jackson33

Bonus payment are rewards for above average performance...Some do offer Xmas, longevity or a form of a bonus on retirement, which have largely been replaced with 401 or some retirement package... Many Companies, apparently where your employed award each employee according their pay from some projected point in growth, either based on actual profits or the price of their stock. The vast majority however base bonuses strictly on performance. Sales, Truck Drivers to virtually all involved in managing money are directed to individual performance. This is where I think confusion is, with regards to AIG. To tie your last statement above; Of all the thousands who were eligible to EARN a bonus (all under contract) very few actually did earn (bad year) and those that did were and are the best and brightest, at least in performance. Obviously most any Company looking for talent, in this area would be happy to have those individuals and add the potential for AIG to become solvent or in the future pay any bonus, has already led to many resignations.

The 27th A, was proposed 9/27/1789 (not a typo) and was one of the 12 original, 10 of which called our Bill of Rights. Interest in reviving the Bill came about by States trying to keep their legislatures from voting themselves pay raises. Between 1978 and 1992, 33 States ratified this Bill and it became the 27th A, discontinuing of pay raises for members of any current Legislature. You can only throw your own 'bum' (HOUSE of Representatives), or your two senators over a six year period. All the 'bums' play this fact and do whats needed to maintain their office, if they really want to...That "tiny" fraction of the government happens to make ALL the legislation, provide oversight (as desired) and since even the House is dependent of the Senate those 100 people, hold more power than the Executive Branch or in fact the Judicial, IMO. ecoli; I agree with you, that very few people understand the Capitalist System or what it takes to achieve success, including most all members of Government or in the general public. Probably less than .001% of any sector becomes a household name, while the majority fail along the line, go bankrupt taking their money and bankers/investors to some degree along with them. Dr DNA; While I follow and agree with your argument for Chapter 11, not only for AIG, but for the Banking failures last year, Fannie/Freddy were backed by the Federal Government and the resulting problems IMO. Congress, Bush/Paulson and the problems seen Sept/Oct, were not seen or could have been and the original thoughts were more to averting rather than fixing a problem. Said another way F/F couldn't or can't just go Chapter 11. One example, I like to use for recovery under Chapter 11, since somewhat involved myself, was Best Products, a retail brick and mortar Company which began to fail in the late 1980's. Lots of folks lost money, jobs and many others were never satisfied, but they came back as BEST BUY, becoming the 1990's number one stock investment for that decade. They now have several times the original stores and employ many times what had been lost and even today are strong, say to their competitor Circuit City, which just files Chapter 7.... Who ever said the 'Bill of Attainder' can't apply to AIG; IMO, Fox's Napolitano and a few dozen others, it most certainly does apply and you should hope it's upheld. Congress cannot arbitrary approach any group or individual for any reason, ESPECIALLY when receiving Federal Funds. I would grant you it is done by agreement (arguably illegal) or that they (Congress) can pass laws for all people (inflicting more harm on some than others) but they have no business accusing or establishing punishment, with out due process.

Obama has the same privileges of any President...with regards to establishing EO. http://deanesmay.com/2009/01/25/obama-supports-warrantless-wiretaps/ Will you continue your opposition "warrentless spying" for the next four years...

That's the scary point, I've been trying to make. However, if Congress and AIG had an agreement/Contract, then yes. Not only was there an agreement to ALLOW Bonus Payments, already under contract, Congress cannot request an illegal action, that is to break previous contracts. You drive a car/truck with a seat belt on or are subject to being fined and you buy liability insurance to get a license plate. These two and a hundred other law were enacted by States, if not thousands, that were attached to acceptance of State Funds from the Federal, which the States sent to them to begin with. A couple tid-bits on Federal Funds. Keep in mind I opposed the Bush/Paulson plan, feeling trying to establish any artificial bottom in a market, could only create a delay, not cure the problem. Markets were already below the value of AIG then and I don't care what their trying to do, NO Company that had an absolute top Market Value of 160-170 Billion, would ever be capable of paying back 30 Billion, much less 165 Billion in a hundred years, then with interest... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIG

