Market Death Spiral Continues 70 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
So long, November lows. Last week, the news media, always looking for a headline, were quick to point out the Dow Theory Sell Signal that occurred last week. Of course, there were plenty of analysts that came out of the woodwork to proclaim the Dow Jones Industrial and Transportation Averages as irrelevant indexes, and therefore Dow Theory had no great impact on the market. Since then, the DJIA now sits 7 percent below its November low after only a week and the S&P 500 is now below its November low. The Nasdaq is not far behind. It looks like the Dow Theorists may be right. Sadly, there are not many signs pointing to an improving market.
Currently, the DJIA now faces resistance at the November low in the 7550 area. It has support in the 7000 area. A fall below this level will likely trigger massive selling.
Click to enlarge 
The S&P 500 not only fell below the closing November low but its intraday low as well. The aforementioned lows are now resistance.
Click to enlarge 
The Nasdaq is the last index standing. It currently has support at 1295 and resistance in the 1430 area. Based on the recent market conditions, it will likely join its compatriots below their November lows.
Click to enlarge
There is still divergence occurring in the market. Currently, 13.76% of stocks are above their 50 day moving average. This is higher than in November, when it stood at 1.17%. Divergence, yes, but it is certainly not comforting. Divergence between indicators may appear on the charts, but it may take time for the trend to change.
Click to enlarge
The bottom line is that the downtrend is still intact. If you are long, you are playing with fire. Now is not the time buy stocks. Period.
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
TraderMark
-
2
Don Dion
-
3
Cliff Wachtel
-
4
Mike Havrilla
-
5
James Quinn
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This article has 70 comments:
On Mar 01 08:24 AM boats.j wrote:
> Sucks to be American these days doesn't it! Karma coming home to
> roost. Sad, so sad!
It's as if this administration is mad at anyone who worked for what they have, and didn't give their money to losers, so Obama is going to do that for us.
The deficit spending under the Obama plan is sure to inslave the american people for generations to come. It's really sad!
$401k's and IRA's people invested in the stock market will continue to lose their wealth, Obama is angry at the stock market, and the people who invested their hard earned dollars in the stock market. Now he is going to teach us all a lesson. He is going to teach us what it feels like to be poverty stricken. The american working man is about to experience slavery, of which noone ever thought possible, and our children and grand children will be endentured survents for life as well.
1 billion in interest payments, on a budget deficit, is unforgiveable.Unmanage... and unbelieveable! Whats more unbelieveable is he has only been in office for a little over 30 days and he is not done spending yet, he has almost a full 4 years left to spend.
You hear about lottery winners just blowing millions of dollars until they loose all their winnings, well, This administation is acting like they won the lottery, and they won't be happy until they have wasted every dime, plus they are borrowing from other country's and blowing their money as well. Leaving the american people holding the bag.
On Mar 01 08:44 AM know nothing wrote:
> As long as the current administration continues on the path of socialism,
> and taxation with out representation, you can not expect to see any
> improvement.
>
> It's as if this administration is mad at anyone who worked for what
> they have, and didn't give their money to losers, so Obama is going
> to do that for us.
>
> The deficit spending under the Obama plan is sure to inslave the
> american people for generations to come. It's really sad!
>
> $401k's and IRA's people invested in the stock market will continue
> to lose their wealth, Obama is angry at the stock market, and the
> people who invested their hard earned dollars in the stock market.
> Now he is going to teach us all a lesson. He is going to teach us
> what it feels like to be poverty stricken. The american working man
> is about to experience slavery, of which noone ever thought possible,
> and our children and grand children will be endentured survents for
> life as well.
>
> 1 billion in interest payments, on a budget deficit, is unforgiveable.Unmanage...
> and unbelieveable! Whats more unbelieveable is he has only been in
> office for a little over 30 days and he is not done spending yet,
> he has almost a full 4 years left to spend.
>
> You hear about lottery winners just blowing millions of dollars until
> they loose all their winnings, well, This administation is acting
> like they won the lottery, and they won't be happy until they have
> wasted every dime, plus they are borrowing from other country's and
> blowing their money as well. Leaving the american people holding
> the bag.
>
>
Wait a minute, even Warren is selling pieces of Americal like P&G, J&J.
Globalism and trickle down economics have pulled the rug out from underneath the masses who are now seen as nothing more than a source of sales for the pools of capital that serve the still wealthy.
Obama is rightfully seeking to reverse this slide toward national poverty. The nation will be much better off when the national wealth is shared more fairly and the masses have sufficient purchasing power to maintain a decent standard of living. Even the wealthy will be better off, because it was the mistaken trajectory under Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush which has taken us over this economic cliff.
As opposed to the moderate and measured selling that we've experienced up to now.
wtf? Down 50% and you think this is mild?
The masses will have spendng power when they are employed and PRODUCING SOMETHING and the nation will prosper as a whole. Obama is taking a massive draw on the already sold-out children of this land---who by the way will have enough problems of their own to contend with without picking up our meal tickets.
Actually, it falls short - you're a moron.
Obama's been in office 39 days and he's supposed to have cured this unmitigated DISASTER that your pals Bush and the 12 year republican congress caused? Actually, a disaster that has its roots in Reagan's failed economic theories?
Get a life. I wouldn't trust you to manage a hummel collection you idiot.
I have to agree with the author on the technicals, unfortunately.
On Mar 01 09:05 AM ferguson wrote:
> The nation will be much better off when the national wealth
> is shared more fairly and the masses have sufficient purchasing power
> to maintain a decent standard of living. Even the wealthy will be
> better off, because it was the mistaken trajectory under Reagan,
> Bush, Clinton and Bush which has taken us over this economic cliff.
The economy died.
Change (to socialism/marxism) we can believe in.
Believe it, it's well underway.
If you have a Hummel collection, you're the moron!!!
On Mar 01 09:31 AM wpdragon wrote:
> Know nothing, your name says it all.
>
> Actually, it falls short - you're a moron.
>
> Obama's been in office 39 days and he's supposed to have cured this
> unmitigated DISASTER that your pals Bush and the 12 year republican
> congress caused? Actually, a disaster that has its roots in Reagan's
> failed economic theories?
