An Obama Rally?
My pal and occasional CNBC sparring partner Charlie Gasparino is a great investigative journalist. His book Blood on the Streets is required reading for those who want to understand the 1990s bubble market.
Where Charlie and I disagree is often in his opinion pieces. We’ve clashed over CRA, Fannie and Freddie — GOP talking points all.
Our latest bone of contention is his OpEd column in today’s NY Post, titled AN OBAMA PANIC? MARKETS FEAR HIS POLICIES. Charlie in part blames the market’s recent selloff on Wall Street’s fear of an Obama presidency.
Note that headline and sub hed — written by editors, not the writer — is far more provocative than the acual text.
It is a well trod, flawed argument we’ve analyzed in the past:
"Barack Obama has remained cool and confident amid the
financial melt down, even as John McCain at times has been
embarrassing, lurching from one proposal to the next. But while the
polls are reflecting Obama’s steady hand, the markets haven’t. In fact,
they’re getting worse by the day as Obama’s lead widens.Most investors know the devil is in the details – and the details of Obama’s economic plans are anything but reassuring.
Of course, the market turmoil is first a reflection of grim reality
- the bursting of the housing bubble and the billions upon billions in
writedowns and losses that have forced upon the hugely leveraged
financial firms companies that had cranked big profits during the
bubble years.The resulting credit crunch is hitting Main Street harder than ever
before. The country is headed for recession; the only question is: Just
how low can the markets and economy go?It could be a lot lower – it all depends on the policies of the next president. And, as it looks increasingly likely that Obama will be that man, the markets are casting a vote of "no confidence.
There are three flaws with that argument: EMH, Causation/Correlation error, and subjectivity.
First, markets are much less efficient and forward looking than the efficient market hypothesis idealogues would have you believe. Consider the credit crisis: It first reared its head in August 2007. Markets looked forward, and saw clear skies. A few months later, the Dow Industrials and S&P500 — both laden with banks, brokers, and insurance companies — rallied to all time highs.
So much for the efficient market hypothesis.
The second issue is the confusion between correlation and causation. As we wrote back in January, when the markets were considerably higher than where they are even after today’s 1,000 snapper:
"All too often, we see the cause and effect relationship analyzed exactly backwards, as in the above example. These causative errors are an all-too-common analytical
blunder when reviewing market or economic data. Unfortunately, in seeking certainty in an uncertain world, confusing cause and consequence is an all-too-regular occurrence. The above quote is a perfect example of that foible.To review: Markets are not skittish because the incumbent party is in trouble -
that’s getting it ass-backwards. When the ruling party is in election trouble, its because the future discounting mechanism of markets is incorporating a slowing economy into its pricing.
Markets may be imperfect and subject to the excesses of crowd behavior,
but they eventually get the big picture correct. The current market
malaise reflects a recognition what is occurring in the
macro-environment."
Lastly, consider how subjective reading anything into markets are. Markets are like Rorschach Tests — very often, the person is revealing their own political leanings, rather than shedding any insight into market action.
For example, Gallup reported this morning that Obama had opened his biggest lead yet of McCain — and the market had its biggest point gain ever. Using Charlie’s logic, we could interrupt this to mean that the market is fearful of an financial novice like McCain, whose economic advisors are a collection of money-losing know-nothings — they include the likes of Phil "Whiner" Gramm, Kevin "Dow 36,000" Hassett, Don "Quit Doling Out That Bad-Economy Line" Luskin, amonsgt others. A less economically astute concentration of thinkers have never before or since been gathered in one place. (And given his VEEP’s utter lack of any qualifications, the market is doubly upset at the ticket).
Now, other than the criticism of Gramm/Luskin/Hassett, I dont believe any of the above paragraph. However, if you buy into Gaspariono’s correlation argument, why not choose the rally on the biggest poll spread?
How well did the markets price in Bush’s presidency — 7 years into his term? Massive deficits, expensive wars, financial mayhem — mostly ignored until 2008. Why would the markets ignore all the damage Bush has wrought 7 years into his disasterous presidency, yet discount wha Obama or McCain might do in the future? That makes little sense.
The answer, of course, is Charlie’s subjectivity — and if you have any doubt as to his political persuasion, just watch him on CNBC.
The bottom line is this: Markets eventually got the credit crisis right — and then they overshot to the downside. What is going on now is not a reflection of policies which have yet to be enacted, legislation which has yet to be passed, based on an election which has to take place. They are the result of a decade of bad Federal Reserve policy, weak supervision of lending standards, ratings agencies run amuck, and an exemption of derivatives from regulations/reserve requirement.
Reading anything more than this into markets is simply folly . . .
>
UPDATE: October 14, 2008 10:02am
Felix Salmon looks at this from a different angle: CNBC’s Gasparino Problem
>
UPDATE 2: October 14, 2008 10:34am
Charlie writes in:
"Of course, Obama’s tax plan is not the root cause of the market turbulence. The piece didn’t state that. But there are underlying fears from investors — I dare you Barry to go out and speak to them — about a remaking of the American economy namely through huge government expenditures and a massive increase in taxes. My point is that those factors are contributing to some of the wild swings in the stock market.
How do I know this? Because I speak to people every day. I know Obama supporters–heavy hitters who have given him big bucks–who have advised him to back of his plan to raise taxes, or to be more precise, not to raise taxes at all in this environment. Putting a value on the how much Obama’s tax plan and his plan to socialize the economy is impossible to gauge, and my op ed never attempted to do that. But to render the overall thesis "GOP talking points" is absurd.
The argument that investors react to changes in fiscal policy is real and there is historical precedent (check the 1930s and 1970s) At bottom I’m a reporter and a free marketeer and I make no apologies for who I am. I get stories because I have a whole range of sources. I know that some of Obama’s Wall Street supporters are worried because even though I’m a free-market type, I have lots of sources.
And with all due respect Barry, I didn’t even know who you were until I bumped into you in the CNBC studio one afternoon. I have a couple suggestions for you: expand your source list. Talk to people who don’t agree with you. It might make you smarter and a better investor."
>
Previously
Confusing Cause & Effect: Elections and Markets (January 2008)
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2008/01/confusing-cause.html
The John McCain Market Selloff (March 2008)
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2008/03/the-john-mccain.html
Pricing in a Bush Presidency (July 2008)
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2008/07/pricing-in-a-bu.html
Source:
AN OBAMA PANIC?
CHARLES GASPARINO
NYPost, October 13, 2008
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10132008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/an_obama_panic__133374.htm
October 13th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
Barry-
Why can’t the Nash Equilibrium be applied to the markets? The market is forward looking when it wants to be and backward looking when it wants to be. It does whatever is best for it at the current time.
October 13th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
More liberal ramblings…zzzzzz.
~~~
BR:: Hey Asshat! RTF post!
You completely misunderstood the discussion here!
October 13th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
Jeeze, another conserative based publication. no wonder the average joe has a hard time making it in the markets. it is all controled by the same conservative, right wing bullshit.
Anyone notice the IBD article blaming the entire finaincial mess on CRA and the Democrats?
Is there ANY fait and unbiased reporting left in this country? Please don’t tell me it is FOX! According to there text message polls of the debate it was a landslide that McCain won both hands down with 82+%.
Unfortunately, the polls don’t agree.
October 13th, 2008 at 9:14 pm
Bush (or Cheney rather, with this guy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Addington ) spent the last 8 years expanding the powers of the president and reducing individual liberties.
Let’s see how fast the next guy undoes those powers…or not.
October 13th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
It’s 2008 – liberal is no longer a four-letter word.
