SI
SI
discoversearch

 Politics | President Barack Obama


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: mel221 who wrote (109783)2/17/2012 11:56:18 PM
From: John Vosilla
   of 142945
 
I think it will prove to be unsustainable.

For sure over the long run. For now interest rates are very low and new bubbles and imbalances get created as a result but the goal is economic growth and job creation. We will accelerate a new boom IF interest rates stay low another couple of years without oil prices skyrocketing to a new high plateau sustained over $4. It is going to be a slippery slope for sure globally. Maybe a property crash in overvalued gateway cities China, Australia Canada even the few remaining in the USA will put the lid on things...

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Road Walker who wrote (109747)2/17/2012 11:57:47 PM
From: Bread Upon The Water
   of 142945
 
Well according to the following I was wrong about the 4 years and then its "gravy" for you with regard to your SSI recoupment of monies paid in, but this says people come out ahead if they live to their statistical life.

money.usnews.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: mel221 who wrote (109769)2/17/2012 11:59:50 PM
From: manalagi
   of 142945
 
I did vote for Obama in 2008 for 1 issue; that he would let the Bush tax cuts expire. He failed to do that one basic thing.

Maybe you should look back why he had to do that.


Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


To: manalagi who wrote (109784)2/18/2012 12:19:11 AM
From: John Vosilla
   of 142945
 
Little that we know, the party left us, and we'll get it back after the defeat in 2012

I too hope the old GOP comes back after this coming defeat.. I liked Ford, Reagan, Bush 41, Dole most of the old guard except some hard line southerners... Actually hoping a JC Watts or Jon Huntsman or even Chris Christi runs in 2016..... I despise the right wing of today, the domestic and foreign policies in the years after 9/11 when they controlled EVERYTHING and how obstructionist they were from day one of the Obama administration.. Not sure how much of this is a generational thing catering to the base of white smaller town conservatives uneasy with the demographic shifts in this country the last 45 years that many of them have noticed later in this cycle than folks in more urban, blueish metro areas already took for granted way back in the 1980's... You would have thought everybody would have joined together in saying what a great country we are when someone can come from such a background with all the obvious obstacles unique to Obama to become our president. Probably the most incredible story of all should give all Americans more hope but even more importantly the people in the rest of the world looking up to America as still the shining star on the hill where anything is possible if you work hard enough..

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: mindmeld who wrote (109731)2/18/2012 4:19:34 AM
From: Road Walker
   of 142945
 
Two Cheers for the SettlementBy JOE NOCERA
Thirteen years ago, state attorneys general reached a settlement in a huge lawsuit they had filed against the country’s biggest tobacco companies. The companies agreed to pay the states a staggering $246 billion while also limiting tobacco advertising, among other things.

The Master Settlement Agreement, as it was called, was widely heralded as a breakthrough in the fight against the purveyors of cigarettes. But it wasn’t. A year earlier, Congress had failed to approve a more far-reaching effort, one that would have placed tobacco under the jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration and set much tougher rules, including standards for regulating secondhand smoke.

The deal struck after that Congressional failure was, like most legal settlements, the product of a negotiation, and revolved mainly around money. It ultimately represented the best the states could get, given both the leverage they had and the constraints they had to deal with. The tobacco companies, it turned out, had leverage, too.

Last week, 49 attorneys general, along with the Obama administration, settled their robo-signing suit against the five biggest mortgage servicers. In some ways, it is the mirror image of the tobacco settlement; even before the ink was dry, liberal groups that prefer the term “banksters” complained that the settlement would fail to inflict a punishment commensurate with the crime.

Nor did the criticisms diminish after the settlement terms were announced. The New Bottom Line, a self-described “coalition of grass-roots, people of faith, homeowners, and workers,” called the settlement a “ paltry down payment.” The American people wanted “$300 billion in principal reduction” instead of the $20 billion or so the settlement was likely to offer, the group added. On Friday, The Financial Times reported that the settlement would even allow the servicers to tap taxpayer funds from already-existing federal mortgage modification programs to lessen their liability. (Both Attorney General Tom Miller of Iowa — who spearheaded the states’ effort — and the Department of Housing and Urban Development, which led the federal involvement, have said the story is wrong.)

But, whatever the flaws of the settlement, it, too, is a product of a negotiation, and it reflects both the strengths and weaknesses both sides brought to the table. Although robo-signing clearly violated the law, prosecuting it would have taken years, and it is highly unlikely that any court would have forced the servicers to pay anything close to the amount the settlement calls for. The threat that they could pull out of the talks and, in effect, dare the states to sue them always hung over the negotiations.

Why did this threat give the banks leverage? Because the real goal of the attorneys general was less to punish the banks than to provide foreclosure relief in the here and now. The prospect of protracted litigation was anathema to them, given the millions of Americans in danger of losing their homes — and the shoddy treatment so many have received from the banks as they have tried to get mortgage modification.

As part of the settlement, the banks agreed, for the first time, to servicing standards that will treat homeowners fairly. Anybody who has seen the foreclosure process up close these past few years knows how important it is to have real standards.