Years ago most States had what's called an 'Inventory Tax', where at years end the inventory of product on hand was taxed. Think about 15 States still have some form of this. Your CEO story probably stems from this, as near years end inventories were transfered between States with this tax to ones w/o or if none, would be en route during inventory, usually Jan. first. Individual stores would play the same game, selling down over the Xmas holidays and restocking after there inventory. You would be surprised by how much was saved or how rail/truck traffic increased in December... Since you feel, a share holder (large or small, ie individual or government, which is illegal to begin with in the US) should be allowed to manage any public corporation by it's investment, would you be happy for a foreign government managing the US Government, if they held -X- amount of the public debt. Would you think the business you work for, have any say in your activity outside the workplace, or where you spend your dollars. Even when you barrow money for say a house or car, the institution is limited to what requirements may be and in all CASES there must be a written agreement to any restrictions. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged You would have to give me an example of what "Bush's outright abuse of EO" means to you. If it relates to 'In times of War' thats about the quickest means to some action. 'Faith Based Initiatives' or other domestic orders are, were and will be (until thrown out) subject to legal action. Maybe it's simple complacency, but any person or business effected by any EO, has the individual right to contest any action stemming from that order (many of GWB's EO have been contested)... Yes, all recent President's when taking office should and do go through previous executive orders, from ALL remaining ones in the books from the former President's (not just the latest). They have the right to revise or set aside (throw out) anything they dislike and this is with out recourse by anyone.

The Paulson plan was basically a loan, by buying Preferred Stock, which is equal to any large investors opportunity. Buffett holds billion in PS, getting up to 10% interest. However, I did not agree with that program either, especially when they pulled back on the seen effects stopping the use of half the allocated 700B funds. I haven't the slightest idea what the Guitner plan is or how it's going to do any more than Paulson's and still don't agree... The Bear's Key; I realize, Obama is mixing words and apparently campaigning a little early for 2012. but outright rage and the insinuation of action against AIG and their policy, legal or not, is not in his job description. Frankly most everything he has been saying HE WILL do is not his prerogative. He is welcome to suggest to congress or ask the Justice Department to check something out (with in limitations), sign executive orders or any number of otherwise illegal means, but has no authority to enforce his own actions. Saying any State that does NOT comply with the demands of the Stimulus Program will be held accountable by HIM, is pure nonsense, IMO. Pangloss; I know, I am on the wrong side this AIG thing even with conservatives. I happen to believe in Law and the Constitution and the idea Federal Government was never intended to be involved with business or todays Corporate World, especially the executive. As for getting hurt, it's already happened and probably to whatever the limits would have been if the Government just let the market do it's thing. Another viewpoint; http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2009/feb/08/obama-is-overreaching/

It's called Constitutional Authority and if this junk was going on between members of two different parties, would be tested to the SC. Executive Branch; To enforce law... Legislative; To legislate law, with authority of oversight of those laws. Judicial; To interpret law. Obama is acting as if he had oversight, authority and does not, nor does the he have authority over any business activity. Congress can call on Business to explain, whatever they want with regards to future, pending or actual legislation, but lack the authority for enforcement. Since their now saying, any given AIG Bonus, will be taxed 93-100% is NOT under any legal authority. If AIG took the money, with that agreement, we would have a different situation. NO, the rest of my post, sets up precedence which can effect every American and very much part of what's happening to AIG today. There is no difference in my taxes paying Joe Six Pack for any reason, or loaning AIG money, other than there is an expectation of getting AIG money back... Pangloss; I realize you are concerned about tax dollars, assume most including media are as well, however laws are still laws. Government, short of some legal action done through the legal system (Jusice Dept.), should have no authority outside of an agreement/contract. Many people have bought up stock in one or another Company, in hopes of gaining some control. A seat on the Board of Directors, influencing some action or a number of things and have failed, sell their stock and move on. Government IMO should never be allowed to buy up any or all of any business for any purpose. Think you have indicated this, but AIG should have been left alone to fail, good assets would have been bought up, bad ones and those holding them taking the loss. IMO....