October 13th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
Eric Sebille, what possibly qualifies this post as “liberal ramblings”??
You think Gasparino is right?
You think that anything which debunks wingnut logic is, by necessity, liberal?
Or, could it be that if we cut to the chase, and use Occam’s razor, we can conclude you are a moron???
October 13th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
Eric, Eric, Eric….methinks you might be a Republican who better get used to “liberal”
as a fine American word and “lower taxes” and Conservatism” and “family values” as illusioary terms of the past.
If you do not get it by Nov 4th, you and Sean Hannity will be the last reactionaries standing.
The Republican era is ending and may not reappear for decades.
October 13th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Let’s see how fast the next guy undoes those powers…or not.
Go long on “or not”. they never give up power and always strive for more.Party doesn’t matter, much of it is driven by the permanent bureaucracy.
October 13th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
One of the hallmarks of sophistry is taking an ass-backwards piece of logic and making it sound plausible. Mens Rea (bad faith) is definitively at work.
Stock prices go up because someone buys or bets (buys futures) that they’ll go up. When fundamentals are absent, the buyer is faking it like a gambler doubling down. Following this analogy, most anyone can beat the house if they have deep enough pockets. Politics isn’t at work here. If Nader was a serious prospect, then you’d see the big guns come out.
October 13th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
Bar, I have to agree with Eric Sebille (welcome to TBP, Eric!) here: More liberal ramblings.
Keep it up.
And oh, by the way, I don’t really care anymore about liberal vs. conservative causes. I just want the marginal tax rates on the rich jacked back up to 91%, I don’t care HOW or even WHETHER the Government uses it. Cuz I have realized the whole last 20 years (reflationomics, our foreign policies, the entire political strategy of the GOP including its alliance with Evangelists and baiting of racism) were to minimize taxes on the rich.
October 13th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Did today’s Obama Ovation qualify as Lowry’s 90% Upside day?
October 13th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
“Go long on “or not”. they never give up power and always strive for more.Party doesn’t matter, much of it is driven by the permanent bureaucracy.”
Sorry. I don’t see Obama in the same mold as Cheney (or Bush). I think you’re equivocating when the evidence indicates that Obama understands what power is granted by the Constitution to the executive branch, and that he will govern accordingly. Obama was a constitutional scholar and lecturer.
October 13th, 2008 at 9:43 pm
Well, conservative now means socialist, so I guess liberal now equals sane or something…
October 13th, 2008 at 9:47 pm
Listen, do you think all that $400M+ campaign funds came from idealists/deluded $200 personal donations?
Of course not! There is big business behind Mr Hussein (MSM to say the least) and yes, they want their “change” back with interest. Like always.
When Bush got re-elected, the top management in the Financial I was working for celebrated with champagne. They will do the same when Mr Hussein wins next.
Change? Don’t be fooled, they are all the same…
[I think for myself and I approved this message]
October 13th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
What CNBC Sucks said. The underwriters of movement conservatism want one thing and one thing only — everyone’s’ money in their pockets w/ no recourse — if the right-wing authoritarians who help them get it want some necks under their heel to make them feel like big shots in return, well, the needs of the little people must be served (you see how democratic and generous they really are?).
October 13th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
Question: How can someone who’s a fairly prominent face of CNBC be allowed to publish such trash? Don’t the people who run CNBC have some control over this guy? There’s gotta be a clause in his contract that says he’s not allow to publish moronic, right wing, ramblings without CNBC’s permission.
I’m guessing his days are numbered at CNBC and that he’s already lined up to go over the new Fox business channel … where he’ll feel right at home. Perhaps he’s trying to get fired in order to get out of his contract. Who knows. Seems like he jumped the couch several months ago.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
RW – Are you equally outraged when the numerous lefties on CNBC, NBC and PMSNBC go on their liberal rants on air and in print? Much of the media is corrupt and biased. You have to at least give Gasparino credit for being upfront with his views rather than trying to pretend he’s not biased.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
It doesn’t strike me as farfetched to think that the market is anticipating Obama’s not so investor friendly policies.
That said, you can throw everything Obama has talked about for the past year out the window. He’ll be out there drilling, mostly leaving taxes alone, won’t touch trade policies, etc, as his advisors didn’t sign up for the Hoover administration.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
NY Post would be the one, no surprise.
From W forward I shall never vote republican, forever.!
October 13th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
The facts clearly illustrate that the direction of the financial markets have no correlation to which political party is gaining in popularity.
As somebody watching the spectacle of the US presidential election from the outside, I am wondering what the real difference is between the Republican and the Democratic presidential candidate.
Both of them voted for the financial rescue package. So it looks like they pursue identical economic policies. They differ to a certain extent on Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama wants to send more troops to Afghanistan – at least he says so. The difference between the two is then a troop differential between Iraq and Afghanistan of 10,000 people give or take a few thousand?
October 13th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
Guess we shouldn’t be surpised to hear a politically biased voice on the network of Larry Kudlow/Anne Coulter, eh? By the way, where have they been hiding the wicked witch? Or is she just being channeled by you know who?
October 13th, 2008 at 10:11 pm
Up to a $10k maximum withdrawal from 401k? That’s about the stupid idea I’ve heard from either candidate.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:12 pm
McCain’s economic advisors are a collection of money-losing know-nothings (not no-nothings).
October 13th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
Nice softball pitch filled with red meat for the demo lemmings, Barry. Why take on the argument if it is beneath you? The only reason is that it gets to you, ie: there is a ring of truth to it, otherwise you’d write him off like a ‘moron, wingnut, etc.’, you know?
October 13th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
Oddly, “the market panic is rooted in investors fears over Obama administration policies” is exactly how Rush Limbaugh explained current events only last Thursday or Friday.
Not that I listen to Limbaugh much but I turned the radio on long enough last week to catch his expert explanation of the ongoing market turmoil. Expecting the blame to fall on Bill Clinton, I was surprised to hear it was Obama’s fault instead.
Your pal Gasparino is only stealing his material from Limbaugh.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
BUY GOLD FUTURES $839 FOR DEC= AND TAKE PHYSICAL DELIVERY IN DEC=CAN NOT FIND GOLD ON THE STREET FOR LESS THAN $1000 AN OUNCE== CAN GET MINI CONTRACT ON CHICAGO BOARD== CHECK GATA WEBSITE FOR DETAILS UNDER ” GOLD IN THE HANDS OF THE PUBLIC IS AN ENEMY OF THE STATE” ARTICLE ON THAT SITE=== BEAT THE FED AND CENTRAL BANKS AT THEIR OWN GAME=== CHEAP GOLD!!!
October 13th, 2008 at 10:23 pm
Maybe Barry will be able to focus on economics and markets better after the election.
~~~
BR: Jay, I focus on whatever creates my bliss at the moment.
When I see a logistically challenged piece, based upon faulty assumptions and flawed reasoning, with some well known false heuristics, I am compelled to correct it.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:24 pm
@werner
A difference is that though both will run huge deficits and add an extra trillion to the debt (yes, both of ‘em), Obama will spend a lot more of the money here: infrastucture, healthcare, etc., and that money will recirculate through OUR economy. Iraq already has more of our blood and treasure than it was ever worth; that being zero blood, and just enough treasure to maintain the flyovers and protect the Kurds at a cost of 8 billion a yr. There are differences in priorities and world view that matter. A lot.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:30 pm
charlie and kudlow… what a combination,
they should have their own show.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:32 pm
Well Huckabee thinks “financial terrorists” caused last weeks drop – bet he didn’t have “redeem money from hedge funds” on his daytimer this quarter – so maybe the fax machine at RNC HQ got jammed so the right wing spielers had to come up with something on the fly.
