondered what was going on, as I have watched the market up one day, down the next, with little movement up or down during a longer period of time. Short selling may have been a factor in this.
Bear with me, I’m just learning about this stuff. I think I’ve got it right, but will await corrections from those who know.
Whatever happened to the idea of investing in a good stock, then holding on for the long haul, taking dividends and distributions along the way, as well as the appreciation in value that a good company will accrue? Am I that old fashioned?
I wonder if the short sellers and the naked short sellers are manipulating the market too much, distorting stock values, and negatively impacting investors like me.
And then we have the bubbles formed and bursting.
And also we have good companies going down without much warning. Who could have known this time last year that some of our most respected financial giants would be in such dire trouble?
Its called a lack of trust. Wall Street has let us down. It is going to take years to recover from this. Let us just hope that we do recover. Thanks to financial globalization, we have many nations who are stepping in to help us out, and preserve their own assets in the process.
This is all so weird!
The Budget was balanced on Clinton’s Watch what did Reagan Busch and Busch do oooooops bigger and Bigger Debt and this Busch had a Republican congress for 6 of 8 years
Hell to the NO. That’s a major reason I left the Republican Party.