• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bernake Fed Policy Announcement

CalGun

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
7,039
Reaction score
3,268
Location
Denio Junction
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Please correct me if I am wrong, but this is how I understood what he said:

We are presently buying $45 billion a month in short term debt (figure might have been $40 billion),
and selling $40/45 billion a month in long term debt as a "federal reserve" measure to decrease the
cost of money in the short term?

But we are about to start buying the short term debt and instead of selling the long term we're going
to buy that too (meaning print and add to the books)? So instead of printing $40/45 billion a month
we're going to start printing $80/90 billion a month?
 
You are trying to make sense out of liberal policies?
 
These aren't liberal policies. They're corrupt policies and the people in charge have so much power that they have raped us under both Bush AND Obama.

These money creations don't do **** for the economy. Banks have so much money that they pay virtually no interest on accounts and actually charge you for the privilege of keeping your stinky money in their glass and marble emporiums.

Al;l these things just cause money to move from hand to hand within the chose ones. Each time miney moves from Feds to Treasury to Banks to Bonds, these are small commissions paid. Small in percentage that is. Process a few trillion and a few billion is barely visible. Those billions are shared by very few - I call them "The Friends Of Bersnakey". This isn't political and has nothing to do with liberal or conservative. Its just a royal ****ing of the american taxpayer.
 
You are right, but liberalism is the vehicle they use to move the wealth along amongst themselves.

You think it is a coincidence that the liberal meme is that we can sustain infinate debt and print endless money?
 
These aren't liberal policies. They're corrupt policies and the people in
charge have so much power that they have raped us under both Bush AND Obama.

These money creations don't do **** for the economy. Banks have so much money that they pay virtually no interest on accounts and actually charge you for the privilege of keeping your stinky money in their glass and marble emporiums.

Al;l these things just cause money to move from hand to hand within the chose ones. Each time miney moves from Feds to Treasury to Banks to Bonds, these are small commissions paid. Small in percentage that is. Process a few trillion and a few billion is barely visible. Those billions are shared by very few - I call them "The Friends Of Bersnakey". This isn't political and has nothing to do with liberal or conservative. Its just a royal ****ing of the american taxpayer.

Obamas appointed Bernake whos doing everything in his power to push banks to loan and instill a sense of confidence in our shrinking economy.

Problem is hes working aagainst aa President whos doing everything in HIS power to weigh down the private sector.

Bernakes just going through the motions.

Banks aren't going to lend when there is no demand in a private sector thats gearing up for tax increases.

Yup, its about liberal policies.
 
You are right, but liberalism is the vehicle they use to move the wealth along
amongst themselves.

You think it is a coincidence that the liberal meme is that we can sustain infinate debt and print endless money?

"The trillion dollar coin"
 
These aren't liberal policies. They're corrupt policies and the people in charge have so much power that they have raped us under both Bush AND Obama.

These money creations don't do **** for the economy. Banks have so much money that they pay virtually no interest on accounts and actually charge you for the privilege of keeping your stinky money in their glass and marble emporiums.

Al;l these things just cause money to move from hand to hand within the chose ones. Each time miney moves from Feds to Treasury to Banks to Bonds, these are small commissions paid. Small in percentage that is. Process a few trillion and a few billion is barely visible. Those billions are shared by very few - I call them "The Friends Of Bersnakey". This isn't political and has nothing to do with liberal or conservative. Its just a royal ****ing of the american taxpayer.

Artificially suppressing the interest rate is done to keep the massive national debt interest payments "managable". Banks are (legally) adding all kinds of moronic "user fees" to all "small" accounts since the interest that they earn is no longer enough to cover their overhead and desired profit.
 
Banks are now and since 2008 being payed interest on their massive reserves by the Fed.

They CAN still make money with low interest rates by borrowing between banks but only if their reserves are kept low.

With massive reserves they loan whats on hand and take a chance in a Obama economy on losing their principle.

Why chance it if the Fed is paying you to sit on money ?

And ultimately there will be no substantial lending increase as long as there is no demand in the economy.

Corporations, Bussiness and investors aren't thinking about expansion, they're thinking about protection and tax increases.
 