If Hannity mentioned UFO’s again today that would be more proof.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
You either are working towards the truth or you are not. Some people help others find truth, while some try to prevent others from attaining the truth.
Those who seek enlightenment appreciate the former and despise the latter.
Keep fighting for the truth, and f*ck the naysayers.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
@Roger –
“Numerous lefties” on CNBC? Jared Bernstein is a frequent guest but not an employee. Steve Liesman is a known Grateful Dead fan who has recently become more vocal to try to counterbalance Gasbagarino’s endless hectoring and interrupting.
Meanwhile there’s Kernen, Kudlow, Caruso-Cabrera, Francis, Kneale…all bona fide conservatives. Sure they’re free to fight for their side but there’s no consistent foil to their (now overwhelmingly discredited) Reagan fantasy jive.
CNBC is a business channel. MSNBC is a news and politics channel, and it’s clear MSNBC is positioning itself as the anti-Fox. Maybe the fact that MSNBC has headed left is why they let CNBC stay right. And there’s no argument that the CNBC audience is overwhelmingly still smoking the Reagan dope.
Let us know which of the anchors/hosts/reporters on CNBC you consider liberal. Becky Quick? Erin Burnett? David Faber?!?
October 13th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
I found material below on New York Times Blog. Articles made the accurate market bottom prediction and ALSO, states that we should expect good news for the mark up phase. Indeed we are at mark up now!
“Correct course of action here is to do the opposite of Joe Public and Sovereign funds:
Buy stocks, and sell dollar, and sell treasuries.
To understand why, read posts from Friday to today (Sunday), on these blogs:
http://marketwarnings.blogspot.com/2008/10/dow-sp500-october-2008-bottom-buying.html
http://marketwarnings.blogspot.com/2008/10/european-union-to-guarantee-interbank.html
http://marketwarnings.blogspot.com/2008/10/financial-crisis-ifm-warns-system-on.html
Sovereign funds and Joe Public share this in common: they are SCARED of risky assets at the BOTTOM, and CONFIDENT in risky assets at the TOP. The opposite of what they should do.”
October 13th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
Anyone who has studied natural phenomena … say pickerel fishing in a Massachusetts swamp … knows well the danger of the causation/correlation confusion. When my dad and I were in a canoe not catching any fish and I was getting cranky he would say, “the fish always start biting when the sun hits the treetops.” If we got a bite as the sun hit the treetops, he would cite it as evidence for his theory. If they didn’t bite he would cite it to something else, usually that I banged the paddle against the canoe and scared the fish that were just waiting to bite. If the fish bit on a cloudy day, he would say the fish could see through the clouds … or just tell me to stop asking questions.
Excellent observation, Barry.
Thanks.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
It’s funny how so many former Bush supporters are now ‘independent’ and really love to complain that there is no difference between ‘Mr. Hussein’ and the conservative republican candidate.
I guess that should be considered progress…but their incessant whining is still kinda of pathetic.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
I think Angry Bear has the right take on this:
Market Rallies 900 Points on Krugman Nobel.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:05 pm
One cannot, WITH INTEGRITY, be a ‘great investigative reporter’ simultaneous with thinking the market is reacting negatively to the prospect of an Obama presidency – a conclusion only possible from the numbingly stupid. One CAN however do so if they are acting from corruption and knowing deceit. THAT is the situation with your ‘pal’, Charlie Gasparino. This is so glaringly true that for YOU to rationalize otherwise is a reflection on YOUR state of being.
As for Obama, luckily for us he is of a caliber of intellect and character his ambition surely lies in joining the pantheon of the ‘greatest’ presidents, possibly even the greatest, as judged by history, AND he appears to have the inner wherewithal to put that within reach. And the times are surely such to provide the opportunity to be so considered.
And god help us all if a fuel/fertilizer truck bomb takes out several hundred downtown rush hour NYC citizens and the American people are stampeded into putting McCain and Palin into the white house.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:05 pm
One cannot, WITH INTEGRITY, be a ‘great investigative reporter’ simultaneous with thinking the market is reacting negatively to the prospect of an Obama presidency – a conclusion only possible from the numbingly stupid. One CAN however do so if they are acting from corruption and knowing deceit. THAT is the situation with your ‘pal’, Charlie Gasparino. This is so glaringly true that for YOU to rationalize otherwise is a reflection on YOUR state of being.
As for Obama, luckily for us he is of a caliber of intellect and character his ambition surely lies in joining the pantheon of the ‘greatest’ presidents, possibly even the greatest, as judged by history, AND he appears to have the inner wherewithal to put that within reach. And the times are surely such to provide the opportunity to be so considered.
And god help us all if a fuel/fertilizer truck bomb takes out several hundred downtown rush hour NYC citizens and the American people are stampeded into putting McCain and Palin into the white house.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:05 pm
One cannot, WITH INTEGRITY, be a ‘great investigative reporter’ simultaneous with thinking the market is reacting negatively to the prospect of an Obama presidency – a conclusion only possible from the numbingly stupid. One CAN however do so if they are acting from corruption and knowing deceit. THAT is the situation with your ‘pal’, Charlie Gasparino. This is so glaringly true that for YOU to rationalize otherwise is a reflection on YOUR state of being.
As for Obama, luckily for us he is of a caliber of intellect and character his ambition surely lies in joining the pantheon of the ‘greatest’ presidents, possibly even the greatest, as judged by history, AND he appears to have the inner wherewithal to put that within reach. And the times are surely such to provide the opportunity to be so considered.
And god help us all if a fuel/fertilizer truck bomb takes out several hundred downtown rush hour NYC citizens and the American people are stampeded into putting McCain and Palin into the white house.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
Somehow, I think that Obama was on Wall Street’s “radar screen” long before October 1st.
. . . .
Unfortunately for Obama, the “capital loss carry forward” is limited to $3000 for individuals. It’ll be a while before there are any capital gains for him to tax.
In any case, an Obama Presidency will be a boon to accountants and tax lawyers.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:14 pm
drewster11 is operating straight out of the wingnut playbook, the patterns are so predictable.
1. Wingnut makes ridiculous argument, unsupported by facts.
2. Argument is completely destroyed, rationally. BR is the winner in this case.
3. Wingnuts say the argument is liberal, so it can’t be right.
4. Wingnuts are called morons by highly evolved people like me
. We say that if your only argument is “you disagree with me and that means you are a liberal, so you are discredited,” then that is a stupid argument. This is objectively true, a 6th-grade debate judge would know that. In fact, you don’t know anything about me, and you can find arguments supporting my position on libertarian sites and at The American Conservative — despite this, you dismiss the argument at being made by a demo lemming.
5. Wingnut says “see, because your only argument is that we’re wingnuts or morons, that proves we’re right”. This conveniently ignores the original argument made by BR in #2 above.
6. Lather, rinse, repeat.
Of course, your short attention span won’t let you read this far….
October 13th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Hey Barry. You should check out this information re your thesis about the CRA and its proponents not being a proximate cause to the subprime crisis.
http://www.mediacircus.com/2008/10/obama-sued-citibank-under-cra-to-force-it-to-make-bad-loans/
~~~
BR: Eric, are you arguing that a 1994 lawsuit over redlining — that’s a refusal to lend money to people not based on their credit history or income, but merely based on zip code — is the basis for the 2008 credit crunch?
Oh, and, the basis was the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), and the Fair Housing Act. THAT’S your argument? 15 years ago, the Fair Housing Act led to Citibank voluntarily settling a case of redlining?