>
> Get a life. I wouldn't trust you to manage a hummel collection you
> idiot.
>
> I have to agree with the author on the technicals, unfortunately.
----------------------...
Six years ago I wrote a book called Uncle Sam's Plantation. I wrote the book to tell my own story of what I saw living inside the welfare state and my own transformation out of it.
I said in that book that indeed there are two Americas -- a poor America on socialism and a wealthy America on capitalism.
I talked about government programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS), Emergency Assistance to Needy Families with Children (EANF), Section 8 Housing, and Food Stamps.
A vast sea of perhaps well-intentioned government programs, all initially set into motion in the 1960s, that were going to lift the nation's poor out of poverty.
A benevolent Uncle Sam welcomed mostly poor black Americans onto the government plantation. Those who accepted the invitation switched mindsets from "How do I take care of myself?" to "What do I have to do to stay on the plantation?"
Instead of solving economic problems, government welfare socialism created monstrous moral and spiritual problems -- the kind of problems that are inevitable when individuals turn responsibility for their lives over to others.
The legacy of American socialism is our blighted inner cities, dysfunctional inner city schools, and broken black families.
Through God's grace, I found my way out. It was then that I understood what freedom meant and how great this country is.
I had the privilege of working on welfare reform in 1996, passed by a Republican Congress and signed 50 percent.
I thought we were on the road to moving socialism out of our poor black communities and replacing it with wealth-producing American capitalism.
But, incredibly, we are going in the opposite direction.
Instead of poor America on socialism becoming more like rich American on capitalism, rich America on capitalism is becoming like poor America on socialism.
Uncle Sam has welcomed our banks onto the plantation and they have said, "Thank you, Suh."
Now, instead of thinking about what creative things need to be done to serve customers, they are thinking about what they have to tell Massah in order to get their cash.
There is some kind of irony that this is all happening under our first black president on the 200th anniversary of the birthday of Abraham Lincoln.
Worse, socialism seems to be the element of our new young president. And maybe even more troubling, our corporate executives seem happy to move onto the plantation.
In an op-ed on the opinion page of the Washington Post, Mr. Obama is clear that the goal of his trillion dollar spending plan is much more than short term economic stimulus.
"This plan is more than a prescription for short-term spending -- it's a strategy for America's long-term growth and opportunity in areas such as renewable energy, healthcare, and education."
Perhaps more incredibly, Obama seems to think that government taking over an economy is a new idea. Or that massive growth in government can take place "with unprecedented transparency and accountability."
Yes, sir, we heard it from Jimmy Carter when he created the Department of Energy, the Synfuels Corporation, and the Department of Education.
Or how about the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 -- The War on Poverty -- which President Johnson said "...does not merely expand old programs or improve what is already being done. It charts a new course. It strikes at the causes, not just the consequences of poverty."
Trillions of dollars later, black poverty is the same. But black families are not, with triple the incidence of single-parent homes and out-of-wedlock births.
It's not complicated. Americans can accept Barack Obama's invitation to move onto the plantation. Or they can choose personal responsibility and freedom.
Does anyone really need to think about what the choice should be?
He is declaring war on investors, entrepreneurs, small businesses, large corporations, and private-equity and venture-capital funds.
That is the meaning of his anti-growth tax-hike proposals, which make absolutely no sense at all — either for this recession or from the standpoint of expanding our economy’s long-run potential to grow.
Raising the marginal tax rate on successful earners, capital, dividends, and all the private funds is a function of Obama’s left-wing social vision, and a repudiation of his economic-recovery statements. Ditto for his sweeping government-planning-an... program, which will wind up raising federal outlays as a share of GDP to at least 30 percent, if not more, over the next 10 years.
This is nearly double the government-spending low-point reached during the late 1990s by the Gingrich Congress and the Clinton administration. While not quite as high as spending levels in Western Europe, we regrettably will be gaining on this statist-planning approach.
Study after study over the past several decades has shown how countries that spend more produce less, while nations that tax less produce more. Obama is doing it wrong on both counts.
And as far as middle-class tax cuts are concerned, Obama’s cap-and-trade program will be a huge across-the-board tax increase on blue-collar workers, including unionized workers.Industrial production is plunging, but new carbon taxes will prevent production from ever recovering. While the country wants more fuel and power, cap-and-trade will deliver less.
The tax hikes will generate lower growth and fewer revenues. Yes, the economy will recover. But Obama’s rosy scenario of 4 percent recovery growth in the out years of his budget is not likely to occur. The combination of easy money from the Fed and below-potential economic growth is a prescription for stagflation. That’s one of the messages of the falling stock market.
Essentially, the Obama economic policies represent a major Democratic party relapse into Great Society social spending and taxing. It is a return to the LBJ/Nixon era, and a move away from the Reagan/Clinton period. House Republicans, fortunately, are 90 days sober, as they are putting up a valiant fight to stop the big-government onslaught and move the GOP back to first principles.
Noteworthy up here on Wall Street, a great many Obama supporters — especially hedge-fund types who voted for “change” — are becoming disillusioned with the performances of Obama and Treasury man Geithner.
There is a growing sense of buyer’s remorse.
Well then, do conservatives dare say: We told you so
On Mar 01 09:48 AM patio wrote:
> Obama's socialism, cronyism, wasteful spending to buy future votes
> is treasonous, in a time of crisis. If we do not rise up, and replace
> democrats ( with true conservatives, not the jackal Republicans we
> now have ), we will bring this country down for decades.
Wake me up when I can go long again.
Thanks for your article; clearly, risks abound on the long side, from a fundamental and technical perspective. But for those of use who want to put our money to work, long or short, I think the more relevant question is how much upside remains on the short side. We have seen a ~55% decline on the Dow vs. 89% in the depression, with a far greater decline in economic production. Do we really expect a repeat of the 89% loss, a 70% loss, or maybe just a 60% loss? Who deny that we are closer now to the bottom than we were before? This is not bottom calling but rather a reflection on the arithmetic reality that our decline is ultimately bounded by zero.
