1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Budget talks: This is getting nasty

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by printdust, Jul 13, 2011.

Page 113 of 214
  1. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    S&P 500 futures trading up this evening.

    The crazy thing -- and I meant to respond to a post from yesterday or today about the markets, but didn't have a chance--is that as much of a distraction as this has been, there are much more substantive things weighing on U.S. markets. First, the dollar, and U.S. treasuries, are being boosted by the mess in Europe. Not matter how stupid we make ourselves look -- and even if a downgrade in U.S. debt comes to AA+ -- the rest of the world continues to look at our debt as safe. It's natural. Europe has serious debt problems and the PIGS (Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain) are teetering. The difference between us and them is that they can't meet their obligations. We can, we're just creating a lot of unnecessary drama.

    The second thing, though, is that the economic news the last two weeks has been particularly bleak. Our GDP is growing at an anemic rate, at best, if you believe their scrubbed numbers, and by now we may actually be in another recession. That is going to not be good for U.S. stocks -- actually worldwide stocks -- if we get GDP numbers at the end of this quarter and we are actually in negative territory instead of the 1 or 2 percent range they are saying right now. The more signs our economy is dipping back into another recession, the more U.S. stocks will suffer, and people will realize this circus was just a sideshow that the markets shrugged off for a reason: They are focused on earnings and the economy. Earnings have looked OK, all considered, but a lot of that is multinationals doing well offshore, and also, companies are not investing and we are now in a vicious cycle. Companies are not investing because they don't see signs consumers are spending. Consumers aren't spending because they are still spooked and they know unemployment is hovering between 9 and 10 percent. And our government is grappling with, but screwing it up, the same issues -- the realization that in 2008 a bubble popped that was a bubble of people being way overleveraged in a lot of facets of their finances. Consumers have realized this and scaled back. Companies have realized this and are squeezing nickels out of the employees they have, and sitting on cash, rather than investing, because 1) consumers aren't spending, and 2) our government is scaring the hell out of them with mixed signals. Now our government is finally catching up, but finding it harder to reign itself in.

    I don't invest in equities and I don't even trade in equity index futures, except under extraordinary circumstances. But with how sick the U.S. economy looks, I can't see how anyone can be too bullish on stocks in general. But maybe we will get some good economic reports and strong earnings, and a miracle can happen. I'm just not that confident right now.

    I'm more afraid that unemployment is going to stay high for a while and we are seeing inflation creep, and the stagflation that means is going to be a problem. It's also not going to allow the economy to grow fast enough to bring in the tax receipts really necessary to reduce our debt without a ton of spending cuts. And that won't happen.

    That's bad news for me. But that horse left the barn a long time ago, and honestly, our ability to run ourselves into debt still has some time left on the clock. Expect that to be what happens.

    And expect it to be politicized for a long time, into the election and past.
     
    The Big Ragu, Jul 31, 2011
    #1345
  2. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    No way is Romney anyone's number two.

    He wouldn't want it. They wouldn't want him.
     
    YankeeFan, Jul 31, 2011
    #1346
  3. suburbia

    suburbia Active Member

    No way Romney's ego will allow him to accept being VP. He's always been the Type-A, natural-born leader type. It's either the top of the ticket or nothing for him.

    I'm not sure about Rick Perry. Though he's 61 himself, and if he has any Presidency hopes of his own, 8 years is going to be an awfully long time to wait.
     
    suburbia, Jul 31, 2011
    #1347
  4. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Not for the GOP. 69 is prime age for their presidential candidates. Mitt will be a spring-chicken 65 next November.
     
    Starman, Jul 31, 2011
    #1348
  5. Birdscribe

    Birdscribe Active Member

    If Boehner had any stones, he'd do what any self-respecting Speaker or Majority Leader would do: go into as many of the 'Baggers' districts as he can and find Republicans to run against them in the primaries.

    He would then throw the muscle of the Speakership behind those challengers, fund them lavishly with the mother's milk of politics and take out as many as he could. He may not get all, but he'd get enough to impart a lesson on those who kneecapped him on the most important vote of his term.
     
    Birdscribe, Jul 31, 2011
    #1349
  6. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Yeah, that's a great plan.

    That would reward them for making the President and the rest of the Democrat(ic) party buckle.
     
    YankeeFan, Jul 31, 2011
    #1350
  7. suburbia

    suburbia Active Member

    Until now, I'd totally agree.

    But now the GOP has a lot of younger, fresher faces that, at least in theory, could appeal to a broader range of voters than just another late-middle-aged white man.

    Marco Rubio is only 40, he's hispanic, he's good-looking, he's from one of the two most important states in every Presidential race and he's very ambitious (he was Speaker of the State House of Representatives in Florida in his 30s).

    Bobby Jindal is only 40, he's Indian-American, he's been a very popular governor, he's very popular with the social conservative crowd and he has extensive policy-making experience from his time heading Louisiana's universities, the state's Department of Health and Human Services (or whatever it's called there) and being the number-two guy at HHS under the Bush administration. If voters can look past his Kenneth the Page moment (and it has been a couple of years already), he'll be a force.

    Chris Christie is definitely not attractive. But at age 49 he's 15 years younger than Romney and 11 years younger than Perry. He energizes conservatives in a way Romney does not. And if his reforms in New Jersey work out (the jury is still out here admittedly), he'll have cred from being a successful conservative governor in an otherwise liberal state.

    Don't forget John Thune, who is only 50 yet could pass for 10-15 years younger and by 2016 will have 12 years as a Senator under his belt.

    All of them could run in 2016. And if a Republican can't beat Obama next year, you better believe the GOP electorate is going to want a fresh face and not just another 60-something or 70-something retread.
     
    suburbia, Jul 31, 2011
    #1351
  8. J Staley

    J Staley Member

    You say it as if the Tea Party is a group of master negotiators, instead of just crazies.
     
    J Staley, Jul 31, 2011
    #1352
  9. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    The Democrats are so smart, yet they keep letting people like GWB and the "Tea Party" outsmart them.

    So, why am I supposed to continue to believe they are the smart ones?
     
    YankeeFan, Jul 31, 2011
    #1353
  10. Birdscribe

    Birdscribe Active Member

    You up for running, YF?
     
    Birdscribe, Jul 31, 2011
    #1354
  11. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    I'm in Danny Davis' district.

    I don't think I'd get very far.
     
    YankeeFan, Jul 31, 2011
    #1355
  12. Birdscribe

    Birdscribe Active Member

    They're not smart. Obama's already shown he could go into a poker hand with four of a kind and get snookered by someone with two pair.

    And how is that rewarding them? "Mainstream" Republicans (as mainstream as a party that would consider Reagan a RINO can be these days) putting pressure on the 'Baggers in a primary challenge. This is what Bill Frist and Tom DeLay used to do as a matter of course as a way to cement their power and prevent rogue party members from straying too far.

    It's what any self-respecting Speaker or Majority Leader used to do as a matter of course.
     
    Birdscribe, Jul 31, 2011
    #1356
Page 113 of 214
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page