Weak . . . Very, very weak.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:33 pm
October 14, 2008
High-Flying Hedge Fund Falls Back to Earth
By LOUISE STORY
Only 10 months ago, Remy Trafelet was so flush that he treated about 100 employees at his hedge fund to a getaway in Venice. He and his crew spent a long, luxurious weekend at the five-star Hotel Bauer, which has Murano glass chandeliers, private gondoliers and a splendid view of a 17th-century basilica.
Story
============================
When I read stories with excerpts like the above, I think there is plenty of room for more taxes on the wealthy. Gasparino, Bartiromo and others on CNBC haven’t shy about dissing Obama on CNBC since the spring. Every reference they make is that Obama will because they don’t want to pay more taxes. I acknowledge that all politicians are the same. I know in my heart that with McCain, there is no hope of change. I can only hope that an Obama administration surprises me and proves different.
Obama has a 95% probability of winning the election as of today! so everyone may as well start getting used to President Obama.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:36 pm
Obamesiah is gonna be great for the markets, heck i’ll be able to cash out of my 401k free of taxes! CAN YOU GET MORE MORONIC THAN THAT!? plus he wants to “spread da welf around mhmmmm” just great…..
wait till we have the crypto commie/muslim/black panther erkle lookalike in office, he and his ACORN friends will redefine retarded and incompetent.
Get out your purple suits and silver nitrate libtards and bow before your savior-
~~~
BR: Wow! Your parents must be so proud of you!
October 13th, 2008 at 11:39 pm
An old friend once related that the definition of IQ – was the speed of handling and acting on information – correctly.
As a prior Tax person, I think Obama and his handlers have developed excellent tax proposals.
Most traders do not pay capital gains tax (that’s for holding 12 months or more)
Look at the Handlers’ that guide Obama – Who could ask for more talent.
There is a disease that is “catchy” at CNBC It “dumbs down”
all who work there. Charlie is no exception.
Look Barry, don’t catch it – if you want to follow things in the market Bloomberg is there for you.
If you want entertainment meant for less than 5 yr old intelligence – there you have CNBC.
Obama scares staid, conservative, out of date, powerful old men – and they will use anything to discredit Obama, behind the mask of prejudice.
Remember George Bush (the W) said that God told him to run for president – who was god punishing?
John McCain is a poor player who struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then (will be) heard no more…an idiot full of sound and fury, signifying nothing
(…, poetic liberty – sic.)
October 13th, 2008 at 11:47 pm
Eric:
“Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories.”
Perhaps you should work on your reading comprehension. I understand they teach it at community college.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:51 pm
“Hey Barry. You should check out this information re your thesis about the CRA and its proponents not being a proximate cause to the subprime crisis.”
1. The case says nothing about CRA.
2. 84% of subprime loans were not subject to CRA.
What’s your point? Citibank was redlining in Chicago. That doesn’t mean they had to give loans to flippers in Orange County and Florida.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
Obama’s 401k plan allows someone to take out $10k ‘penalty’ free, not ‘tax’ free numbnuts.
I’m sure you’d prefer that those who find themselves out of work also lose their homes, lose their medical insurance, and line up in the soup kitchen?
October 13th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
Hopefully Obama reads history and adjusts our treatment from the symptoms to causes of our economic problems. Everything else is noise.
Dominic Lawson: It all went wrong when we left the gold standard
http://tinyurl.com/5yvs3y
October 13th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
“It’s funny how so many former Bush supporters are now ‘independent’ and really love to complain that there is no difference between ‘Mr. Hussein’ and the conservative republican candidate.”
No no, there are many differences if you look carefully.
But the huge campaign funding amassed by Mr Hussein should raise some questions about “what change?”. Instead I’m scoffed as:
- Bush supporter; (based on what?)
- now independent; (huh?)
- complainer; (me? I just raised a question…)
October 13th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
“When I read stories with excerpts like the above, I think there is plenty of room for more taxes on the wealthy.”
It certainly suggests that the estate tax will be with us for a long time.
It’s one way to -eventually- claw back all those i-Bank bonuses, and the shady mortgage broker profits that we’re now paying for.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:58 pm
One cannot, WITH INTEGRITY, be a ‘great investigative reporter’ simultaneous with thinking the market is reacting negatively to the prospect of an Obama presidency – a conclusion only possible from the numbingly stupid.
The willfully-ignorant rightards will follow their politically-slanted cultural-self-esteem storytellers like Kudlow and Gasbagarino, and will lose money accordingly. And I will laugh at them.
October 14th, 2008 at 12:03 am
so much for the efficient market hypothesis…..bottom line: the markets eventually got the credit crisis right? hmmmm?
I’m not sure why business would be excited about higher tax’s on capital, increased regulation, empowerment of trial lawyers, more union power, and restricted free trade. Not too mention 100’s of billions in new entitlements and spending. bottom line, if you want to know if lower tax, right to work, etc states tradionally run by republicans are better than high tax, unionized democrat run states just see how people are voting with their feet.
btw, the biggest correlation/causation fallacy is global warming, where people buy into it without questioning it and there is not even any correlation of late
October 14th, 2008 at 12:08 am
mhm,
That was not solely directed at your post but your reference to Obama as ‘Mr. Hussein’ doesn’t exactly distinguish you from the other “wait till we have the crypto commie/muslim/black panther erkle lookalike in office” posts.
So are you saying I was wrong in classifying you as a newly independent, former Bush supporter or just lucky?
-wtf
October 14th, 2008 at 12:10 am
But the huge campaign funding amassed by Mr Hussein should raise some questions about “what change?”. Instead I’m scoffed as:
- Bush supporter; (based on what?)
Gee, I’m sure it has nothing to do with referring to the candidates as ‘Mr. Hussein’ and the ‘conservative Republican candidate’. How long have you been calling politicians by their middle names — Walker and Bruce? Hussein and Sidney? How stupid do you think we are?
Hey, I can play innocent-stupid as well –
“Ooh, the Repub candidate’s middle name is ‘Sidney’. That’s not a very manly name, or a very American one. Didn’t Australia just pull their troops from Iraq? So he must be a ‘terrist-lover’. Is he going to make us all play cricket and drink Fosters til we puke?”
October 14th, 2008 at 12:10 am
nate,
“he and his ACORN friends will redefine retarded and incompetent.”
Unfortunately for our country, the current occupants of the White House already grabbed the Gold Medal in that category.
.
October 14th, 2008 at 12:14 am
A correction to a statement above.
In his (Obama’s) proposal on 401K’s and IRA’s withdrawals of up to 10,000 – will be penalty free – not Tax free.
In the future – we all are going to have to listen to all the words – not a few words from a sentence and assume the rest!
October 14th, 2008 at 12:23 am
>> biggest correlation/causation fallacy is global warming, where people buy into it without questioning it and there is not even any correlation of late
No, let me explain what happened, so you understand.
First, I read the conclusions of the consensus of scientists.
Second, I read arguments against global warming and found them sometimes ludicrous, sometimes written by people with a history of writing against hypotheses later accepted universally (e.g., second-hand smoke), and ultimately unpersuasive.
Is there a difference of opinion? Yes. But, 22% still approve of Bush. And something like 40% (but dropping) think Palin is qualified to be President. Why do I bring that up? To give examples proving the point that you can’t convince everybody of anything. Don’t blame me for having made up my mind. And, lastly, there’s substantial overlap of Bush/Palin supporters and global warming deniers. That, too, suggests global warming is real.
October 14th, 2008 at 12:26 am
Message to all nuts: when you are in a hole, stop digging.