Sodomy laws were outlawed Nationally in 2003. These laws have meant many things to different jurisdictions over the years, but were not solely directed to homo-sexual acts, rather acts by heterosexual couples. Since the implied acts required for sexual activity of two women or two men would require sodomy, the idea of Civil Unions could not be considered, legally. Factually, straight couples and/or gay couples, have always sodomized each other in normal sexual activity. For instance Bill Clinton was impeached (not convicted)for lying about an act of sodomy...

Isn't current thought for altering a course of an object, to place mass (assume in some spacecraft) near the object and letting that created gravity on the object change its course. Think that's where "years" come in...Last I heard a potential impact 2029 return visit 2036 is being planned in this manner. As for space debris on earths ozone, we are showered daily with tons of the stuff, not all dust, actually cleaning areas for new ozone forming, inside a month. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V3S-450KJGS-16&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=a1affa0a940f09b2e156b9c06414a951 If an impact was eminent without time to divert trajectory, say weeks out, wouldn't destruction be more plausible than leaving it alone. If big enough to wipe out Berlin, I hardly think the remnants of a blasted meteor would destroy Europe. Much would be diverted initially, with much of the remaining burning up in Earths atmosphere.

AIG, is still a public company, beholding to their stock holders. Public opinion therefore may cause obedience to Mr. Cuomo's demand, but making payroll public by any business, Corporate or not is against the law. As for contract obligation, these people would be in position to sue for due wages, hardly what you want your best and brightest to be doing. As for Obama telling the public, he is having a member of his administration placing pressure on AIG, is as illegal as you can get, none of his business or in his authority and will backfire. Every person receiving any welfare or frankly most on SS, disability or unemployment would be subject to what they can or cannot do with that money or other money in their hands. Telling Joe Six Pack, he cannot spend to buy beer or smokes with his check, is about the same percentage of cost involved. Another thing bothering me about this stupid mess, is how government is diminishing every industry in the country. Today, EVERY market in the world was up, the US (except NASDAQ-Small Business) was up and until this issue and his visions for small business were digested the markets dropped. The man needs to shut up on every little minor news item and forget campaigning, until things straighten out. Talk about competency...bascule, this is IN MY OPINION.

Not trying to explain Mallett's theory; IMO he feels warping time, involves placing the Craft (stable, not flying) into the realm of tachyons, a thought entity that is not restricted to C (speed of sound). My personal interest here was the restriction (something must IMO) to energy waves. His interest the warping of space-time or drawing the future and/or past into the same realm. If you are interested in further understanding his ideas, after reviewing the wiki post, particularly 'Modern Interpretations', google *Ronald Mallett*, where several videos and explanations are offered by him...Good luck... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyon

Anything not legal, cannot be legalized by entering into a contract. That is if illegal by nature, the contract cannot be valid. Until 2003, Sodomy was questionable or illegal in most all US Jurisdictions. Same Sex Unions or any other similar relationship would/could not be addressed. This holds true for other laws today, including retardation, statutory incest or a number of the various State requirements for marriage/unions, age of consent etc... http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/161044 Gives you an idea on States attitudes over the years and the final nail on Sodomy acceptance, though still argued in the courts... This however is not the point of this thread, which interest me. If the changing of the simple word 'marriage' was changed to accommodate individuals rather than any particular classification, for all recognition, benefits and obligations to the Federal Government, the end result would go to States and where I feel the issue belongs... Frankly iNow, you or any proponent of SSM should be all over this idea. If the matter is addressed by Congress, attempting to make it a Federal Obligation, in todays climate would end up Amendment #28, Limiting Recognition to one and one and would be ratified by 38 States IMO...

When ever I see this topic, it reminds me of Dr. Ronald Mallett, a professor at the University of Connecticut, who has spent is life on MACHINE time travel. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Mallett The BBC made a documentary on his ideas, think about 2003. It's the story of why that most interested me then, trying to go back in time, to help heal his Dad who had died of a heart attack when he was quite young. Unfortunately, if he is correct time travel by machine would be from the times the machines are developed, which stems off on 'Stargate' Science Fiction. The general ideas are also based on warping time or bending space-time and highly speculative. http://heroeswiki.com/Space-time_manipulation As for worm holes, speeding some human to or past light speed ©, or the memorable Star Trek, returning a Whale to Planet Earth, it's extremely unlikely in my opinion. Worm holes if they exist, would be connected the an existing Black hole, which is pure speculation and not likely to be accessible to any human during whatever times we exist. Distances involved and the human structure are just not up to the task. IMO, if traveling in time, by machine is ever achieved it will be in the form of transferring information (one way), very much like we already study what's happened during the visible light from the distant past. We do this daily with our radio waves...