What's most troubling to me is that Bersnakey was only re-appointed by Obama. Here we get this new Liberal President and amazingly, he chooses his own Cabinet, but RETAINS the same guys who oversaw the Bush screw-up. Doesn't that bother anybody but me? Who is in charge here? Maybe not the President but maybe the real owners and real rulers of the country.

Something is very wrong with this picture. Maybe Bush and Obama are doing what they're told to do.

Sure, interest rates are at nada because, as Pirate points out, this "saves" money on our massive loans. But we've created a lot of money since then that we seem to just pass back and forth while "certain people" collect "handling fees". Gee, nothing suspicious about that, is there?

As for the lack of lending, I find it hard to assimilate the idea that this has anything to do with "fear of tax increases". Indeed, I contend it has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with it. All we;ve had for 12 years have been lower and lower taxes while our economy declined and declined. So, how can I believe that some future "possible" tax hike of 6.5% has somehow prevented anybody from wanting to make money for so many years. I think the slow borrowing activity has to do with absence of need. Is there some product we have a shortage of? No. Have consumers nutted out and bought mountains of crap they didn't need during the period of fake wealth perceived during the housing boom? Yes.

Even our growth in manufacturing has been automated. Things we built with thousands of blue collar workers are now built by dozens or maybe hundreds of engineers designing and overseeing robots. Add to that the relocation of labor intensive production to our globalized world economy, add a splash of greed by owners who worship the American Dollar but not America itself.

Banks are overflowing with money to lend to GOOD IDEAS. They've cut back on irresponsible loans, but not because of taxes...

To quote Will Rogers, "I'm not as concerned with my return ON principal, I'm concerned with the return OF my principal.

(blah, blah, usual OPION© disclaimer applies)







Artificially suppressing the interest rate is done to keep the massive national debt interest payments "managable". Banks are (legally) adding all kinds of moronic "user fees" to all "small" accounts since the interest that they earn is no longer enough to cover their overhead and desired profit.

Obamas appointed Bernake whos doing everything in his power to push banks to loan and instill a sense of confidence in our shrinking economy.

Problem is hes working aagainst aa President whos doing everything in HIS power to weigh down the private sector.

Bernakes just going through the motions.

Banks aren't going to lend when there is no demand in a private sector thats gearing up for tax increases.

Yup, its about liberal policies.
 
What's most troubling to me is that Bersnakey was only re-appointed by
Obama. Here we get this new Liberal President and amazingly, he chooses his own Cabinet, but RETAINS the same guys who oversaw the Bush screw-up. Doesn't that bother anybody but me? Who is in charge here? Maybe not the President but maybe the real owners and real rulers of the country.

Something is very wrong with this picture. Maybe Bush and Obama are doing what they're told to do.

Sure, interest rates are at nada because, as Pirate points out, this "saves" money on our massive loans. But we've created a lot of money since then that we seem to just pass back and forth while "certain people" collect "handling fees". Gee, nothing suspicious about that, is there?

As for the lack of lending, I find it hard to assimilate the idea that this has anything to do with "fear of tax increases". Indeed, I contend it has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with it. All we;ve had for 12 years have been lower and lower taxes while our economy declined and declined. So, how can I believe that some future "possible" tax hike of 6.5% has somehow prevented anybody from wanting to make money for so many years. I think the slow borrowing activity has to do with absence of need. Is there some product we have a shortage of? No. Have consumers nutted out and bought mountains of crap they didn't need during the period of fake wealth perceived during the housing boom? Yes.

Even our growth in manufacturing has been automated. Things we built with thousands of blue collar workers are now built by dozens or maybe hundreds of engineers designing and overseeing robots. Add to that the relocation of labor intensive production to our globalized world economy, add a splash of greed by owners who worship the American Dollar but not America itself.

Banks are overflowing with money to lend to GOOD IDEAS. They've cut back on irresponsible loans, but not because of taxes...

To quote Will Rogers, "I'm not as concerned with my return ON principal, I'm concerned with the return OF my principal.

(blah, blah, usual OPION© disclaimer applies)

You'll never get to the bottom of any economic issue if you can't be objective.

If your first priority is to leave Obama's complicit policies out of the discussion then why post ?

Of Course raising taxes has a effect on the private sector ( its not a positive effect ) and if the Fed raised rates just a little it would damn near bankrupt us as we try to pay just the interest on 16 trillion.