If nothing else, republicans have proven to be absolutely incompetent. Now they claim that all our ills are the democrat’s fault, but after having had absolut power (presidency, house and senate) for almost six full years they didn’t manage to fix anything. Not a damn thing and here we are. What a bunch of cry babies.
October 14th, 2008 at 12:28 am
wtf,
thanks for clarifying, and yes, your are wrong if you classified me.
My point is that while many expect/hope Mr Hussein will operate huge changes I expect nothing significant. Not when you owe so much back from ‘contributions’. Tax increase on higher brackets? On the ones funding his campaign? Not without a loophole… In that regard he _is_ an equal.
October 14th, 2008 at 12:39 am
@ Posted by: engineer al | Oct 13, 2008 10:13:40 PM
It’s simple:
BLAME
|
\/
Clinton < -- 2008 --> Obama
October 14th, 2008 at 12:39 am
dude, that’s why you’re the boss. sorry charlie, kiff
October 14th, 2008 at 12:43 am
wunsacon-are you aware that co2 has been rising but the global temperature hasn’t lately?don’t you think that if you’re going to make the claim that the “debate’s over” and rising co2 causes global temperatures to increase, that when co2 rises global tempterature’s ought to follow? you’re obviously not very well read. I guess that’s why you try and link me to distracting strawman arugments like second hand smoke. here’s a hint, the above is why all those scientists call it “climate change” not global warming. it’s called hedging their bets
October 14th, 2008 at 12:44 am
mhm,
I have no illusions about Obama. When he sold out on the FISA bill I realized that Rev. Wright was right when he called him a ‘politician’.
That said I think the old FDR story applies well to Obama and that’s a hell of a lot better than the republican alternative.
“FDR was meeting with a group of reformers trying to persuade him to support one of their goals. After they finished speaking, FDR said to them, ‘You’ve convinced me. I want to do it. Now make me do it.’”
-wtf
October 14th, 2008 at 12:50 am
>> thanks for clarifying, and yes, your are wrong if you classified me.
Sorry, I know you’re a regular on this board. But, you know that saying about “walks like a duck”?
>> My point is that while many expect/hope Mr Hussein will operate huge changes I expect nothing significant. Not when you owe so much back from ‘contributions’. Tax increase on higher brackets? On the ones funding his campaign?
Well, this statement is curious in 3 ways:
- Democrats and independents from many walks of life decide that Obama is someone they like a lot and so they donate a lot. And that’s something “wrong”?
- Rich Democrats like Warren Buffett *want* the rich (rich conservatives and liberals alike) to pay a bigger percentage of the tax burden. If Obama owes so much back, then does he do what these rich constituents have been asking or not?
- “Barak Obama” is such a unique name (AFAIK) that there’s no need to distinguish him via his middle name, especially one used by those who’d like to make Romper Room-like associations between him and a former well-known enemy of the state bearing the same name. (Quack!)
October 14th, 2008 at 12:55 am
Unfortunately, an example of the public perception of your typical Mr. Sidney supporter…
Link
October 14th, 2008 at 12:55 am
BR: Please slap Gasparino around a bit next time you two share a pint. He also stooped to personally insulting Felix Salmon over at Portfolio for posting a similar piece.
Either he simply doesn’t grasp basic concepts or he’s being handed very large checks behind the scenes to parrot the GOP talking points for stupid people. His arguments are both insulting and disappointing.
His cred as a respectable economic mind evaporated decades ago.
October 14th, 2008 at 12:57 am
pkut, the debate’s over because the deniers threw about 1,000 arguments against it. In turn, each has been discredited. Should I consider the 1001st? No.
YOUR side’s repeatedly poor arguments convinced me the “skeptics” have no worthwhile data. They’re not credible. So, the case is closed.
You should’ve presented better evidence at trial. Find competent leaders to better present your case next time — if you can.
October 14th, 2008 at 1:01 am
Markets eventually got the credit crisis right — and then they overshot to the downside. What is going on now is not a reflection of policies which have yet to be enacted, legislation which has yet to be passed, based on an election which has to take place.
———————–
Your right, markets have got the credit crisis right. However, politicians have got it wrong (yes, that includes your policy proposals), and I’m sure they are factoring the idiotic policies congress is likely to come up with. They haven’t overshot to the downside yet
October 14th, 2008 at 1:05 am
pkut, why don’t you post a cite regarding your “debunking” of wunsacon’s point?
I’ve read a lot of the science around global warming, and although I’m not a scientist (BS Chem Eng), it is persuasive enough to make me comfortable with the consensus opinion as expressed by climate scientists.
The opposition is not persuasive, and is inextricably linked with a bunch of people who have been dead wrong in public about a lot of other stuff.
Now, what this means in terms of public policy is still subject to debate. But calling it a “hoax” or claiming that it is a causation/correlation fallacy is simply not supportable.
October 14th, 2008 at 1:06 am
The Original DC:
MSNBC isn’t even a liberal channel. There is Joe Scarborough(former Republican Congresscritter) in the morning. Chris Matthews has admitted voting for George W. twice. Do you really think Andrea Mitchell is a liberal? They have guys like Pat Buchanan as political analysts. MSNBC, like CNBC is owned by GE. They aren’t going to stray too far from what best benefits GE.
October 14th, 2008 at 1:06 am
The Original DC:
MSNBC isn’t even a liberal channel. There is Joe Scarborough(former Republican Congresscritter) in the morning. Chris Matthews has admitted voting for George W. twice. Do you really think Andrea Mitchell is a liberal? They have guys like Pat Buchanan as political analysts. MSNBC, like CNBC is owned by GE. They aren’t going to stray too far from what best benefits GE.
October 14th, 2008 at 1:06 am
The Original DC:
MSNBC isn’t even a liberal channel. There is Joe Scarborough(former Republican Congresscritter) in the morning. Chris Matthews has admitted voting for George W. twice. Do you really think Andrea Mitchell is a liberal? They have guys like Pat Buchanan as political analysts. MSNBC, like CNBC is owned by GE. They aren’t going to stray too far from what best benefits GE.
October 14th, 2008 at 1:39 am
wunsacon, I expect a lot of flack for daring to oppose a major (popular) force, no problem. But unlike physics, arguing against an intellectual point of view does not represent an equivalent force in the opposite direction. I could, for example, invalidate a theory without making any other claim. So no quacks, sorry.
As for the 3 points you make:
- there’s nothing wrong with donations, it just means business;
- I remember Buffet donated most of his fortune, so higher tax isn’t his problem really. But a good guy nonetheless;
- Why should Hussein be a problem? It is a very common name, but somehow his supporters thing that a mere phonetic approximation might taint his long record of achievements. That is lame.
October 14th, 2008 at 1:42 am
Logic seems simple to me. If you were a super powerful computer and you looked at the last 8 years you would decide the risk was too great to elect another republican into office. Look at the situation, look at the people McCain has around him vs Obama. McCain has a lot of people who are similar to our current executive branch.
Why take the risk? Why not make a true change and see where we go.
October 14th, 2008 at 1:43 am
Wow, silly me, I was thinking that that was a succinct takedown, by BR, of some, obviously, contorted tripe, served by CGas.
Little did I know that the Important thing was: who is, or was, or will be, alternately, a libtard, or a rightard.
I have much to Learn.
But, one thing I do know, this: a former well-known enemy of the state bearing the same name. (Quack!)
Posted by: wunsacon | Oct 14, 2008 12:50:30 AM
shows a serious lack of knowledge of our own, recent, History. Simply, Saddam, like the Shah some twenty years earlier, was Our Boy, that we assisted in overtuning a democratically-elected Government.
wunsa-, no offence meant, feel free to your own opinions, just understand, Facts always have a Cost.