Jim Cramer, is a former 'Hedge Fund' manager, having made a few billion during the 'Tech Bubble' crash(1999-2000), shorting Tech stocks and made billions for other investors, has been more accurate than most. He currently cannot hold stock having joined CNBC several years ago, but continues to control his own 'Charity Trust Fund', now suffering along with the rest of us. While I rarely agree with him, primarily for his Northeastern Liberal philosophy (Strong supporter of Spitzer, who took down several Corporate Executives before becoming Governor and so on...) and his general attitudes on other issues (bailout of individuals who made bad loans) he is as knowledgeable as any Market Annalist reporting today. He works for GE, the parent company of NBC and then CNBC. What would seemingly be a contradiction of my own comments, one of his 'Themes' is the CEO 'Hall of Shame'. The CEO of GE, Jeffrey R. Emmett has never been on this list of ten, while GE has tumbled in both value and reputation for years since the last CEO Jack Welch retired. So do all reporters working for CNBC or for that matter NBC, there reporters including the Nightly News with Brian Williams, all of which have been under fire for one thing or another. To shorten, I might suggest you looks to President Obams adviser and who is advising him on business affairs, Jeffrey R Imett. Pangloss; Of course, media can influence public opinion and has forever. It's only more obvious today with all the alternative information available. However any one on one debate should only be judged on full knowledge of the debaters. Cramer knew what he was in for and should have passed, others did. Why he went ahead, I don't know, but think I have laid out the probabilities.

Interesting twist, since there are already many siblings living as a couple today, using the same arguments G/L use for their behavior and by definition was instituted for religious reasons alone, later adding some potential health effects. In commune style societies, (Fundamentalist LDS, Amish and others), segmented Ethnic Groups (Asian/Muslim and others) or just small town USA, marriages are often between first cousin and no one cares... I voted the other day for government to discontinue the wording 'Marriage', ironically for this reason, but not necessarily doing sex. Years ago, my folks lived in Green Valley Az. and had friends in Sun City, a suburb of Phoenix. Of the 70k homes, probably more now, are thousands of older folks living together who had lost their life long spouse, but living with another person out of marriage, were not sexually active and very much part of the neighborhood. In meeting a good many married couples, it was surprising to note how many didn't even use the same bedroom, much less bed. Others just brought an elderly parent in and others their dysfunctional child. The number of actually married couples in some of these places would surprise anyone, I believe. California's domestic partnership system, fits these folks and many already can take advantage of some benefits and in my mind this is a good thing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_partnership If the Federal recognized DP, including SS whether unions or partnerships (that is the benefits/deductions/legal issues) the end result would be a dramatic drop in Nursing Home/Assisted Living residents. Another topic, but conditions in these place can be horrible. Since most individuals already receive some form of assistance, their own SS, survivors benefits or from their own or deceases spouse's retirement plan, the cost to the Federal would be very little. Thread; I like the results so far on this issue and for a change I believe it reflects US Society as a whole. Those responsible for voting down SS recognition in 2000-2008, IMO felt something was being forced on them or their own marriages were being diminished, but I do think the American Society is acceptable to a Federal Government being tolerant to all it's citizens. That is no result, would change a thing in their lives...ie then fine... Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged First, I don't think the US should follow any other National Trend and certainly not on Human Rights. While the EU and Canada have or are changing attitudes those with the majority of the worlds population are not and probably are centuries from any change. A quick check found these Nation in opposition; China, India, the Continent of Africa (except So Africa) and Russia. Sharia Law forbids the acts involved and punishments range to death and most of the 58 Islamic States have yet to give Women any rights. one example; http://gaylife.about.com/od/samesexmarriage/ig/Gay-World-Tour.--_7/Gay-World-Tour---Russia.htm While I agree religion should have no say in our Federal Legal system, it's still made up of Religious people. However I would bet, those same people would be acceptable to a simple word change over redefining their personal beliefs. Best of both worlds, so to speak...