On Mar 01 10:24 AM Child Psychiatrist wrote:
> Mr. Anderson:
>
> Thanks for your article; clearly, risks abound on the long side,
> from a fundamental and technical perspective. But for those of use
> who want to put our money to work, long or short, I think the more
> relevant question is how much upside remains on the short side. We
> have seen a ~55% decline on the Dow vs. 89% in the depression, with
> a far greater decline in economic production. Do we really expect
> a repeat of the 89% loss, a 70% loss, or maybe just a 60% loss? Who
> deny that we are closer now to the bottom than we were before? This
> is not bottom calling but rather a reflection on the arithmetic reality
> that our decline is ultimately bounded by zero.
On Mar 01 09:15 AM JPDD wrote:
> <i>A fall below this level will likely trigger massive selling.</i>
>
>
> As opposed to the moderate and measured selling that we've experienced
> up to now.
>
> wtf? Down 50% and you think this is mild?
According to the news, the markets and the currency trades, the US is holding up better than most.
Boat.j can still go to Canada. They are holding up relatively well and love the sport of US bashing. Just don't plan to get a serious illness, since they will send you to the US. Unless of course you die waiting to be sent.
People get rich by hiring workers and paying low wages, like WallMart or by being executives earning huge bonuses on the back of workers who can barely pay monthly dues for a family. With corporations trying to make more profit by moving manufacturing to overseas, more people cannot find jobs. All this need to change, or we will see a revolution.
50% of all people paying no income tax at all is not fair.
If we "are all in it together", then we should all contribute. That would be fair.
On Mar 01 10:54 AM polar40 wrote:
> 39% tax instead of 36% on people making over $250,000 is fair. 95%
> population makes less than this amount. Most high income people also
> have numerous tax deductions loop holes and reduce tax to almost
> 0%. It is the middle income people that run the govt.
> People get rich by hiring workers and paying low wages, like WallMart
> or by being executives earning huge bonuses on the back of workers
> who can barely pay monthly dues for a family. With corporations trying
> to make more profit by moving manufacturing to overseas, more people
> cannot find jobs. All this need to change, or we will see a revolution.
How do you arrive at that conclusion? The fact that the Bush tax cuts are going to be reversed is the first hopeful sign I've seen that we will start working towards future economic growth.
And the real costs of the wars and now going to be on the books, instead of hidden away as if they didn't exist. Of course we will have a tremendous deficit, the Bush Crime Family ran it up enriching themselves and their class.
The American Corporate press is reporting to its American slaves that is is well in USA. Those of us who get real news know this!
Oh, and things are tough in allot of places, some which you mentioned, the difference is they know it and they know America caused it!
Sad, so sad!
On Mar 01 10:52 AM 2houndz wrote:
> Yeah, it sucks to be living in America right now
>
> According to the news, the markets and the currency trades, the US
> is holding up better than most.
>
>
Rationality is in short supply right now, don't give up yours either.
On Mar 01 10:24 AM Child Psychiatrist wrote:
> Mr. Anderson:
>
> Thanks for your article; clearly, risks abound on the long side,
> from a fundamental and technical perspective. But for those of use
> who want to put our money to work, long or short, I think the more
> relevant question is how much upside remains on the short side. We
> have seen a ~55% decline on the Dow vs. 89% in the depression, with
> a far greater decline in economic production. Do we really expect
> a repeat of the 89% loss, a 70% loss, or maybe just a 60% loss? Who
> deny that we are closer now to the bottom than we were before? This
> is not bottom calling but rather a reflection on the arithmetic reality
> that our decline is ultimately bounded by zero.
On Mar 01 12:50 PM ROLEXROLEX wrote:
> I never read even one article or comment on sa, I am bad.
A better way is to have a one page IRS law. As follows: Less than 70k a year 0%, 70k to 140k 15%, 140k to 250k 25%, 250k to 350k 35%, 350k to 500k 45%, 500k to 1 million 55%, 1million to 5 million 75% and 5 million up 95%.
On Mar 01 01:07 PM henarl wrote:
> Instead of worrying about how much of the taxes are paid by the top
> 2% or 5% and how many people don't pay taxes at all, it makes a lot
> more sense to replace the monstrously complex income tax system with
> a simple federal sales tax that makes the big spenders foot most
> of the bill. Tax consumers rather than earners. This would also
> eliminate the huge IRS bureaucracy, thereby saving more money. Of
> course those bureaucrats would fight this because they don't want
> to lose their government jobs and have to get a productive job in
> the private sector instead. Also, tax accountants and attorneys
> would have to find honest work too so they wouldn't like it. Oh
> well, those with vested interests in the status quo will probably
> keep it from happening. Too bad.
Obama to Joe the plumber: "Spread the wealth around."
Sorry folks, anyone who heard the unscripted comment from Obama above and did not believe it and now has remorse needs to drag out a mirror, look into the eyes reflecting back and say "you are the reason for this." Maybe you'll like what you see in 4 years but my odds say from present performance (questionable friends, nominated tax cheats, proposed budget) you probably won't. BTW I hope my odds are wrong.
- AIG needs $30 B more
- BofA equity may be diluted (similar to Citi)
- Jobless claims likely to hit 700K
- Buffet- "economy in shambles for 2009 and likely beyond..."
- All indexes (excl Nasdaq) have breached ’02 lows (now at 13 year lows)
Bar Stool Economics
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20."
Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!"
"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia
On Mar 01 01:16 PM boats.j wrote:
> Except that a consumption tax would result in a much higher rate
> for poor people than rich people. Poor people have no discretionary
> income. They'd be taxed on everything they need to live. Rich people
> have massive discretionary income and therefore would be paying a
> very low effective rate.
>
> A better way is to have a one page IRS law. As follows: Less than
> 70k a year 0%, 70k to 140k 15%, 140k to 250k 25%, 250k to 350k 35%,
> 350k to 500k 45%, 500k to 1 million 55%, 1million to 5 million 75%
> and 5 million up 95%.
On Mar 01 11:24 AM TA wrote:
> We are far closer to the bottom than we were 16 months ago. It's
> human nature to take the recent past and extrapolate the future assuming
> it will never change which unfortunately goes both ways at extremes.
>
>
> Rationality is in short supply right now, don't give up yours either.
>
Only the market can work things out, and as long as we keep manipulating and interfering, things will only get worse. Unless we print enough money to bail everyone out and then everything will be fine.