You think are economy is good now ? Improving ? No, its getting worse.

Treasuries are short term. One year.

You've even started to lean toward some over lord conspiracy rather than see whats right in front of you.

Unbelievable.
 
Must not be making myself clear. I certainly didn't ignore Obama's policy of hiring the exact same people that were part of the collapse.

I also said nothing about the economy improving. I actually explained why I thought it wasn't.

Treasuries are whatever length of time they are from a month to 30 years.

I do think that someone is pulling the strings. If you don't agree, say so. I don't feel obligated to blame everything thats happened over more than a decade on Obama. He's part of the problem but not the entire problem.

That you didn't respond with anything but a critique of me instead of explaining where I was wrong is the most unbelievable thing that happened here.


You'll never get to the bottom of any economic issue if you can't be objective.

If your first priority is to leave Obama's complicit policies out of the discussion then why post ?

Of Course raising taxes has a effect on the private sector ( its not a positive effect ) and if the Fed raised rates just a little it would damn near bankrupt us as we try to pay just the interest on 16 trillion.

You think are economy is good now ? Improving ? No, its getting worse.

Treasuries are short term. One year.

You've even started to lean toward some over lord conspiracy rather than see whats right in front of you.

Unbelievable.
 
Must not be making myself clear. I certainly didn't ignore Obama's policy

of hiring the exact same people that were part of the collapse.

I also said nothing about the economy improving. I actually explained why I thought it wasn't.

Treasuries are whatever length of time they are from a month to 30 years.

I do think that someone is pulling the strings. If you don't agree, say so. I don't feel obligated to blame everything thats happened over more than a decade on Obama. He's part of the problem but not the entire problem.

That you didn't respond with anything but a critique of me instead of explaining where I was wrong is the most unbelievable thing that happened here.

Treasuries are 1 year. There are other bonds but the Feds buying Treasuries.

Bernake didn't cause the collapse but yes, Obama hired AG holder who helped enforce HUD and CRA regulations on banks in the early 90s with AG janet reno that DID cause the collapse.

The housing bubble caused yhe collapse and it was Govt mandated as politicians like B. Frank pushed for lower underwriting standards and regulations that forced banks and GSE's to make available cheap and easy credit.

When a liberal President comes in and purposely grows the public sector almost exponentially and forces the new expenses on a shrinking private sector you have what we're going through today.

Its what happened in Greece as their politicians sold bonds to pay the expense of a massive public sector that was financed by debt.

See the correlation ?
 
You may be right but I can't find anything in my search to define which "Treasury" has been bought by the FED.
Treasury bills have maturities of a year or less.
Treasury notes are issued with maturities from two to ten years.
Treasury bonds are long-term investments that have maturities of 10 to 30 years from their issue date.


How did Obama hire AG Holder in the 90s? Obama took office in 2008

Everybody agrees that the scenario that allowed for the housing bubble predates Bush. But, what exactly did Bush do about it. Nothing. I don't like Obama any more than you do but trying to blame him for everything since biblical times doesn't make sense either.

When you say "Liberal President" do you include Clinton, Bush and Obama?

Equating the USA to Greece is a popular statement but hardly identical. Greece is a tiny economy that doesn't even have its own currency. The US prints the worlds reserve currency.

Maybe my "overlord" theory belongs in conspiracy theories but there is a lot to support my postulations. And yes, I'm aware they are only postulations.

And may I ask, how "bad" are things? Poor people hav always been poor. Unemployment comes for many factors, not the least of which are automation and globalization.







Treasuries are 1 year. There are other bonds but the Feds buying Treasuries.

Bernake didn't cause the collapse but yes, Obama hired AG holder who helped enforce HUD and CRA regulations on banks in the early 90s with AG janet reno that DID cause the collapse.

The housing bubble caused yhe collapse and it was Govt mandated as politicians like B. Frank pushed for lower underwriting standards and regulations that forced banks and GSE's to make available cheap and easy credit.

When a liberal President comes in and purposely grows the public sector almost exponentially and forces the new expenses on a shrinking private sector you have what we're going through today.

Its what happened in Greece as their politicians sold bonds to pay the expense of a massive public sector that was financed by debt.

See the correlation ?
 