Not correct; I am not sure who "everyone" is, but my point has always been the Markets (all of them) are not happy with POLICY Obama has been suggesting and now implementing. That the drop is IN PART a precursor to what those few involved will take the economy at some future point in time... As for other indicators outside the markets, opinion polls reflect CURRENT satisfaction or disapproval with the same policy. It's my understanding these polls are now trending down at historic speeds... http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123690358175013837.html waitforufo; Bull market rallies are common, especially when their are no discernible means to explain. It could be shorts selling into profits, but their are plenty of day traders out there and play those shorts, not trading in shorts. Another current factor maybe China's apparent activity, along with other growing economies like Brazil. Our DOW components have a very high presence in China and virtually every major component of any market has foreign interest. That is the DOW could easily top 8500 or 9000, never reflecting our American economy. So long as increased Taxes, small business earning 200-500k filing regular returns and Corporate Taxes which are simply passed on (inflation) are planned, Business will not expand or will the consumer return. Remember also 'capital gains' (market activity) is based on the loss/gains over the year and no one is holding back for probably gains, with current loses (average investors). iNow; I'll accept your argument as opposition to my opinions, not ParinoiA and argue, the markets do reflect a perceived future results of those policy. It would be my pleasure to admit error, apologize to everyone, possibly even contributing to Obama 2012 Campaign if the markets rebound under a Capitalist Government (opposed to government owned anything), unemployment rebounds to 2006 levels, inflation is somehow held in check under 5%, total US tax burdens drop back under 50% (combined) and less people are on some form government assistance. Even a combination of some...but I don't see this coming from my limited knowledge of historical government intrusions into the Corporate World...I have not even entered the SS, Medicare/Medicaid or health care pending problems which are still there and will dwarf any current 'so called' crissis... ParinioA; Yes it is the Limbaugh argument and I do agree with him on this...I don't give a hoot about Obama the person, whether he is perceived successful or a failure, but do care about the future of the US and what I have described as my life, my ancestors and the individualism which has made the US a very unique Nation for a couple centuries. Then it's my belief, apparently Limbaugh and maybe a couple others, the policy of Obama with the added current Congress those policies do NOT allow my hopes for my descendent's the same privileges I enjoyed...

The idea behind the 2-to whatever percentage of people involved in actual market transaction, was the trending down in the markets was partially in reaction to future, then Administration policy (Yes, confidence). It's that small percentage and of course there are many other factors involved, but the largest factor in any recession is public 'confidence' or the purchasing consumer. Both have to return, along with foreign investment, reasons to expand or buy up troubled business or assets. Most of which involves that same elite group which are currently setting out. Frankly, blame should go to Bush if for no other reason than taking 'lame duck' to new meanings and the Republican Congress for their actions up to and including the last two Democratic Congress's. Without getting complicated or giving a title to any party philosophy, the best solution to any recovery will come from the private sector IMO. That is 100% at risk capital, not borrowed or printed by government and has the highest potential efficiency levels for activity. When government, Republicans Bush/Paulson or Democrats Polosi/Reid Congress spend 350B of 700B, followed by the the next 350B and each of the other programs, that money is at risk only to the Country itself (Goes under) and efficiency levels are notoriously poor for any US Government... Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged No the stimulus isn't doing anything, new unemployment filings would be going down... It's good news however and based on increasing volumes NYSE 1.8B Shares, Nasdaq 2.5B (both above recent averages) and we didn't have a large Hong Kong gain overnight, must mean something. Would think the real bottom was finally accepted at 7,000 and which I played. Did notice a great deal of 500k to a millions share transactions, which usually means Mutual Funds are transferring in or out of some sector, today seemed to be into GE (on outlook), don't know what out of...Hope for some G-20 action is building and frankly the usual spring weather always helps...We will know more in the morning and it goes to 7500 Friday, Unep claims drops (report in AM) or oil continues to rise, we could get over 8k next week. Lot of 'if's' though... Cramer thinks it's China, most DOW Stocks do have a built in China Play, but I don't agree...