On Mar 01 09:33 AM JerseyMike wrote:
> Keep drinking that Cool Aid. Obama is an unmitigated disaster for
> America. His bumbling and stumbling on the economy has only made
> things worse. The idea that taking resources away from the most productive
> in society will somehow make us all better off is so stupid that
> the markets are rightly rejecting it.
>
On Mar 01 10:24 AM Child Psychiatrist wrote:
> Mr. Anderson:
>
> Thanks for your article; clearly, risks abound on the long side,
> from a fundamental and technical perspective. But for those of use
> who want to put our money to work, long or short, I think the more
> relevant question is how much upside remains on the short side. We
> have seen a ~55% decline on the Dow vs. 89% in the depression, with
> a far greater decline in economic production. Do we really expect
> a repeat of the 89% loss, a 70% loss, or maybe just a 60% loss? Who
> deny that we are closer now to the bottom than we were before? This
> is not bottom calling but rather a reflection on the arithmetic reality
> that our decline is ultimately bounded by zero.
Take $1,000. Down 50% puts you at $500. Down 89% puts you at $110.
Forget about how much you HAD ($1,000) and concentrate on how much you HAVE ($500).
$110 is down 78% from what you HAVE.
Try not to go there.
> Sucks to be American these days doesn't it! Karma coming home to
> roost. Sad, so sad!
No, no it doesn't.
You know you're on the right side of the border when people hate you because you are more creative and succesful than they and when people on the other side of the border are trying to sneak over to your side.
We also know we're the best because we fight to free other people not just to take resources from others'. What other country in history has ever spilled their own blood to free a people from a dictator and then handed that country back over to its people? We have done it many times. I for one am proud to be an American.
NAFTA AFTA, JOBS SHIPPED OVERSEAS IN SEEK OF SLAVE LABOUR
GOODS PRODUCED SHIPPED BACK TO THE USA THE CONSUMERS ARE BEING GRADUALLY REDUCED TO POVERTY ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY SLOW BUYING THE CHEAP PRODUCTS PRODUCED BY AMERICAN COMPANIES OUTSIDE THE USA.
DESTROY THE US AUTO COMPANIES THEN NEXT BOEING FINALLY WHAT IS LEFT IS THE SERVICE INDUSTRY WHICH PAYS LOW WAGES.
IN THE END NO MORE MIDDLE CLASS WHAT IS LEFT IS THE POOR AND THE VERY RICH.
WHER ARE THOSE REPUBLICAN THAT CALL THEMSELVES FISCIAL RESPONSIBLE TAKING THE DEFICIT FROM 5.7 TRIILLION TO 10.3 TRILLION.
CHENNEY RESPONSE WAS WE GOT TWO WARS THE REPORTER FAILED TO ASK HIM TWO WARS OF YOUR OWN MAKING MR CHENNEY. THESE TWO WARS COULD BE AVOIDED COVERT OPERATION WILL BE MORE CHEAPER AND EFFECTIVE TO GET RID OF SADAM.
COVERT OPERATION AS TO BIN LADIN HIS SUPPORTERS WERE FEW,
BUT THE INVASION HAS MADE ALL OF THE TALIBAN AND THE POPULATION OF NORTHERN PAKISTON HIS SUPPORTERS.
THE EOMAN EMPIRE DESTROY ITSELF, THEN THE BRITISH EMPIRE NOW THE USA ON THE PATH OF DESTRUCTION, MASSIVE MILITARY SPENDING WORLD WIDE, WHO IS ABOUT TO INVADE THE USA, THE RUSSIAN PULLED OUT OF EASTERN EUROPE BUT THE US CONTINUES MASSIVE MILITARY SPENDING.
Boats: If you're worried about a federal sales tax being harder on poor people than rich people, just exempt staple food items, clothing items under $50, public transportation, rent under $500 per month, etc. In other words, the necessities. The rich will still have to pay the sales tax on their luxury purchases, which they will continue to buy. After all, what is the point of being rich if you can't have your mansions, yachts, private jets, Bentleys, etc.? The more toys you buy, the more tax you pay - what could be fairer?
I hate, hate, hate this argument. You do understand that this 2% (the so-called overclass) controls an inordinate amount of the wealth in this country, yes? 50% sounds like a lot until you consider the number as a percentage of their income. After all, there's multi-billionaires in this group. It's all relative. When you consider their crafty use of tax loops and havens and the ridiculously low cap gains rates, their average contribution (as a % of their income) is no higher than the little guy! In fact, some of the super-rich pay little tax at all. Just ask Therasa Heinz Kerry who's effective tax rate is something like 9%
On Mar 01 11:01 AM JerseyMike wrote:
> 2% of people paying 50% of all taxes is not fair.
> 50% of all people paying no income tax at all is not fair.
> If we "are all in it together", then we should all contribute. That
> would be fair.
On Mar 01 09:45 AM patio wrote:
> Written by Star Parker - an African American Columnist.
>
> ----------------------...
>
> Six years ago I wrote a book called Uncle Sam's Plantation. I wrote
> the book to tell my own story of what I saw living inside the welfare
> state and my own transformation out of it.
>
> I said in that book that indeed there are two Americas -- a poor
> America on socialism and a wealthy America on capitalism.
>
> I talked about government programs like Temporary Assistance for
> Needy Families (seekingalpha.com/symbo...), Job Opportunities
> and Basic Skills Training (seekingalpha.com/symbo...),
> Emergency Assistance to Needy Families with Children (seekingalpha.com/symbo...),
> Section 8 Housing, and Food Stamps.
>
> A vast sea of perhaps well-intentioned government programs, all initially
> set into motion in the 1960s, that were going to lift the nation's
> poor out of poverty.
>
> A benevolent Uncle Sam welcomed mostly poor black Americans onto
> the government plantation. Those who accepted the invitation switched
> mindsets from "How do I take care of myself?" to "What do I have
> to do to stay on the plantation?"
>
> Instead of solving economic problems, government welfare socialism
> created monstrous moral and spiritual problems -- the kind of problems
> that are inevitable when individuals turn responsibility for their
> lives over to others.
>
> The legacy of American socialism is our blighted inner cities, dysfunctional
> inner city schools, and broken black families.
