Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : ahhaha's ahs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ahhaha who wrote (14802)	9/21/2009 10:26:25 AM
From: WillieTee	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24758

"Putin is busy making himself into a $billionaire by stealing a good chunk of Russia's wealth. Why does he need to divert resources to a hopeless cause? What can Russia gain by launching a preemptive attack on some unknown country? Russia, like the US, depends heavily upon the slavery of the rest of the world. Putin wouldn't attack those sending him dollars." Putin is already a billionaire and war with the west is the last thing on his agenda. My guess is that he would like to reassemble a portion of the USSR, or at least the areas that the Czars ruled, as well as possible indirect control of the oil producing regions in Central Asia. One of the reasons for the Bush proposed ABM in Eastern Europe was to show US support for the newly free governments in that region. Poland and the Czechs saw that intention and strongly welcomed it. The idea of NATO expansion was to directly counter Russian attempts at future control of that region. We also maintain(ed) bases in the oilandgas-istans with the intention of hoping that a US presence would allow them to maintain their independence. The question is what does our President do should Russia start to reclaim its empire? As always it is our allies that should be nervous.

To: ahhaha who wrote (14802)	9/21/2009 12:05:12 PM
From: grusum	Respond to of 24758

obeyme doesn't know how to handle the office he holds. A: "Is there a right way to hold it?" with a far reaching understanding of the implications of everything one does while in office, along with the determination to do the very best job one can for his country. -------------------- A: "He and Bush have a fundamentally different way of looking at things. When Reagan took office he treated Carter the same way DM treated Bush." i know reagan took the solar panels off the white house and brought back the ceremonial guard, but didn't notice any condescending treatment of carter by him. reagan simply made a statement 'you were wrong'.. -------------- to his latest gaff of giving up the defense shield in poland for nothing. not even a popsicle and a bag of chips. A: "That's an ok move reflecting fundamental different view. It's hard to justify the expense of such a shield. What does it yield except makework?" it would yield more trust with our allies. we went back on a promise. much of what politicians get the military to do is makework unless they're attacking or defending something. it's always up for debate whether anything the military does is cost effective. anyway, the main point is that it seems he got nothing in return but putin's 'good will'. --------- he's dangerous. A: "He's dangerous because he hasn't shown that he can go against his party, the people, aliens, in order to lead. That's true of all presidents. I think you'd agree that media has the people sucking on a pack of lies. In order to solve problems a leader must go against the pack and figure out solutions independent of imposing influences. We are vulnerable until he can go." yes, he hasn't shown any true leadership yet. ---------------- russia and china had better be careful. A: "Those two running dog capitalists have nothing to worry about although Russia has a gang problem a la LA. The socialist nations had better be careful or they will be buried in BRICKs." we still have a lot of nuclear weapons. obeyme has his finger on the button. for some reason he scares me more than any other president. -------------- he could make moves that they don't expect and have no choice in their minds but to respond with force A: "What is he doing so that they need to respond with force? They're going to move first in anticipation?" no, they would move in reaction. he has done nothing yet. and the odds might be small that he will, but the odds seem orders of magnitude greater for miscalculation than any other modern president that i can think of. ------------- or he might respond with force when it really isn't needed. putin is surely licking his chops now, A: "Putin is busy making himself into a $billionaire by stealing a good chunk of Russia's wealth. Why does he need to divert resources to a hopeless cause? What can Russia gain by launching a preemptive attack on some unknown country? Russia, like the US, depends heavily upon the slavery of the rest of the world. Putin wouldn't attack those sending him dollars." that's the best case scenario and i hope it's true. but i believe that putin is a patriot to his country much more than obeyme is to ours. ------------- but this president is too unpredictable to mess with. A: "So far, he's been reliably predictable." i was being kind when i said he was unpredictable. i should have said what i really felt.. that he is stupid. he will make stupid mistakes. the manifestation of stupidity is seldom predictable in what will actually manifest. only the stupidity itself is predictable. -------------- his judgement in everything has proven to be really, really bad. A: "What has he judged? enacted? created?" he has judged all races.. "typical white folk". i wouldn't use the word enacted, however he has approved various bailouts such as 'cash for clunkers' and the like. he created a brand new 'government motors' when he fired the CEO of a private company. i'd say his lack of good judgement is apparent for all to see. ----------- A: "'crats know down deep they have nothing. They cling to the hope that an alternative to the previous admin will carry them on through. DM is desperately looking for something that will work, because so far, nothing has. Nothing can either. "... not in our stars, but in ourselves", is the problem." yes. ----------- A: "The US has been in a "recession" for 15 years. It's in a recession because labor priced itself out and FED allowed it. (Congress 'crats created Dual Mandate, so in order to save the US from Congress, FED gives the 'crats what they want, lotsa money.) The price of labor doesn't rise when FED keeps interest high. If AG didn't want a free market in money, then he had to keep rates artificially high, starting in 1995. Instead, he kept them artificially low because his Keynesian friends bid him to do it. The artificiality propped up employment with the help of tax cutting so that labor's falling value was hidden. Employment has to fall to get value to rise. There's nothing DM can do except, go against his party, change his stars, by cutting tax on capital and corporations." thank you for explaining this. -------------- A: "If he doesn't the alternative is what we have now, or worse." i fear worse. sometimes you almost seem like an optimist to me.