You may be right but I can't find anything in my search to define which "Treasury" has been bought by the FED.
Treasury bills have maturities of a year or less.
Treasury notes are issued with maturities from two to ten years.
Treasury bonds are long-term investments that have maturities of 10 to 30 years from their issue date.


It's ( I thought, common knowledge ) known the Fed's purchasing short term Treasuries. It's a problem as short term low or no interest rate bonds mature quickly and can easily increase which also increases our debt service fees. An increase of 6 % equals roughly 1 trillion to our yearly deficit and Treasuries are starting to flatten out. Once the Feds stops buying them and/or our interest rate increases after a devaluing of our credit rating or a necessary increase that's IT.

Right now, they owe 70% of our debt.

How did Obama hire AG Holder in the 90s? Obama took office in 2008

Holder was a AG in Janet Reno's Justice Dept. He held banks responsible for violating HUD and CRA regulations when those banks refused to loan to people with bad credit, low income and were Black. Those policies were the impetus of the sub prime debacle that nearly collapsed our economy and that we're suffering from since people thought it was time to elect a black president, not a competent president to deal with the huge recession the bubble caused.

BUSH in 2005 actually tried to reign in the two GSE's but was pushed bak by a liberal Democrat Congress.

Everybody agrees that the scenario that allowed for the housing bubble predates Bush. But, what exactly did Bush do about it. Nothing. I don't like Obama any more than you do but trying to blame him for everything since biblical times doesn't make sense either.

Again, he tried but with a Democrat Congress calling his questioning of Fannie and Freddie racist and with no leverage was forced to let it go.

When you say "Liberal President" do you include Clinton, Bush and Obama?

Why would I ? Obama's distinct policies have caused the private setor to shrink, the labor force to shrink in record amounts and dependence to climb almost exponentially.

Equating the USA to Greece is a popular statement but hardly identical. Greece is a tiny economy that doesn't even have its own currency. The US prints the worlds reserve currency.

Maybe my "overlord" theory belongs in conspiracy theories but there is a lot to support my postulations. And yes, I'm aware they are only postulations.

It's not about scale, it's about policies and liberal economic theory.

And may I ask, how "bad" are things? Poor people hav always been poor. Unemployment comes for many factors, not the least of which are automation and globalization.[/QUOTE]
 
Who owes (owns?) 70% of our debt and to whom do they owe it?

So, you're effectively saying that every problem we have was caused by Democrats?

What Obama policies are you specifically referring to? Please don't say taxes, they've actually gone down the last 4 years although that may change momentarily. So, what exactly has Obama done that say, Clinton or Bush did differently? I'll assume you're not going to go with Democrat all bad Republican all good.

((I didn't vote for Obama. I bash and defend with equal vigor - all these Politicians make me sick and I DO think they are puppets and I UNDERSTAND you don't think that - but lets talk about this))




It's ( I thought, common knowledge ) known the Fed's purchasing short term Treasuries. It's a problem as short term low or no interest rate bonds mature quickly and can easily increase which also increases our debt service fees. An increase of 6 % equals roughly 1 trillion to our yearly deficit and Treasuries are starting to flatten out. Once the Feds stops buying them and/or our interest rate increases after a devaluing of our credit rating or a necessary increase that's IT.

Right now, they owe 70% of our debt.



Holder was a AG in Janet Reno's Justice Dept. He held banks responsible for violating HUD and CRA regulations when those banks refused to loan to people with bad credit, low income and were Black. Those policies were the impetus of the sub prime debacle that nearly collapsed our economy and that we're suffering from since people thought it was time to elect a black president, not a competent president to deal with the huge recession the bubble caused.

BUSH in 2005 actually tried to reign in the two GSE's but was pushed bak by a liberal Democrat Congress.



Again, he tried but with a Democrat Congress calling his questioning of Fannie and Freddie racist and with no leverage was forced to let it go.



Why would I ? Obama's distinct policies have caused the private setor to shrink, the labor force to shrink in record amounts and dependence to climb almost exponentially.



It's not about scale, it's about policies and liberal economic theory.

And may I ask, how "bad" are things? Poor people hav always been poor. Unemployment comes for many factors, not the least of which are automation and globalization.
[/QUOTE]
 
Who owes (owns?) 70% of our debt and to whom do they owe it?