>
> Through God's grace, I found my way out. It was then that I understood
> what freedom meant and how great this country is.
>
> I had the privilege of working on welfare reform in 1996, passed
> by a Republican Congress and signed 50 percent.
>
> I thought we were on the road to moving socialism out of our poor
> black communities and replacing it with wealth-producing American
> capitalism.
>
> But, incredibly, we are going in the opposite direction.
>
> Instead of poor America on socialism becoming more like rich American
> on capitalism, rich America on capitalism is becoming like poor America
> on socialism.
>
> Uncle Sam has welcomed our banks onto the plantation and they have
> said, "Thank you, Suh."
>
> Now, instead of thinking about what creative things need to be done
> to serve customers, they are thinking about what they have to tell
> Massah in order to get their cash.
>
> There is some kind of irony that this is all happening under our
> first black president on the 200th anniversary of the birthday of
> Abraham Lincoln.
>
> Worse, socialism seems to be the element of our new young president.
> And maybe even more troubling, our corporate executives seem happy
> to move onto the plantation.
>
> In an op-ed on the opinion page of the Washington Post, Mr. Obama
> is clear that the goal of his trillion dollar spending plan is much
> more than short term economic stimulus.
>
> "This plan is more than a prescription for short-term spending --
> it's a strategy for America's long-term growth and opportunity in
> areas such as renewable energy, healthcare, and education."
>
> Perhaps more incredibly, Obama seems to think that government taking
> over an economy is a new idea. Or that massive growth in government
> can take place "with unprecedented transparency and accountability."
>
>
> Yes, sir, we heard it from Jimmy Carter when he created the Department
> of Energy, the Synfuels Corporation, and the Department of Education.
>
>
> Or how about the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 -- The War on Poverty
> -- which President Johnson said "...does not merely expand old programs
> or improve what is already being done. It charts a new course. It
> strikes at the causes, not just the consequences of poverty."
>
> Trillions of dollars later, black poverty is the same. But black
> families are not, with triple the incidence of single-parent homes
> and out-of-wedlock births.
>
> It's not complicated. Americans can accept Barack Obama's invitation
> to move onto the plantation. Or they can choose personal responsibility
> and freedom.
>
> Does anyone really need to think about what the choice should be?
>
it's indentured servants, not endentured survents
it's no one, not noone
it's unforgivable, not unforgiveable
it's unbelievable, not unbelieveable
it's administration, not administation
one or two errors and I might still be able to take you seriously, but the ignorance evidenced by your spelling skills belies the ignorance of your brain
On Mar 01 08:44 AM know nothing wrote:
> As long as the current administration continues on the path of socialism,
> and taxation with out representation, you can not expect to see any
> improvement.
>
> It's as if this administration is mad at anyone who worked for what
> they have, and didn't give their money to losers, so Obama is going
> to do that for us.
>
> The deficit spending under the Obama plan is sure to inslave the
> american people for generations to come. It's really sad!
>
> $401k's and IRA's people invested in the stock market will continue
> to lose their wealth, Obama is angry at the stock market, and the
> people who invested their hard earned dollars in the stock market.
> Now he is going to teach us all a lesson. He is going to teach us
> what it feels like to be poverty stricken. The american working man
> is about to experience slavery, of which noone ever thought possible,
> and our children and grand children will be endentured survents for
> life as well.
>
> 1 billion in interest payments, on a budget deficit, is unforgiveable.Unmanage...
> and unbelieveable! Whats more unbelieveable is he has only been in
> office for a little over 30 days and he is not done spending yet,
> he has almost a full 4 years left to spend.
>
> You hear about lottery winners just blowing millions of dollars until
> they loose all their winnings, well, This administation is acting
> like they won the lottery, and they won't be happy until they have
> wasted every dime, plus they are borrowing from other country's and
> blowing their money as well. Leaving the american people holding
> the bag.
>
>
> Keep drinking that Cool Aid. Obama is an unmitigated disaster for
> America. His bumbling and stumbling on the economy has only made
> things worse. The idea that taking resources away from the most productive
> in society will somehow make us all better off is so stupid that
> the markets are rightly rejecting it.
>
It does not take mass migration. In fact, quite the opposite.
According to Mayor Bloomberg, almost half the budget of NYC is paid by 44,000 people (of over 8 million).
If half those people left, the city would be bankrupt.
22,000 people could leave in an hour from JFK.
On Mar 01 10:26 PM Hexan wrote:
> "They won't move away from the greatest country on earth! Will they?
> No, because other countries tax at an even higher rate or can't offer
> them the things they think they can't live without. Mass migration?
> Hardly."
>
> It does not take mass migration. In fact, quite the opposite. <br/>
>
> According to Mayor Bloomberg, almost half the budget of NYC is paid
> by 44,000 people (of over 8 million).
>
> If half those people left, the city would be bankrupt.
>
> 22,000 people could leave in an hour from JFK.
>
On Mar 01 08:44 AM know nothing wrote:
> As long as the current administration continues on the path of socialism,
> and taxation with out representation, you can not expect to see any
> improvement.
>
> It's as if this administration is mad at anyone who worked for what
> they have, and didn't give their money to losers, so Obama is going
> to do that for us.
>
> The deficit spending under the Obama plan is sure to inslave the
> american people for generations to come. It's really sad!
>
> $401k's and IRA's people invested in the stock market will continue
> to lose their wealth, Obama is angry at the stock market, and the
> people who invested their hard earned dollars in the stock market.
> Now he is going to teach us all a lesson. He is going to teach us
> what it feels like to be poverty stricken. The american working man
> is about to experience slavery, of which noone ever thought possible,
> and our children and grand children will be endentured survents for
> life as well.
>
> 1 billion in interest payments, on a budget deficit, is unforgiveable.Unmanage...
> and unbelieveable! Whats more unbelieveable is he has only been in
> office for a little over 30 days and he is not done spending yet,
> he has almost a full 4 years left to spend.
>
> You hear about lottery winners just blowing millions of dollars until
> they loose all their winnings, well, This administation is acting
> like they won the lottery, and they won't be happy until they have
> wasted every dime, plus they are borrowing from other country's and
> blowing their money as well. Leaving the american people holding
> the bag.