I believe we are on the same page here and kind of like the idea of eliminating the word marriage from legal matters involving anything to do with the Federal Government. States already have the right to RECOGNIZE, whatever they please as legal unions, California having never touched their 1999 'Domestic Partnerships' aka 'Civil Unions under either Prop 22 2000 or Prop 8 in 2008. When you get right down to substance, most any two people are covered under at least one program or another in old age, are obligated to pay taxes whether filing jointly or not. In many cases any same sex couple would probably take a loss to request survivors benefits from SS and employers, many insurance companies are already obliging those needs. Think in 49 States, a Gay person, in many a SS Couple can already legally adopt children or become foster parents. States issue 'Marriage Licenses' purely for the majority and could easily be changed to some other word comparable to 'Drivers' or 'Permit' and Churches could issue whatever they want to conform with their specific religion and most do anyway. As for laws, I may disagree...No law is 100% restrictive or permits 100% of anything. It is simply a guideline for enforcement to act on according to the society the law was written, judged by Courts, Judges and a Jury if needed. Some laws are ignored by the general public (speeding/pot/adultery) or are for practical reason not enforceable in all places. That is I believe the legal system works just fine for the society and times they have existed. If covered before sorry; But freeing of Slaves, really had nothing to do with the majority of Black people in the US. First Slavery was not legal in most States and different States had different rules on freeing slaves, buying or selling of them. In those days and on other issues well into the 20th Century, once a person crossed a State Line, they were then under the laws of that State. Enforcement couldn't cross State Lines to enforce and in many places not even in State County lines. My point, most blacks were not slaves in 1865, many owned land, business, worked for wages and I would suppose married whomever they wanted. To often American's are held to the standards set by some States, their law/action and frankly in many cases well into the 1960-70's as additional Federal Law (Fair Housing/Voters Rights-poll taxes) were enacted. Additionally http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underground_Railroad Side note; Ben Franklin passionately opposed Slavery, wanted to somehow get 'abolition' into the Constitution and would not have been opposed by most the then 13 Colonies. However Virgina (home of Jefferson/Washington and others), a slave State was the power in the Country in those days. Even the first ten ratified amendments and required to get the Constitution Ratified, in most part came from the Virgina Constitution, ironically which came from the English Magna Carta in 1215 or so... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Carta

Good question correlation is when markets move in tandem; http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/charts/chartdl.aspx?D4=1&ViewType=0&D5=0&CP=0&PT=5&CE=0&&ShowChtBt=Refresh+Chart&DateRangeForm=1&3=0&PeriodType=5&Symbol=%24INX&C9=0&DisplayForm=1&ComparisonsForm=1 Causation, other wise known a reason, is when something that has no historical precedent happens. The NASDAQ dropped OUT of correlation in 1999/2000 but had a defined causation. When markets drop IN correlation, not only our three US majors, but around the world the causation cannot be market internals...

INSTILL CONFIDENCE...He is the leader of this country,all the people, not the Democratic Party. I have no idea how many President's have used that line when going against the voters that got them elected (base). IMO, Obama will have to suffer some real defeats from Congress or more likely some World Powers, before he realizes some of his advisor's are not concerned about a second term, if in fact he is...China, Brazil and a few other markets are already showing signs of increased activity and to the upside. The G-20 meeting April 2nd will determine a great deal of what others are doing, much of which is not in the Obama outline... The GDP in 1929 and 1939 were was the same. near 1-T (up and downs through the years) and Clinton was held to the Republican Congress, which was fiscally responsible in those days. Clinton did increase GDP and I've already condemned the Rep Congress under Bush and he not using the VETO. ecoli; He (Obama/Congress) wouldn't have to reduce taxes, but simply extend the current rate (brackets) say another 10 years. I would bet a 2000 point gain in the DOW and more important a 4-500 point increase in the S&P 500 with in one week...remember confidence. waitforufo; I hope you noted, my mention of "401's and other retirement funds" and "Mutual Funds" which are most all held by the less than elite. On this, some in Congress are suggesting taking 401's away from personal control or managers, placing them under IRS and giving them an inflationary increase each year. Don't think it has a chance of being enacted, but even the talk of such nonsense has many worried. According to Jim Cramer, think about Oct. of 2008, money was going to T-Bills/Bonds. This would include Corporate 'cash on hand' which is still quite high in most cases and requires reporting each quarter. No one in the markets with half a brain, other than those that short the markets, will pay any 'Capital Gains' for 2008. All I had to do was sell one Stock last September and still ended up with a carry over loss. Dividends and Interest will be down at least 50% over 2007 on rates paid alone. Most sellers of real estate, homes, farms to business were from distress and will have a carry over for years. I expect 2009 Federal Revenues to be down 10-15 in total (where 2008 tax money hits the books) and I expect the reason Obama will retroactively (Jan. 2009) increase taxes on everyone (Clinton 2000 rates/brackets).