October 14th, 2008 at 1:58 am
Posted by: Whammer | Oct 14, 2008 1:05:09 AM
Wham–
you’re obviously, or so you say, well read on the topic, why not post links to what you think supports yon’ vaunted ‘Climate Scientists’, and their position on Climate Change nee` Global Warming?
While we’re waiting, everyone else can get a start on understanding what these CC/GW-chefs have been cooking up:
http://clusty.com/search?input-form=clusty-simple&v%3Asources=webplus&query=Climate+Kids
Yes, boys & girls, your boys & girls will be the front-line snitch squad for the Stadt.
October 14th, 2008 at 1:59 am
“Obama was a constitutional scholar and lecturer.”
Biggest laugh of the day. O-Scam-A is a complete lightweight who hasn’t read a lick of source material. Anyone who thinks he’s an intellectual is as much of a self-congratulatory ass as B. Hussein himself.
October 14th, 2008 at 1:59 am
“Obama was a constitutional scholar and lecturer.”
Biggest laugh of the day. O-Scam-A is a complete lightweight who hasn’t read a lick of source material. Anyone who thinks he’s an intellectual is as much of a self-congratulatory ass as B. Hussein himself.
October 14th, 2008 at 1:59 am
“Obama was a constitutional scholar and lecturer.”
Biggest laugh of the day. O-Scam-A is a complete lightweight who hasn’t read a lick of source material. Anyone who thinks he’s an intellectual is as much of a self-congratulatory ass as B. Hussein himself.
October 14th, 2008 at 2:01 am
Charlie Gasparino is absolutely wrong.
The markets are scared $h!tless that one of these two bozos are the best we can expect for the next 4 years.
What’s coming next after the latest Fed short squeeze rally?
October 14th, 2008 at 2:03 am
>> shows a serious lack of knowledge of our own, recent, History.
Huh?? Bro’, I know Saddam was a “friend” before he was an “enemy”. I’ve read about the woeful overuse of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” doctrine. More importantly, that information is completely beside the point I was making.
>> Little did I know that the Important thing was: who is, or was, or will be, alternately, a libtard, or a rightard.
We’re not getting rid of the Fed, Mark, even though it might be a good idea. So, write in Ron Paul and I’ll be proud of you. But, there’s a significant difference in competency among the two nominees from the 2 mixed-model capitalist/socialist majority parties running this country. Forgive the rest of us for (a) believing we’d be better off with one and not the other and (b) believing it’s important. Maybe not as significant a change as you’d like to see. But, significant nonetheless.
October 14th, 2008 at 2:14 am
Given all the remaining uncertainty, I’m not so sure anything’s been overshot (or undershot) since “the target” is entirely obscurred… shooting at what? As you go to pains to explain, answer to the question: Is the market the oracle of all economic wisdom? Answer: maybe, sometimes, errr….
CDS unknowns, layoffs, FED balance sheet off the charts… I don’t know Barry.
“overshot the target”??? Really? How do you overshoot a target nobody sees?
As usual, I think Roubini has it right.
October 14th, 2008 at 2:19 am
mhm, FWIW, I think your point #3 underestimates the “power” of “word association” with that subset of the Palin “lynch mob” demographic. What’s “lame” is how some partisans use his middle name as raw meat for the racist constituents that forms an unfortunate *subsection* of the GOP. I don’t consider it “lame” to criticize its use.
Now, DON’T ask me what name Adolf Coors would use were he to run for office… I don’t know. We can argue that another day.
October 14th, 2008 at 2:37 am
RE: Global Warming
When you oxidize (burn) a hydrocarbon such as gasolene or kerosene, you get incomplete combustion; i.e. C-H…+ 02 –> CO + CO2 + H2O. SO WHEN YOU BURN GASOLENE AND STUFF YOU GET CARBON MONOXIDE, CARBON DIOXIDE AND TWICE (that’s right) as much WATER. This water wasn’t there before. It is added to the water we have on the planet. Yet we have idiots going around telling us there will be a shortage of water. Do these guys sell water CDS’s? Water vapor is a STRONGER greenhouse gas than CO2. Oh, you didn’t know that? WTF not? Do you want to know what’s going up? SEA LEVEL. The melting of the poles has very little to do with it. Another fun fact for you: High humidity encourages rampant fungi and bacterial growth. So expect more disease and rot if we don’t go solar. Yeah, I know. I’m making all this up to make you cry in your reptilian beer.
October 14th, 2008 at 2:46 am
wunsa-
you should take it easy on the ink blots..
I was only characterizing the juvenile jousting that was, all too readily, on display, with words found, in the thread, above..
this, though: “But, there’s a significant difference in competency among the two nominees from the 2 mixed-model capitalist/socialist majority parties running this country” is pretty interesting.
Let’s accept that as a given, no prob.
How are you going to know who won?
You think ‘Black boxes’ are only found on Wall St.?
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2004/11/20/its-official-vote-fraud-found-in-florida/
You should wonder, better you should have an answer, b/c w/o one we’d be off tamping our ‘mixed-economy’ in our Hooka, and having a communal blow..
October 14th, 2008 at 3:04 am
Don’t blame the Republicans, they are the result of an intelligent design.
October 14th, 2008 at 3:04 am
Mark, I’m with you on the Diebold risks, starting 4 years ago. I prefer paper ballots. (I recall reading that Canada still does it and tallies the votes quickly. Why can’t we?)
I also prefer:
- Weekend voting. (Can get more volunteers to help, if nothing else.)
- Open-source program computerized district drawing, to eliminate gerrymandering.
- Instant run-off voting, to end the political duopoly enforced by the fear that “my vote won’t count”. Everyone could vote for whom they really want without compromise.
October 14th, 2008 at 3:10 am
I hope GW “skeptics” at least check the surface temperatures of Venus and Mercury. The former is much hotter than the latter, because of atmospheric effects, despite being much further away. That’s true regardless of however the sun is behaving. So, clearly, “atmosphere” affects “temperature”. I hope “skeptics” aren’t stuck on that hurdle. (I’m sure most are not. But, some of them might be.)
October 14th, 2008 at 3:30 am
this: ” better you should have an answer, b/c w/o one we’d be (better) off tamping our ‘mixed-economy’ in our Hooka, and having a communal blow..”
was missing ‘better’..
wunsa-
sounds like you don’t have an answer, really, have you thought about what that means?
worse, it’s not even part of the orchestrated/castrating cacophony we’re entreated to, re: (S)Election ‘08.
gee, ya think there may be something else we’re missing?
doesn’t matter, right? wunsa-, just so nobody hasn’t told ya, on this Plantation, we’re all Niggers–it’s just that few Are Masters, some delude themselves into thinking they are Masters, and Most take the Whip.
If that’s not True, you tell me how Free Men can have no recourse at the Ballot Box. Because, that’s, Exactly, what those eVoting hackjobs provide–no Recourse, no Recount, no Republic.
Believe me, I sincerely hope/wish I’m wrong, though, I don’t see any other way to add it up. It bodes ill for all, that’s the only ‘Equal Opportunity’ we can be sure of.
October 14th, 2008 at 3:42 am
So, clearly, “atmosphere” affects “temperature”.
wunsa-
if those CC/GW gladhanders were so concerned about ‘the Environment’, why isn’t Hg=Mercury (the Element) #1 on their Hit List?