>
>
On Mar 01 09:17 PM maxe wrote:
> "Now is not the time buy stocks. Period" I love this, the Americans
> are capitulating and giving up all hope, im buying now for sure!
Yes the markets are still in a major downtrend and can be expected to continue down. Current earnings for the S&P 500 indicate that we can expect to see a decline well into the 600s.
Now is the time to just be cool and wait this out - keep lots of powder dry. There will be nice $$$ to be made. And the market will tell us when it is time.
On Mar 01 08:24 AM boats.j wrote:
> Sucks to be American these days doesn't it! Karma coming home to
> roost. Sad, so sad!
On Mar 01 09:31 AM wpdragon wrote:
> Know nothing, your name says it all.
>
> Actually, it falls short - you're a moron.
>
> Obama's been in office 39 days and he's supposed to have cured this
> unmitigated DISASTER that your pals Bush and the 12 year republican
> congress caused? Actually, a disaster that has its roots in Reagan's
> failed economic theories?
>
> Get a life. I wouldn't trust you to manage a hummel collection you
> idiot.
>
> I have to agree with the author on the technicals, unfortunately.
You are a shameful sellout. This is conservative thinktank drivel. You think they respect you? Black single mother turned christo-fascist? They turned you out. I hope they pay you well. And if you are such a christian, read the new testament. Half of it is Jesus talking about helping the poor. He never rationalized, as you do, denying the poor because they were all lazy and shiftless idlers anyway, and coddling them would only reiniforce that. You are a self-hating propagandist.
On Mar 01 09:45 AM patio wrote:
> Written by Star Parker - an African American Columnist.
>
> ----------------------...
>
> Six years ago I wrote a book called Uncle Sam's Plantation. I wrote
> the book to tell my own story of what I saw living inside the welfare
> state and my own transformation out of it.
>
> I said in that book that indeed there are two Americas -- a poor
> America on socialism and a wealthy America on capitalism.
>
> I talked about government programs like Temporary Assistance for
> Needy Families (seekingalpha.com/symbo...), Job Opportunities
> and Basic Skills Training (seekingalpha.com/symbo...),
> Emergency Assistance to Needy Families with Children (seekingalpha.com/symbo...),
> Section 8 Housing, and Food Stamps.
>
> A vast sea of perhaps well-intentioned government programs, all initially
> set into motion in the 1960s, that were going to lift the nation's
> poor out of poverty.
>
> A benevolent Uncle Sam welcomed mostly poor black Americans onto
> the government plantation. Those who accepted the invitation switched
> mindsets from "How do I take care of myself?" to "What do I have
> to do to stay on the plantation?"
>
> Instead of solving economic problems, government welfare socialism
> created monstrous moral and spiritual problems -- the kind of problems
> that are inevitable when individuals turn responsibility for their
> lives over to others.
>
> The legacy of American socialism is our blighted inner cities, dysfunctional
> inner city schools, and broken black families.
>
> Through God's grace, I found my way out. It was then that I understood
> what freedom meant and how great this country is.
>
> I had the privilege of working on welfare reform in 1996, passed
> by a Republican Congress and signed 50 percent.
>
> I thought we were on the road to moving socialism out of our poor
> black communities and replacing it with wealth-producing American
> capitalism.
>
> But, incredibly, we are going in the opposite direction.
>
> Instead of poor America on socialism becoming more like rich American
> on capitalism, rich America on capitalism is becoming like poor America
> on socialism.
>
> Uncle Sam has welcomed our banks onto the plantation and they have
> said, "Thank you, Suh."
>
> Now, instead of thinking about what creative things need to be done
> to serve customers, they are thinking about what they have to tell
> Massah in order to get their cash.
>
> There is some kind of irony that this is all happening under our
> first black president on the 200th anniversary of the birthday of
> Abraham Lincoln.
>
> Worse, socialism seems to be the element of our new young president.
> And maybe even more troubling, our corporate executives seem happy
> to move onto the plantation.
>
> In an op-ed on the opinion page of the Washington Post, Mr. Obama
> is clear that the goal of his trillion dollar spending plan is much
> more than short term economic stimulus.
>
> "This plan is more than a prescription for short-term spending --
> it's a strategy for America's long-term growth and opportunity in
> areas such as renewable energy, healthcare, and education."
>
> Perhaps more incredibly, Obama seems to think that government taking
> over an economy is a new idea. Or that massive growth in government
> can take place "with unprecedented transparency and accountability."
>
>
> Yes, sir, we heard it from Jimmy Carter when he created the Department
> of Energy, the Synfuels Corporation, and the Department of Education.
>
>
> Or how about the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 -- The War on Poverty
> -- which President Johnson said "...does not merely expand old programs
> or improve what is already being done. It charts a new course. It
> strikes at the causes, not just the consequences of poverty."
>
> Trillions of dollars later, black poverty is the same. But black
> families are not, with triple the incidence of single-parent homes
> and out-of-wedlock births.
>
> It's not complicated. Americans can accept Barack Obama's invitation
> to move onto the plantation. Or they can choose personal responsibility
> and freedom.
>
> Does anyone really need to think about what the choice should be?
>
On Mar 01 03:21 PM fabien_hug wrote:
> You are right, taking resources away from the most productive destroyers
> of value in recent history and allocate them for health and education
> will definitively destroy the good karma that drove this great nation
> on top of world.
On Mar 01 01:07 PM henarl wrote:
> Instead of worrying about how much of the taxes are paid by the top
> 2% or 5% and how many people don't pay taxes at all, it makes a lot
> more sense to replace the monstrously complex income tax system with
> a simple federal sales tax that makes the big spenders foot most
> of the bill. Tax consumers rather than earners. This would also
> eliminate the huge IRS bureaucracy, thereby saving more money. Of
> course those bureaucrats would fight this because they don't want
> to lose their government jobs and have to get a productive job in
> the private sector instead. Also, tax accountants and attorneys
> would have to find honest work too so they wouldn't like it. Oh
> well, those with vested interests in the status quo will probably
> keep it from happening. Too bad.
We will then have an opportunity to change the course of mankind away from ugliness that has built for hundreds of years culminating in the spectacular failure of American capitalism.
