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.

Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (82388)	9/10/2010 10:52:00 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 149317

"Nothing has been done by anyone to address the real estate problem as it should be addressed, IMO." Actually, since the underlying problem is we have too many homes, 120 were just burned in San Bruno, after a gas explosion. Plus, a bunch burned in Detroit, and they had way too many vacant ones.

To: koan who wrote (82388)	9/10/2010 2:29:37 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

I do not know what Stiglitz is saying? Nothing has been done by anyone to address the real estate problem as it should be addressed, IMO. He is saying that keeping interest rates unnaturally low is diverting investment monies to real estate that could be used in tech or clean energy. If housing were booming, that would make sense but its not. So his argument makes little sense. I would even suggest he does not understand real estate very well. <"What is needed is a quick write-down of the value of the mortgages. Banks will have to recognize the losses and, if necessary, find the additional capital to meet reserve requirements." Click here for a similar sentiment. newser.com; Stiglitz is the most referred to economist in the world and a Nobel prize winning economist. Who cares? Does that mean he never makes mistakes? That's BS. I don't want to argue about Obama. I like a lot of his appointments and I like him 10,000 times better than Bush. I think the difference between you and I tejek, is that I at least try to be objective, fail though I may. I try to find the truth of the matter. I am being objective. Everything Obama does I evaluate. The man doesn't do everything I want the way I want it but what he does do suggests someone who is rational and thinks things through when making the best decision. When it comes to presidents, that makes me very happy. You, on the other hand, seem to look for someone who thinks and acts exactly like you do. When Obama doesn't react the way you think he should, you go ballistic. The classic example is the oil spill in the Gulf. Not for one second did you trust him to do the right thing........you and Stockman were running around like chicken littles, screaming the sky was falling. You and he were absolutely convinced Armageddon had hit the Gulf. Neither of you were reasonable in your assessment....and as its turned out neither of you were correct in your assessment. You say: "I have his back". That is not being objective, that is blind partisonship. Which is fine, I am a yellow dog democrat, but don't try to pass it on as honest debate. When you are the best president in a very long time who is fighting for my interests, oh yeah, I have his back. You bet your damn life I do. This is the first president in my lifetime who has given any real indication of caring for the little guy. He has yet to hit a false note with me. So yeah, I have his back....big time!

To: koan who wrote (82388)	9/10/2010 3:17:39 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

This is from Krugman in his article today: "A decade ago, Japan was a byword for failed economic policies: years after its real estate bubble burst, it was still suffering from chronic deflation and slow growth. Then America had its own bubble, bust and crisis. And these days, Japan’s record doesn’t look that bad to an American eye. Why not? For all its flaws, Japanese policy limited and contained the damage from a financial bust. And the question in America now is whether we’ll do the same — or whether we will take a hard right turn into economic disaster." I don't know of any credible economist who believes Japan did a good job of containing its financial crisis from two decades ago. Not a one. In fact, Japan still languishes today from the rather flaccid policies put into place when they got into financial difficulty then.