What Are the Consequences of Obama Failing?
- Thread starter SirJosephPorter
- Start date
That is easy, darkbeaver. Obama’s mission is to turn the economy around, to clean up the monumental mess left by the Republicans. Obama and the Democrats will be judged by that and that alone.
If by the middle of next year the economy has turned around and things are looking up, Democrats will have a good election, with only modest losses. If the economy is still in the tank (or heaven forbid, got worse), Democrats take a bath in November 2010.
Modest losses?.. Anytime you employ the word 'trillion' in the same sentence as deficit, there is no such thing as a modest loss anymore.
As far as your other contributions in the past few posts; it is clear that you will see only what you want regardless of the macro-environment that surrounds us all.
Good luck to you - doubtless, you will need to rely heavily on it.
As far as your other contributions in the past few posts; it is clear that you will see only what you want regardless of the macro-environment that surrounds us all.
Good luck to you - doubtless, you will need to rely heavily on it.
Well then, in that case I feel supremely confident in answering that he will fail and spectacularly so. There is nothing absolutely nothing he can do to turn the global economy arround even if it were the fault of the one party with the two faces system, those clowns control zip. I hope you got your gold shopping done. Don't wait too long SJP we would miss you dearly if your puter was reposesed.:smile:
No doubt that is what conservative Republicans hope for, their fondest wish is to see unemployment at 25% and inflation at 20% come November 2010, so they can win in 2010.
Anyway if you indeed are a conservative (and I don’t know you enough to know if you are or not) and you indeed feel that way, you may wish to prepare for the biggest celebration of your life. If you are right, the fondest dream, the heart felt wish of conservatives will come true, USA will be in a deep depression come next November.
I hope you got your gold shopping done.
Darkbeaver a savvy, experienced investor has a well diversified portfolio, and I am no exception. In addition to having stocks, bonds, mutual funds, money market funds, limited partnerships etc in my portfolio, I also have a significant amount of gold.
Most of it was bought around 250 to 300 $ an ounce. I have South African Krugerands, Canadian Maple Leaf gold coins (both have one ounce of pure gold each) and several gold bullions (again one ounce each).
A while ago the wife wanted to make jewellery out of some of them, and I said OK. Gold retains its value even after making it into jewellery.
So while I don’t share your pessimism (I personally think things will turn around by next year), I do have investment in gold.
Darkbeaver a savvy, experienced investor has a well diversified portfolio, and I am no exception. In addition to having stocks, bonds, mutual funds, money market funds, limited partnerships etc in my portfolio, I also have a significant amount of gold.
Most of it was bought around 250 to 300 $ an ounce. I have South African Krugerands, Canadian Maple Leaf gold coins (both have one ounce of pure gold each) and several gold bullions (again one ounce each).
A while ago the wife wanted to make jewellery out of some of them, and I said OK. Gold retains its value even after making it into jewellery.
So while I don’t share your pessimism (I personally think things will turn around by next year), I do have investment in gold.
That is about 180 degrees off how I remember it. But then what to I know ?I'm only a libertarian logger and never watch fox news, preferring truth over fear mongering.
So while I don’t share your pessimism (I personally think things will turn around by next year), I do have investment in gold.
You would be better off investing in B.C. bud. Much better medium of exchange. At least out here.
You would be better off investing in B.C. bud. Much better medium of exchange. At least out here.
''Obama’s mission is to turn the economy around, to clean up the monumental mess left by the Republicans. Obama and the Democrats will be judged by that and that alone.''
100% correct.
We certainly did not have these problems during the Clinton years.
100% correct.
We certainly did not have these problems during the Clinton years.
We certainly did not have these problems during the Clinton years.
Reagan and Bush Sr. made sure that everything was running tickity-boo. (I think that Bush new that Clinton was a womanizer and would dedicate his presidency to hitting-on the interns - Bush worked extra hard so Clinton wouldn't have to)
Reagan and Bush Sr. made sure that everything was running tickity-boo. (I think that Bush new that Clinton was a womanizer and would dedicate his presidency to hitting-on the interns - Bush worked extra hard so Clinton wouldn't have to)
I think that Bush new that Clinton was a womanizer and would dedicate his presidency to hitting-on the interns - Bush worked extra hard so Clinton wouldn't have to
Captain, do you mean that Bush worked extra hard at womanizing, so that Clinton won’t have to?
Captain, do you mean that Bush worked extra hard at womanizing, so that Clinton won’t have to?
The road to riches is littered with the broken bodies of diversified portfolio warriors SJP. Still it is the warriors way to look only forward and fight the good fight to the end. I have never invested in anything I couldn't eat drink or charm into bed.:smile:
The comment is crystal clear SJP... If you're having any difficulties with reading comprehension, let me know and we'll get you some help.
SJP,
I'm just a little curious about your investing advice. What exact role does a limited partnership play in your portfolio?