To refresh your memory, the point of this thread was this portion of the first post, no insinuations, no agenda, just the simple fact the Rich have pulled out of the markets...It would be my opinion, Obama has shown no Company/Corporation or the investor (here/ worldwide) any reason to get back in or promote confidence, referring to recent comments by Obama advocates and/or voters who are the elite rich...Jack Welch, Warren Buffet, Jim Cramer the head of Intel and many others. To the other ramblings... The trending direction of the Equity markets or for that matter any market (commodity, money etc) or those involved is not determined by the days news or market activity. Mutual Funds which are long range by nature and involve most all 401's, or the many retirement funds, including Unions Retirement Funds are managed by people looking at various time lines down the road. That may be a few minutes for any day trader, but the majority is based on a couple months to several years and adjustments are made monthly based on their observation of a future. Hedge Funds unfortunately are primarily funded by the elite rich and do make money, based on the perceived future economy in either direction and since mid-2007 have made fortunes. Everything, regardless of political influence has indicated since Oct. 2007, that these perceptions were going down hill and I'll offer one viewpoint made then. Your welcome to compare the dire comments, with the then factors but all those factors would be greatly appreciated today... http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2006/12/economic_review.html What caused the original downturn I will speculate on in the interest of opposing dialog... http://nwrepublican.blogspot.com/2008/10/hud-says-illegal-aliens-hold-5-million.html In October of 2008, HUD made this announcement, which no doubt had been known for many years, but certainly back to June of 2007 when GWB made his big move for 'Immigration Reform', which would have been very difficult for any Republican to make. EXCEPT the business community with 3-4% unemployment rates was in need of workers and many of which already knowingly using that workforce...for whatever reason. That is the estimated 12-20 million, illegals could NOT be replaced by the 3-4% unemployed, if they would even take those jobs. Note; I realize things have changed today. Paulson replaced John Snow as Secretary of the Treasury, who left under less than some agreed to reason in July 2006. Paulson was with Goldman Sach's in 1974 and CEO 12/1994 to 6/1998, had intimate relations with the Chinese Elite (Wikipedia Paulson Bio), visiting there country over 70 times and maintained those relationships. Back on topic...By Nov. 2006, it was obvious (vote over) Congress was going to be under Democratic Control. Mergers/Acquisitions and Restructuring, which had been strong (reason for market increases) and peaked in 2006 and early 2007, virtually coming to an end by 2008. Even Sirius Radio, near bankruptcy with XM Radio which was bankrupt took over a year for the Democratic Congress to approve. http://investor.sirius.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=230306. Yes the markets started a decline in Oct. 2007, from the record high, and no Obama was not then the cause. Congress was left of center, at least their leaders Polosi/Reid and from the time anyone considered Obama the only person on the planet left of Reid at the time, had a potential chance of becoming President, the Markets, Investors and Business themselves were cutting back, which became exaggerated as the potential increased to pending and finally taking office. I'll add he was directing media and some policy long before taking office Dec 2008 and Jan 2009. What he has failed to do IMO, is offer any reason, rhetoric or action, to cause all those 'Elite Rich' otherwise known as investors to join back in or invest in the future, to say nothing of the small business owner, which still controls the major job markets. In fact he is going the wrong direction, placing the Worlds largest employer in danger under 'card check'. Wal Mart employs over a million in the US, deals with most manufacturers and is today credited with saving each family 2k dollars, just shopping their stores. From the investor viewpoint; What is now deflation, reduced housing prices, will turn to massive inflation, as artificial bottoms are placed in markets and cost of operations, from labor to taxes and massive debt or increased money supply will generate massive inflation. In case your going to argue Bush did, he also had a massively increasing GDP to work with...