Will we choose to annihilate everyone on the planet? Will we choose to to put aside failed economic and political theories? Will we rise above our baser selves?
I'm not seeing anyone capable of drafting a new Magna Carta that will emphatically limit the powers of our latest and most awful monarchs, the bankers, and affirm that they never again be allowed to have power over our money.
A new Dark Ages is upon us.
you are correct. The stark differences between McCain and Obama were readily apparent to the average voter but the deceitful ,conniving media did everything possible to make Obama look like JFK and McCain look/appear like Nixon. One of the most dangerous outcomes from this election is the fact that soon no one will listen or pay any atention to this mass media. When that happens we could be ripe for anything from a revolution to a demagougue as President. The media from the main TV networks to the NY Times "sold their souls" to the devil in the adoration of Obama. Now they will pay the price as ratings, ad revenues, and circulation fall off a cliff. When a liberal newspaper recently failed in the Pacific Northwest one journalist bitterly complained that the people had lost a "watchdog" of Govt. Unfortunately we need to susbstitute the term "lapdog" instead. And now they will pay the price for their "bias". The day the NY Times goes bankrupt I will happily "dance on their grave." Bastards.
Yank
On Mar 01 04:16 PM Alphameister wrote:
> Kudos to "patio" for presenting the article by Star Parker, one of
> the best summaries of America's socioeconomic probems I've read in
> a long time. For anyone who understands the lessons of history, it
> wasn't necessary to wait until even one day of Obama's term as President
> to know he will be disastrous for America. He isn't an honest man,
> but he was surprisingly open about his socialist prescriptions for
> America and still the benighted electorate found him the lesser of
> alternative evils.
On Mar 01 01:16 PM boats.j wrote:
> Except that a consumption tax would result in a much higher rate
> for poor people than rich people. Poor people have no discretionary
> income. They'd be taxed on everything they need to live. Rich people
> have massive discretionary income and therefore would be paying a
> very low effective rate.
>
> A better way is to have a one page IRS law. As follows: Less than
> 70k a year 0%, 70k to 140k 15%, 140k to 250k 25%, 250k to 350k 35%,
> 350k to 500k 45%, 500k to 1 million 55%, 1million to 5 million 75%
> and 5 million up 95%.
On Mar 02 10:35 AM nukldrager wrote:
> Ridiculous. You are suggesting leaving someone who earns 5 mil with
> 250k net after taxes? Wtf. How about a flat tax no exemptions. On
> all levels of income. 15%
But.... be assured, in the long term the dollar is going to deflate. Congress is making sure it will (probably why Bill and Hillary are so interested in foreign affairs). The dollar will continue in short term popularity until the point that foreigners decide the pickings are ripe elsewhere. Then we have serious problems because Americans are failing to save anything for themselves yet alone any to fuel deficit spending of our govt.
Watch china (who by the way is funding their stimulus with our cash and no debt). China is also having a field day wandering around asia and africa continuing to buy commodities to fuel their economy (at discounted rates and in cold hard cash...no deficit spending there).
On Mar 01 11:14 PM Trader.V wrote:
> Our economy is so horrible the dollar is dropping in value, isn't
> it? Well, isn't it?????
On Mar 02 11:17 AM wisurvey wrote:
> Not initially. I think you will see a steady climb in dollar vs
> yen, euro thru this year. It is an anomaly caused by greater problems
> overseas and the short term, temporary result of the almighty 'stimulus'
> package.
>
> But.... be assured, in the long term the dollar is going to deflate.
> Congress is making sure it will (probably why Bill and Hillary are
> so interested in foreign affairs). The dollar will continue in short
> term popularity until the point that foreigners decide the pickings
> are ripe elsewhere. Then we have serious problems because Americans
> are failing to save anything for themselves yet alone any to fuel
> deficit spending of our govt.
>
> Watch china (who by the way is funding their stimulus with our cash
> and no debt). China is also having a field day wandering around
> asia and africa continuing to buy commodities to fuel their economy
> (at discounted rates and in cold hard cash...no deficit spending
> there).
>
On Mar 01 08:24 AM boats.j wrote:
> Sucks to be American these days doesn't it! Karma coming home to
> roost. Sad, so sad!
You should care is producers leave and it doesn't matter if they are rich or not.
It is funny that people who have more money than they know what to do with are mad about RETURNING to tax levels that Bush repealed. How has all that trickle down worked???
Lets see, lowering taxes on the rich has done nothing positive for the economy. Lowering capital gains taxes has done nothing positive for the economy. And what is the rich persons conclusion??? The economy is down so lower my tax rate and it'll trickle down.
Yes, so our overall conclusion is that although the financial crisis shows daily the overall greed of the rich in our country at the expense of the poor, the problem will be fixed by lowering the taxes of the rich so they can make even more money.
Yup, this all makes sense. Capitalism = Greed and undeserved yields
Socialism = Equal taxation
Regardless of your opinion as to whether they should have expensive houses and cars, those are debts that cannot be undone at this point (just try to sell an expensive house right now). So, when their taxes are significantly increased, there may be a significant number that find such increase to be in excess of their discretionary funds. This will add to foreclosures, defaults on various loans, and defaults on credit cards. If someone is losing a house, or going into bankruptcy, which thanks to the change in bankruptcy laws no longer provides a debt-free slate from which to start again, there is less incentive to continue to put in the very long hours in a stressful job with a lot of responsibility only to have the compensation for it go to pay down debts that still exist and high taxes to support other people who are not putting in those hours with that stress. Remember, these are people who would have been meeting their bills and continuing to have some discretionary income but for the double whammy of a higher tax rate and losing the majority of their deductions, including the mortgage deduction on which they counted.
This will add to the downward spiral, and not spread the wealth. We cannot assume that people placed in such situation will continue to make significantly taxable incomes rather than throw up their hands in defeat and join those who expect to be helped by all the remaining "rich" folk. If you think that the upper middle class income earner has a lot of tax deductions and ways to avoid taxes on that income, you obviously haven't been in those ranks and know not whereof you speak. The truly wealthy spend a lot of their income to legally avoid as many taxes as possible, yet even most of them still pay a very hefty amount by anyone's standards, and yes, they can leave this country because they have structured themselves in such a way as to make that option economically viable, despite the conditions elsewhere.