They own up to 70% of our Treasury debt. Sorry about the typo.....I'm inclined to make a few of those a day. It's short term ( one year) and low interest debt owned by......us. A low interest Treasury is bad for a couple of reasons especially if your depending on a central bank to keep financing your massive deficit spending. Yields could go up easily in a year adding massive amounts of federal payments annually as the Treasury attempts to pay off its current interest.

So, you're effectively saying that every problem we have was caused by Democrats?

I've explained my analysis dating back to the early 90s. Consider that Freddie and Fannie have been around since 1930 and usually retain sub-prime origination's prior to 1990 of 10%. That's been a consistent percentage prior to the sub-prime collapse and people have been buying and selling homes, investing in and trading Mortgage Backed Securities and Investment banks have been insuring those investments with Credit Default Swaps for decades without crashing ours and the worlds economy.

What happened prior to 1990 to mandate cheap and easy credit for all ? The investment banks bought and sold AAA rated MBS as part of investment portfolio's and Fannie and Freddie also bought, sold and packaged Govt guaranteed mortgages to and from investment banks.

What Obama policies are you specifically referring to? Please don't say taxes, they've actually gone down the last 4 years although that may change momentarily. So, what exactly has Obama done that say, Clinton or Bush did differently? I'll assume you're not going to go with Democrat all bad Republican all good.

What has Obama done ? With the implementation of Obama Care ( for one ) he's put an enormous amount of emphasis on employers to try and decipher a 2700 page Health Care Law so they'll comply with the Health and Human Services criteria and up until it's full implementation they had no idea of it's cost or how it affected their bottom line or if they could afford it.

Also Obama care before it's implementation increased insurance premiums for individuals and corporations. As it turns out Obama care is expensive as Businesses look at scaling back or lowering the hours of full time employees to comply and maintain a profit.

On top of that is the Dodd Frank Bill. Yes Barney Frank, one of the most single complicit politicians in the sub prime collapse got to on his way out blame it on the banks by putting together a banking reform bill that's done a huge amount of damage to banks and their ability to lend.

Consider prior to 2008 Banks held excess reserves of around 2 billion, since banking reform and Fed policies their reserves have increased to over 1.9 trillion total.

Ok so on to tax increases because the liberal narrative is a lie. Tax increases on top of excessive EPA regulations, draconian banking regulations that stop credit and Obama-care has the effect of weighing down the private sector to the point of a shrinking labor participation rate ( no automation didn't cause this ) and increased unemployment. The general incompetence of Obama's presidency and his perpetual attack on the private sector as he grows the public sector which adds NO wealth into the market is to blame for the perpetuation of a recession that should have ended in 2005.

Allot of small business are not C-corporations are taxed through personal income tax. Small businesses employ about half of all private sector employees. So it's not just a tax on " the eeebil rich ", it's a tax on small businesses.

Obama-Care has hidden sur tax rate increases on dividends and capital gains taxes on top of the increased rates Obama's pushing now. People with money respond ONE WAY to this kind of Govt Grab of private capital and it's the chink in the armor of the liberal economic meme. They protect it, they sit on it, they tuck it away forcing the public sector to borrow and spend and borrow and spend while the Fed pumps money into the Banks to get them to do something they will never do under Obama.

Lend money. There has to be demand to lend money, to borrow money and a liberal who's intent going after the people that actually inject real wealth into the economy through investments and expansion has to deal with the consequences of his bankrupt agenda. You have to accept our private sector needs a certain amount of confidence and that confidence is based on policies that come out of Washington. Do you think with Obama's current policies there has been a substantial effect on confidence in our free market ?


((I didn't vote for Obama. I bash and defend with equal vigor - all these Politicians make me sick and I DO think they are puppets and I UNDERSTAND you don't think that - but lets talk about this))

That's great. You don't have to feel guilty then for your vote that would have contributed to millions of Americans continued suffering and chronic joblessness and to a up and coming economic collapse.

That may sound apocalyptic b ut I see no way out off this after voters doubled down on stupid and re-elected Obama.
 
Taking someone's pitcher of Kool-aid, pouring half into another pitcher then filling both up with more water gives them diluted Kool-aid they never had and just leaves us with ****ty Kool-aid.
 
If you want to create a flurry of economic activity, raise the rate 1/4 point without telling anyone ahead of time. Nothing like a fear you have just screwed yourself by waiting too long to get people to jump in head first.
 