The deal is going to force the banks to pay $2.7 billion to provide lawyers and counseling for homeowners. A full-time monitor will oversee enforcement. And it will push the servicers to — finally! — make principal reductions. There are many experts who believe that principal reduction is the only way to pull the nation out of its housing crisis, yet the banks have been loath to take that route. Under the agreement, banks that swallow losses on principal will be able to take a credit against the liability. Miller says that the goal is to show the banks that principal reduction will not cause the sky to fall — and that they eventually begin doing it of their own volition.

For those who mainly care about seeing the banks punished, there will be other opportunities. The litigation relief the banks won is surprisingly narrow. States and the federal government will still be able to sue for lots of other abuses, including lying about the quality of mortgages that were bundled in toxic mortgage-backed securities.

Indeed, Eric Schneiderman, the attorney general of New York, is leading a joint effort with the federal government to investigate possible securitization fraud. Though he eventually signed onto the deal, Schneiderman had long been critical, because he feared it would give the banks too much relief.

Now he has to put his money where his mouth is. Let’s see if — when his investigation is complete and he is negotiating with the banks — he winds up putting the serious hurt on the banks. Or whether he, too, discovers that leverage works both ways.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (109786)2/18/2012 4:27:24 AM
From: Road Walker
   of 142945
 
Yes but we were just talking about SS. It sounds like the average person gets less than they put in when you take out Medicare from the calculation. BTW thanks for the find, good info.

Medicare benefits are the main reason most workers are coming out ahead. A male earning the average wage throughout his working life who retires in 2010 paid $55,000 into the Medicare trust fund, but is likely to receive $161,000 worth of Medicare benefits, the Urban Institute found. In contrast, he pays $290,000 in Social Security taxes throughout his career and collects $256,000 in retirement payments.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: ChinuSFO who wrote (109771)2/18/2012 9:00:06 AM
From: steve harris
   of 142945
 
Obama is still bashing WallStreet while he gives WallStreet money to them faster than Geitner can print it.

Boehner and Congress can't wipe their nose unless they ask for Reid's permission first. Obama and his 374 unaccountable Czars continue to change America for the worse, Boehner has nothing to do with that other than he doesn't have the balls to even try to stop it.

Record food stamps, unemployment, food and gasoline prices, will be the election this fall.

Now what ever happened to James Carville's 1992 "It's the economy stupid" video?

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Road Walker who wrote (109790)2/18/2012 10:55:44 AM
From: Bread Upon The Water
   of 142945
 
OK

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: mel221 who wrote (109769)2/18/2012 11:40:51 AM
From: Nicholas Thompson
   of 142945
 
About 70% of this year's deficit is due to paying for or continuing Bush policies , especially the tax cuts, the continuing costs of the financial crisis which started in late 2007 and the costs of the Bush wars. It is possible that Obama could have negotiated better on rescinding the tax cuts which make a major part of the 70% , but you know full well where the GOP stood on that, they wanted the cuts to continue. I wish Obama had attacked these issues with more force, but after 2010 , his options were restricted.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


To: koan who wrote (109743)2/18/2012 12:32:03 PM
From: roto
   of 142945
 
It is worst than you think.
My wife is Chinese. I am not a stranger to China.

China is much more than chopsticks, bicycles, rickshaws, even computers now...that sort of squat we think China is. The great equalizer in this world are computers. Anything of quality, of value, can be manufactured anywhere. Computer aided design. Computer aided manufacturing. Metallurgy vastly improved. It can be done anywhere in the world.
The differences only being the educated workforce. The U.S. has the very best colleges & universities. We excel.

The Chinese cities (huge) are transitioning into something we only talk about here. The cities very modern, very old, very metropolitan and beautiful, in general the cities are people friendly. There are tons of things to do. And it seems like everyone gets along famously well.
The airports are new. The skyscrapers go ever so higher. The subway systems are state of the art. The fast trains (bullet trains) are main transport (preferable) between the cities. Everything so disbelievingly affordable. Even the taxis are dirt cheap.
More new cars were sold in China in 2011 than in America.
The Chinese are doing the 'fast' train, 3rd generation or so (They can thank German & Japanese engineering for this), at 500km an hour (300mph). There are plans for the new “Orient Xpress” to Europe. Supposedly 2 days.
Also, S.E. Asia.
They know how to move people. All 1.3 billion Chinese. Most live approximate to the east coast. China is in transition. Amazing all this in the last 30 years.

Now, China seems like it will be a guarantor of European debt.
With China's U.S. foreign currency reserves of over 3 trillion$ early last year, there will be no war. More likely than not, it will be accommodation.

By the way, I easily spend less than $2thou for a 2 week visit anywhere in China, including airfare. Comfortably. Outstanding food. Every visit, something fantastic, something intense. Totally pleasant.
Way cheaper than a visit to DisneyLand. Then again, a lot of people still believe in Disneyland.

The U.S. If you revisit Bill Clinton's presidential exit, the U.S. had projected 0$ deficit by 2012.
Republican congressional largess, idiotic banking deregulation, no regulatory overseers, an incompetent president, where in the hell where the Democrats after Jan2001?









Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (5)
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2014 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.