I played the market for years and have yet to come across an LP as an investment opportunity.
A quick piece of advice for you... The underlying premise that 'savvy' investors subscribe to seeks to make their money/assets work as hard as possible for them... You should give that idea some serious thought.
I'm just a little curious about your investing advice. What exact role does a limited partnership play in your portfolio?
I played the market for years and have yet to come across an LP as an investment opportunity.
A quick piece of advice for you... The underlying premise that 'savvy' investors subscribe to seeks to make their money/assets work as hard as possible for them... You should give that idea some serious thought.
There are several types of limited partnerships, Captain. Some provide a steady revenue stream, while others function as tax shelter and defer your taxes by (typically) ten years.
There used to be something called mutual fund limited partnerships, they used to give a return of 15 to 20% annually over the duration of the partnership (typically 15 to 20 years). But I am afraid it was too much of a good thing (it depended upon getting a hefty tax deduction, that is how most limited partnerships work), CRA put a stop to that. I used to possess a fair amount of those. I had two Templeton mutual fund limited partnerships, they expired just last year.
Then there are partnerships based upon movie industry, there are flow through shares etc.(which invest in oil exploration ). A limited partnership can be formed in just about any sector. The most popular currently are the flow through shares.
But limited partnerships are good investments only for high income earners, since they assume that you are going to get tax deductions at the maximum rate (if you get deductions at less than maximum rate, then your rate of return is not as attractive any more).
I assume that you are referring to LP's from an equity perspective (resources or real estate).. These I am familiar with although I (personally) do not equate that with general securities like stocks (which, to a degree represent a form of LP).
Sounds like you are a fan of mutual funds. Not to sound overly negative, but that game is (in my mind) based on a system that may go the way of subprime mortgages. They had gotten so big (funds like AIM, Invesco and Templeton) that they have transformed into 'the market'... I won't go into the details, but I am close with a former senior manager of one such fund and they are scared sh*tless.
Think about applying any capital losses against your income to bump-up revenues... You have a 5 year window to do such and with the waythe markets have been over the last couple of years, now may be the time.
Sounds like you are a fan of mutual funds. Not to sound overly negative, but that game is (in my mind) based on a system that may go the way of subprime mortgages. They had gotten so big (funds like AIM, Invesco and Templeton) that they have transformed into 'the market'... I won't go into the details, but I am close with a former senior manager of one such fund and they are scared sh*tless.
Think about applying any capital losses against your income to bump-up revenues... You have a 5 year window to do such and with the waythe markets have been over the last couple of years, now may be the time.
People always blame the party in power for economic failures, when it is really the World Bank as well as Federal Reserve who are responsible (non governmental entities). Political parties only create laws that allow them to get away with it. It has been going on since 1913. May as well blame President Wilson (Democrat 1912) and all others after him.
Sounds like you are a fan of mutual funds. Not to sound overly negative, but that game is (in my mind) based on a system that may go the way of subprime mortgages.
I did not say mutual funds, Captain. I said mutual fund limited partnership, which is a totally different thing. Or rather was. As I said, it was too much of a good thing, CRA clamped down on it. They stopped allowing the tax deductions, so the whole thing dies out about 7 or 8 years ago. There may be a few in existence (their life time is usually 15 to 20 years), but I assume they haven’t issued new ones for many years now.
Mutual fund limited partnership was very attractive, they used to return 15 to 20% annually over the life of the partnership. Originally the brokers used to keep it for themselves, it was so good. Later they started handing them out to their investors.
Most of these issues used to be subscribed to the fullest shortly after they were issued. But this has nothing to do with mutual funds (although they made use of mutual funds).
I did not say mutual funds, Captain. I said mutual fund limited partnership, which is a totally different thing. Or rather was. As I said, it was too much of a good thing, CRA clamped down on it. They stopped allowing the tax deductions, so the whole thing dies out about 7 or 8 years ago. There may be a few in existence (their life time is usually 15 to 20 years), but I assume they haven’t issued new ones for many years now.
Mutual fund limited partnership was very attractive, they used to return 15 to 20% annually over the life of the partnership. Originally the brokers used to keep it for themselves, it was so good. Later they started handing them out to their investors.
Most of these issues used to be subscribed to the fullest shortly after they were issued. But this has nothing to do with mutual funds (although they made use of mutual funds).
Do you know that one gold wedding ring produces twenty tons of waste, much of it toxic. I hope the gold collectors are going to pay for the damage.
Mutual funds have served me well for over 40 years BUT you have to keep an eye on things and know a little bit more about some aspects than your financial advisor does or at least is willing to impart to you. It took me over 30 years to learn and have done poorly on a couple of funds- my fault, wouldn't happen like that again. Most important rule of thumb is buy low, sell high and you'll never regret buying them. SEcond most important rule have a minimum 5 year time horizon.