I'm big on apocalypses so maybe I'll get to see one and validate all those Sci-Fi books I read.

Well, you make a good argument and a good presentation. I think your years are a little off, 2005 was the height of the housing insanity. Obama began his Presidency in 2008 so to pin all of this on him would mean 2010 at best.

The prioritization of Obamacare was as ill timed as possible and overly-complex. He's don a poor job in a lot of areas. I just don't accept the vision that things were groovy under the other party and that Democrats take all the blame. Both parties have wasted and stolen with both hands enthusiastically.

I'll rd your post more closely later tonight and we'll continue our conversation at another time.

Thanks and good evening,



They own up to 70% of our Treasury debt. Sorry about the typo.....I'm inclined to make a few of those a day. It's short term ( one year) and low interest debt owned by......us. A low interest Treasury is bad for a couple of reasons especially if your depending on a central bank to keep financing your massive deficit spending. Yields could go up easily in a year adding massive amounts of federal payments annually as the Treasury attempts to pay off its current interest.



I've explained my analysis dating back to the early 90s. Consider that Freddie and Fannie have been around since 1930 and usually retain sub-prime origination's prior to 1990 of 10%. That's been a consistent percentage prior to the sub-prime collapse and people have been buying and selling homes, investing in and trading Mortgage Backed Securities and Investment banks have been insuring those investments with Credit Default Swaps for decades without crashing ours and the worlds economy.

What happened prior to 1990 to mandate cheap and easy credit for all ? The investment banks bought and sold AAA rated MBS as part of investment portfolio's and Fannie and Freddie also bought, sold and packaged Govt guaranteed mortgages to and from investment banks.



What has Obama done ? With the implementation of Obama Care ( for one ) he's put an enormous amount of emphasis on employers to try and decipher a 2700 page Health Care Law so they'll comply with the Health and Human Services criteria and up until it's full implementation they had no idea of it's cost or how it affected their bottom line or if they could afford it.

Also Obama care before it's implementation increased insurance premiums for individuals and corporations. As it turns out Obama care is expensive as Businesses look at scaling back or lowering the hours of full time employees to comply and maintain a profit.

On top of that is the Dodd Frank Bill. Yes Barney Frank, one of the most single complicit politicians in the sub prime collapse got to on his way out blame it on the banks by putting together a banking reform bill that's done a huge amount of damage to banks and their ability to lend.

Consider prior to 2008 Banks held excess reserves of around 2 billion, since banking reform and Fed policies their reserves have increased to over 1.9 trillion total.

Ok so on to tax increases because the liberal narrative is a lie. Tax increases on top of excessive EPA regulations, draconian banking regulations that stop credit and Obama-care has the effect of weighing down the private sector to the point of a shrinking labor participation rate ( no automation didn't cause this ) and increased unemployment. The general incompetence of Obama's presidency and his perpetual attack on the private sector as he grows the public sector which adds NO wealth into the market is to blame for the perpetuation of a recession that should have ended in 2005.

Allot of small business are not C-corporations are taxed through personal income tax. Small businesses employ about half of all private sector employees. So it's not just a tax on " the eeebil rich ", it's a tax on small businesses.

Obama-Care has hidden sur tax rate increases on dividends and capital gains taxes on top of the increased rates Obama's pushing now. People with money respond ONE WAY to this kind of Govt Grab of private capital and it's the chink in the armor of the liberal economic meme. They protect it, they sit on it, they tuck it away forcing the public sector to borrow and spend and borrow and spend while the Fed pumps money into the Banks to get them to do something they will never do under Obama.

Lend money. There has to be demand to lend money, to borrow money and a liberal who's intent going after the people that actually inject real wealth into the economy through investments and expansion has to deal with the consequences of his bankrupt agenda. You have to accept our private sector needs a certain amount of confidence and that confidence is based on policies that come out of Washington. Do you think with Obama's current policies there has been a substantial effect on confidence in our free market ?




That's great. You don't have to feel guilty then for your vote that would have contributed to millions of Americans continued suffering and chronic joblessness and to a up and coming economic collapse.

That may sound apocalyptic b ut I see no way out off this after voters doubled down on stupid and re-elected Obama.
 
Back
Top Bottom