Assume that you will never take the majority of a wealthy person's income or assets. Isn't anyone doing the math? How can the upper middle class income earners who can manage to sustain themselves despite the tax increases (both Federal and State) possibly generate enough taxes to keep everyone afloat? The money needed to pay back the trillions we have spent and are continuing to spend is higher than the GNP for one year of the entire world. China will only buy so many bonds. And everyone seems to forget that bonds need to be repaid.
We have never faced a time when the economies of every country were so interconnected during a downturn, nor a time when none of the major world powers were better able to ride it out than the others. I'm glad that some of them think the Unites States is in that position, but I fear they are mistaken. We will only benefit from that perception for awhile.
We will all be facing a dramatically different life style as the global realities play out. There has been a lot of greed, both personal, corporate, and governmental, that has helped get us to this point. Likewise, there has been a lot of fraud and misuse of the system by those who want to be given what they think they are entitled to receive just because they are alive, but who do not want to sacrifice and work hard to get it. And then there are the most of us in the middle, who liked the idea of being able to work hard to get ahead, planned for our futures, and foolishly thought that life would continue as it had in the past. We may get a reprise for awhile by an economic stimulus from some new industry or something as elusive as seeming peace in the Middle East, but at the end of the day the price tags for all of the programs that have been and are being put into place throughout the globe will come due, and I fear we are kidding ourselves about the consequences.
On Mar 02 12:40 AM sether wrote:
> Your whole premise is faulty. Ambitious people, regardless of their
> race or socio-economic strata, will always strive to better themselves
> and achieve. Social programs are designed to facilitate that amongst
> the lower strata (again, regardless of race), who have fewer opportunities
> in their immediate environment. Civilized societies (especially those
> which claim to be based on 'Christian' principals) should promote
> social mobility by providing baseline minimums in education and health,
> which anyone is 'free' to accept or reject. Conservatives do not
> want an educated, heathly, or upwardly-mobile population, which is
> why they oppose these programs.
> You are a shameful sellout. This is conservative thinktank drivel.
> You think they respect you? Black single mother turned christo-fascist?
> They turned you out. I hope they pay you well. And if you are such
> a christian, read the new testament. Half of it is Jesus talking
> about helping the poor. He never rationalized, as you do, denying
> the poor because they were all lazy and shiftless idlers anyway,
> and coddling them would only reiniforce that. You are a self-hating
> propagandist.
>
On Mar 02 09:28 AM yank wrote:
> alpha:
> you are correct. The stark differences between McCain and Obama were
> readily apparent to the average voter but the deceitful ,conniving
> media did everything possible to make Obama look like JFK and McCain
> look/appear like Nixon. One of the most dangerous outcomes from this
> election is the fact that soon no one will listen or pay any atention
> to this mass media. When that happens we could be ripe for anything
> from a revolution to a demagougue as President. The media from the
> main TV networks to the NY Times "sold their souls" to the devil
> in the adoration of Obama. Now they will pay the price as ratings,
> ad revenues, and circulation fall off a cliff. When a liberal newspaper
> recently failed in the Pacific Northwest one journalist bitterly
> complained that the people had lost a "watchdog" of Govt. Unfortunately
> we need to susbstitute the term "lapdog" instead. And now they will
> pay the price for their "bias". The day the NY Times goes bankrupt
> I will happily "dance on their grave." Bastards.
>
> Yank
No one listening to mass media is what conservatives want. The FOX model of 'news' is designed to discredit ALL media by suggesting that it is all just opinions, left or right leaning, and that there is no fact-based reporting, and by extension no facts. This provides cover for whatever atrocities are committed by government / corporatocracy. Papers like the NY Times are one of the few big-media sources which still do actual investigative reporting. They are not perfect of course, but yes they are a valuable and still powerful watchdog. That is why they are the target of relentless and shrill attacks from the right. Don't worry, they will deliver the dirt on the left as it unfolds. The last 8 years have been such a shitticane of horrors from the right that naturally any media outlet's body of criticism from that time would seem heavy weighted on the right side of the spectrum (except FOX). Get real. Don't cry. By the way, in order to dance on a grave you must be capable of dancing.
On Mar 02 09:28 AM yank wrote:
> alpha:
> you are correct. The stark differences between McCain and Obama were
> readily apparent to the average voter but the deceitful ,conniving
> media did everything possible to make Obama look like JFK and McCain
> look/appear like Nixon. One of the most dangerous outcomes from this
> election is the fact that soon no one will listen or pay any atention
> to this mass media. When that happens we could be ripe for anything
> from a revolution to a demagougue as President. The media from the
> main TV networks to the NY Times "sold their souls" to the devil
> in the adoration of Obama. Now they will pay the price as ratings,
> ad revenues, and circulation fall off a cliff. When a liberal newspaper
> recently failed in the Pacific Northwest one journalist bitterly
> complained that the people had lost a "watchdog" of Govt. Unfortunately
> we need to susbstitute the term "lapdog" instead. And now they will
> pay the price for their "bias". The day the NY Times goes bankrupt
> I will happily "dance on their grave." Bastards.
>
> Yank
On Mar 02 09:28 AM yank wrote:
> alpha:
> you are correct. The stark differences between McCain and Obama were
> readily apparent to the average voter but the deceitful ,conniving
> media did everything possible to make Obama look like JFK and McCain
> look/appear like Nixon. One of the most dangerous outcomes from this
> election is the fact that soon no one will listen or pay any atention
> to this mass media. When that happens we could be ripe for anything
> from a revolution to a demagougue as President. The media from the
> main TV networks to the NY Times "sold their souls" to the devil
> in the adoration of Obama. Now they will pay the price as ratings,
> ad revenues, and circulation fall off a cliff. When a liberal newspaper
> recently failed in the Pacific Northwest one journalist bitterly
> complained that the people had lost a "watchdog" of Govt. Unfortunately
> we need to susbstitute the term "lapdog" instead. And now they will
> pay the price for their "bias". The day the NY Times goes bankrupt
> I will happily "dance on their grave." Bastards.
>
> Yank