Mokele; These comments were ""generalizations"" on two political policies, diametrically opposed to each other...The issue WAS whether a person could be of one mind on either, and be of one for both.... On your redirection of the topic; Yes, liberal policy (opposed to conservative, not Republican) the ideology is designed around control of human behavior. Taxes have long been used or credits for perceived good or bad behavior. Buy this or that, receive a deduction or pay high taxes or the perception of good or bad for some predetermined reason (health/enviormental)... Specifically on HC (Medicaid/Medicare), Welfare (any program), SS (Disability or unemployment) or any Federal program, there are limitations, requirements/regulations, as to who is eligible for what with books of rules and more important today who all IS eligible for participating.

A 'Fiscal Conservative' believes today in an operation of government with the idea of smaller government, less taxes, less regulation, more efficient and under the limits of the Constitution. Liberal Agenda is defined as involvement in as many aspects of human behavior under Federal Control. Health Care, Welfare, SS and so on...IMO, you cannot be a Fiscal Conservative and simultaneously support a Liberal Agenda. On your abortion, stem cells and GM issues, these are opposed by Religious conservatives, which I have said are 'unfortunately connected'. The reality however, is it's the Liberal Blocks (Latino/Black) that in recent times have blocked these issues, or where acceptance has been slow...Religious viewpoints are not bound to Conservative or Liberal operation of Government... I DO NOT consider Pangloss an advocate for liberalism or disagree with most any of his post. I believe my explanation will be plausible to him, with in the context offered and stand by these views...

In all honesty, I have never heard a Texan make such a comment. I have been asked by some folks from other Countries and have a standard reply, basically I would expect no less from her/him in regards to their country, nor would I condemn their opinions. I have also written a good many post of admirations for other society, including India, China, Europe itself and in particular the 'British Empire', in their periods of greatness, based on what was when the greatest... Assessment of History is based on times it has occurred in. The US from it's founding to at least the 1990's, was a leading force in bringing the World out of the mid evil period of ideology, an idea of tolerance, freedoms to mankind, a sense of personal participation in governing, achievement for just a few examples. Most every person in this Nation has a direct relation to some other Nation, many in their 1st to 3rd generation back, and I would bet not many, if any would deny our system offers more potential than they expected, thought possible or in many cases actually experienced. Millions seek refuse from tyranny or the opportunity to visit, study in, migrate or in some manner learn the culture. Just as many do it illegally, knowing it may be short lived but never in fear of danger. Most these and million more in my opinion that have been here many generation, ARE proud American's and would gladly admit it to any other person. It's the pride I see in others, especially from the past when the US has assisted others in time of war, need or distress and the continuous flow of American's traveling around the world helping other society in the name of their country. My cry for Nationalism, as you put it, is done with the desire my kids and yours will experience no less of that pride and NO I don't thinks it's excessive, but lacking in the ones that should be showing it the most...

IMO; Any person who claims 'Fiscal Responsibility Policy', then proclaims a liberal social agenda, cannot be a conservative. Case in hand would be Mr. Obama, with Mr. Bush 43 not far behind. I don't have the time to explain 'incremental application' and feel you already understand the process. From SS to Welfare and the Accessible Housing Policy of today, or the dozens of issues started by the Federal for some noble or feel good reason or some temporary relief, the programs have continuously expanded, in nearly ALL cases. Socialism, is the intrusion of government into the economical system, whether business itself or in the interest of something else. State Government have always had the choice to control business with in their State. Today we have executive orders and Congressional Mandates, with an occasional activist judge over riding the intend of the founders for State Rights. Having shown the relationship between Cuba or any other Country to that of the US Taxing System (Federal/State) and the high percentages, not including local, sales, gas, or the many secondary taxes, it doesn't take much imagination to determine where that point of no return lays. I am NOT predicting an end to the Country, but an end to what made it great, IMO is in sight...