Ya think might organize some awareness campaigns around the effects of Coal-fired electricity generation?? Tell you that if your local Ute isn’t in the Thermometer business then maybe its CEO should find a better use of his Corpos funds than his 7/8-digit compensation package? on and on..
It’s NFW you’re so sensitive to ‘ink blots’, you’ve been weaned on Bernay’s-brand (“None Finer”) agitprop.
Again, no offence meant, but start doing your own Homework and learn more than your Taught. Even the greens will tell ya: There aren’t enough Trees for all the Canes needed..
October 14th, 2008 at 4:43 am
“I smarter than all of you because I can write in half sentences that sound like riddles and everyone needs to do more homework so that you can understand me clearly because I refuse to post a complete and coherent sentence.”
-M. Hoffer.
Hey Mark, how about laying off the N-word. I’m sure someone as smart and all knowing as yourself can figure out a more polite way of getting your point across, especially given this thread’s topic.
-wtf
October 14th, 2008 at 5:10 am
wtf–
you know, I did think twice before posting that, primarily b/c of the existence of the PC Police.
with that in mind, and after further thought, I let it Fly b/c I thought, if anyone would understand the use of that word, in that context, it would be Obama, his ownself.
towit: “And the central text for black liberation theology can be found in Chapter 4 of Luke’s gospel, where Jesus outlines the purpose of his ministry.
“Jesus says my mission is to eradicate poverty and to bring about freedom and liberation for the oppressed,” Hopkins says. “And most Christian pastors in America skip over that part of the book.”
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89236116
keyword: Black Liberation Theology
further: “The Rev. James Cone is the founder of black liberation theology. In an interview with Terry Gross, Cone explains the movement, which has roots in 1960s civil-rights activism and draws inspiration from both the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X, as “mainly a theology that sees God as concerned with the poor and the weak.”
from same link..
be careful the blinders that are set upon you, for, too soon, you lose sight of, even, your Self, let alone your Path..
October 14th, 2008 at 5:37 am
well said Barry,
Gasparinos constant on air attacks on the democrats suck!
October 14th, 2008 at 6:18 am
This debate is silly since we know there no causes nor effects that can be traced to events. As a rule we see what we expect to see. I think it does not matter what either candidate thinks,or does. Congress is the corrupt institution now and always will be. As a consequence the USA has seen its best days and now takes up also-ran status while you children bicker knowingly. BR is getting to be a waste of time.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:19 am
While I am amazed at how the United States ends up with McCain & Obama as the two final choices for leader of the free world, I will not blame Obama for someone else’s mess.
Sadly, Obama has done next to nothing politically which is a problem within itself; but, blaming him for 8 years of failed policy just shows how desperate the Republicans are.
The Republicans have largely gotten everything they have asked for over the span of the Bush Presidency, so blaming someone not yet even in Office shows how “lies and deception” are the tool of choice from their bag of tricks and frankly isn’t fooling anyone anymore.
Lastly, what we are now reaping was largely sown by the Republicans and the glare of it all around the world is unmistakable. We have destroyed our financial credibility and as a result non-US money (too) will no longer be fooled by the shenanigans coming out of Washington and Wall Street.
To be complete, the Republicans should go ahead and blame Obama for the hyper-inflation (and higher resulting interest rates) that are around the corner as well.
October 14th, 2008 at 8:17 am
I’m now convinced that the only people defending GOP economic policy these days are either a) deep in denial or b) totally greedy, selfish high earning people who can’t stand the idea of paying more taxes, or both.
There’s no defense of Republican economic policy. The catastrophic economic situation we are in must bring into question the legacy of Ronald Reagan and Reaganomics. It was Reagan’s administration that ushered in an era of humongous budget deficits. After the 2002 elections when the GOP made big electoral gains, former Treasury Sec Paul O’Neill quotes Dick Cheney as saying “Reagan proved deficits don’t mater.” (Paul O’Neill got fired shortly thereafter for objecting to the reckless economic policy.) So, 27 years after the advent of Reaganomics, we know it was a miserable, catastrophic failure.
The one defense of Ronald Reagan is that he was a pragmatist and raised taxes later in his first term as the deficit as a %-to-GDP spiraled out of control to 6%. Bush and Cheney were so consumed by the supply side dogma that they fiddled while Rome burned.
Charlie Gasperino is in total denial, and I bet he’s hopping mad his taxes are gonna go up. Hey, it’s the least you can do after supporting the exact policies putting this country on the edge of the abyss !
October 14th, 2008 at 8:57 am
Jojo 11:33:20 PM – “He and his crew spent a long, luxurious weekend at the five-star Hotel Bauer, which has Murano glass chandeliers, private gondoliers and a splendid view of a 17th-century basilica”
me – imo spending in the luxurious realm would not be such a problem if world travel wasn’t such a part of it. ie: Support your local economy. And extra liquidity goes into drugs too. While I’m on the subject, a shaved head is a fashion statement? or a drug de-enforcement measure?
Jon 11:55:46 PM- “suggests that the estate tax will be with us”
me – have got to keep that one in mind as a recapture method.
VJ 12:10:47 AM- “his ACORN friends will redefine retarded and incompetent”
me – that registration sweat shop was using quotas (or nearly) hiree quote “You get fired for consistently bringing in cards in the low teens”"bonus for getting over 100 cards in a week”
and I have to wonder if “false flag operators” infiltrated the organization setting up the scandal
wtf 12:44:33 AM – “Obama … called him a ‘politician”
me – ya he is; a breed workin for a cause; my cause I hope
I shelled out some cash to Obama for Pres, a first for me, realizing it is cash that makes a fight possible
does he support my ultimate view (imo No) of “we all vote binding referendum style on policy – the elected polititians write the code in the direction of the vote – or get fired (quickly).
wunsacon 3:04:19 AM “I prefer paper ballots”
me – I 2nd that; and a 1-5% verify days after election with re-verified nmachines
and what would posting early voting results like now hurt the process? Polls – we don’t need no stinkin polls 3 weeks before an election … the election day crunch would be reduced; results would get folks involved with money, retoric and bubble fill-ins
wtf and Mark 4AM exchange – Barack is malatto and primarily raised in a white enviroment which imo matters to views more than DNA
BG 6:19:56 AM – I am hoping he is still untainted as to the roles politians must play to survive in that job title
and I’ll add another personal request that he does not support (I’m pretty sure cause its outta this world wing) … request present cash system is replaced with a new system revolving around labor in the school and work years providing an “American Standard of Living” that is allowed to be maintained in the retirement years
October 14th, 2008 at 9:31 am
The incumbents must find some reason, other than the complete breakdown of the economic philosophy which they subscribe to, to rationalize what is happening. We have heard this illogical argument from numerous wingnuts. Kudlow, Jimmy P., Jerry Boyer, Cavuto, the list goes on.
October 14th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Is there ANY fait and unbiased reporting left in this country?
McNeil Lehrer comes closest.
And newsflash: they’re ALL liars, and both sides see larger government as the answer to everything. Corporations, unions and other special interests love this because it’s much easier to plop a lobby in one town and have all that opportunity to shmooze and grease wheels than it is to have to make their case to constituencies spread out all over this country.
Where have you gone, Barry Goldwater? A nation turns its lonely eyes to you….
October 14th, 2008 at 10:36 am
I note that a lot of Wall Streeters, such as BR, are very focused on the day to day, or even the few weeks to months time frame. You may be right on some of the details…but then again…maybe not. Sort of like the news media maintaining every day on what moved the market: “short covering”, “earnings miss”, “Fed Statement”, etc.
I am a big market history believer. No matter who was prez, there was/is going to be a mean price ratio (e.g. P/E, P/B, etc.) reversion. We got some serious reversion that past few weeks. I believe that would have found a horse to ride over a period of minutes, days, hours, weeks, months or whatever over the next few years. We will most likely see another mean reversion leg over the next few years. This is a secular bear- price moving sideways as earnings catch up.
When the proper P/E ratio is achieved, the next secular bull will start. As the big moves occur, the innocent and partially guilty will be blamed by both sides of the partisan divide.
October 14th, 2008 at 10:53 am
OhNoNotAgain, the point is that Obama personally isn’t the one who’ll be making a lot of the decisions (and even if he were, I doubt that he’d give up power that he could be using to “do good” as he sees it: he is NOT that kind of person). The unelected bureaucracy is hard at work at increasing _its_ power. Quite successfully, I must say, for the last 150 years or so.
October 14th, 2008 at 11:18 am
Charlie’s retort to Barry and Felix seems to boil down to “Sources. I have sources! I talk to people all day. Did I tell you I have sources?” and “I never heard of you.”
Well, Judy Miller had plenty of sources too and maybe Charlie ought to consider getting up to speed on this “tubes” blogoshpere thingy…it’s really been catching on. Perhaps he’s feeling a bit threatened by erosion of the traditional media filter (which he’s a part of.)
Great analysis of a very twisted set of talking points, Barry (as usual).
October 14th, 2008 at 11:30 am
Mark E. Hoffer, acknowledged. I don’t know what to do about mercury. Seems the public lacks the will to do anything until there’s a crisis, because they’re watching sports and sitcoms. Their disinterest in sacrificing “here and now” means they elect leaders who promise not to spoil the party.
Barry, judging from the last paragraph in Gasparino’s note, he’s freaking pissed! HA! What a troll!
October 14th, 2008 at 11:40 am
See angry bear post, “McCain Sinks The Dow” with a chart “proving” it’s McCain’s fault:
http://angrybear.blogspot.com/2008/10/mc-cain-sinks-dow.html
or
http://tinyurl.com/4ykns9
October 14th, 2008 at 11:41 am
Jeebus, I used to have some respect for Gasparino, which I;m losing quickly.
Obama’s plan to socialize the economy?? Excuse me, but who’s running the show right now?
This entire “Obama’s increasing chances of winning the election correlates well to the tanking of the market” has about as much credibility as “the drop in average temperature from late Summer to early Autumn correlates weel to the tanking of the market”. Let’s blame the weather!
October 14th, 2008 at 11:41 am
Incredible rejoinder by Gasparino: I talk to people! I use a wide range of sources, but I prefer to only believe those whose views are consistent with my worldview. I’m a Serious Person, unlike Barry who is just a blogger in his mother’s basement.
October 14th, 2008 at 11:48 am
IMO, what is really at the root of Gasparino’s angst is the personal realization that the Republicans are responsible for their own mess and it is absolutely driving Charlie and Larry totally nuts!
Both are looking down the road at the destruction of failed policies they have supported for the last 28 years and the rise of more balanced rules and regulations for all of us not just a chosen few.
That is what is really eating at these guys. Both should get their BP checked on a daily basis; because this tide has finally turned and they had better get used to it.
October 14th, 2008 at 11:56 am
wuns – “because they’re watching sports and sitcoms”
hey don’t knock em to hard – sometimes I think they are more reality based than me
quote from “Meatballs I” “it just doesn’t matter … it just doesn’t matter … it just doesn’t matter”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3S_k1dRbXY
October 14th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
Gasparino is an embarrassment. He’s always spewing Republican talking points on CNBC. His reporting on Lehman was borderline criminal. And, he’s a jerk to boot!
October 14th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Reversed causality indeed. Obama is doing so well in the polls directly due to the poor economy and market. The market is telling us we need a change and Obama is what we need.
October 14th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Did Gasparino seriously just tell Barry to go speak to more people? Is he aware of the fact 24,249 “people” are subscribed to this blog?
Sure, Charlie breaks news for CNBC – but that essentially makes him a great parrot, or fly on the wall, not a man of the people.
The man who blogs his analysis, puts it on the record and is right more often than not, is the man of the people.
Regards,
George
October 14th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
The headline I just read over on Bloomberg.com was that “…stocks drop on concern about corporate profits…”
Did someone interview some statistically significant sample of stock sellers to see why they were selling?
And the buyers, to see why they were buying?
Did someone do that on Monday, or any other previous day before conjuring headlines touting the reasons for the market’s rise or fall?
Even had they done such intensive research in such a short time span, would it have had any predictive value?
Long after the fact, we may discern why a particular era yields declines or advances. We fairly well understand the cause for the market crashes in ‘29, ‘32, ‘87, et al.
But for anybody to take a day, or even a short series of days, and attempt to fix upon the market’s actions a cause so vague and several steps removed as the prospects of whether one or another is elected president is the essence of overreach in analysis–particularly when neither candidate is substantially different than the other in their pronouncements of public policy that might affect the markets. They both supported the bailout, and its prospects of passage or failure seemed to somewhat move the markets, but even that is just pure speculating.
Attributing market moves to either candidate’s election prospects is just politically-biased speculating, and should be ignored.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
I love all these “free market” guys who “hate” government intervention and hate taxes, except when the government is giving them money and lower their taxes. CNBC is a source of morbid “entertainment” not a source of financial enlightenment. You want real information? Watch Bloomberg. Gasparino and Kudlow are just sad clowns. Again, being on TV working for a network doesn’t make you either intelligent or reliable, it makes you a reporter, and reporters, with all due respect to reporters, are just parrots and give no insight or depth to anything.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
wunsa-
with this: “Seems the public lacks the will to do anything until there’s a crisis, because they’re watching sports and sitcoms.” are you trying to tell us that: while rootin’ for the Browns one night, J4P, from Lorain, had an epiphany that CO2 was going to ‘ruin his World’…so he rented a mule and began his trek to spread ‘the Word’ about CC nee` GW?
Bud, if that’s the case, I hope you have a large truck, b/c I can find all kinds things to Sell you..
Back to Today, you should know that this GHG-induced AGW Hoax has been hatched long ago, a chick no more, now fully-fledged and on the wing, ready to drop its load of * all over us.
Put the Goalposts back where they belong, for if you don’t, you’ll be keeping score of, and have it kept for you, Carbon Credits, points that’ll never win any game you’d want to Play.
past that, this:
Where have you gone, Barry Goldwater? A nation turns its lonely eyes to you….
Posted by: Dr. Kenneth Noisewater | Oct 14, 2008 10:32:30 AM
is nice to see. AuH2O was the right formula in ‘64, and, curiously, will be the correct Investment Advice for the next 64 years.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
O, and to this: “And with all due respect Barry, I didn’t even know who you were until…”– CGas
It is no wonder that he gets referred as ‘GasBag’-arino..You just have to luv the spectacle of one Blowing up his own ***.
There isn’t a lens in existence that could correct the aberration, logical and otherwise, that he suffers from.
BR, as others have noted, you were kind enough to refer to him as a ‘pal’, it seems obvious, in that regard, the old adage has been proven, yet again. towit: “No good deed…”
what a waste of Time, though the good news is, I learned some more about Snakes after 2X checking ‘vituperative’..
October 14th, 2008 at 7:29 pm
Why do you call this idiot a pal? especially after that deeply condescending final paragraph in his note to you?
October 15th, 2008 at 7:07 am
Hey Gasparino, what do you think is going on now if not “huge government expenditures”? I hope Obama levies “massive tax increases” on the overpaid CNBC blowhards like you, Cramer, and Kudlow.