Talent on loan from god!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by ozzmdj, Jul 14, 2009.

  1. ozzmdj
    Offline

    ozzmdj Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,163
    Thanks Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Wolf Creek, Missouri
    Ratings:
    +69
    RUSH: Now, interesting here, Robert Samuelson -- one of my favorite economists. He's not as favorite of mine as Professor Hazlett. We all know Professor Hazlett. But Robert Samuelson writes a column now for the Washington Post and in Newsweek, and his Newsweek piece in the July 20th issue is entitled, "How the Mighty Have Fallen -- The rich really aren't like you and me--: They're historically recession-proof. But this time they've been hit hard -- and we may all be the poorer for it," he says. That's the theme of his piece. "With secure jobs and ample incomes, the rich and the near rich are supposed to be insulated from economic slumps. Well, not this time. Many feel fearful, threatened, and impoverished. ... Collateral damage is widespread. Sales at luxury chains have fallen sharply; same-store revenues for Saks Fifth Avenue and Neiman Marcus dropped about 25 percent in recent quarters. Many country clubs are struggling to hold members." Yessssssssssss!

    "In New York's Hamptons, unsold homes reached a 34-month supply early this year at the prevailing sales pace; buyers had hibernated. Economist Susan Sterne, a specialist in consumer spending, calls it 'the demise of luxury... the people who buy $3,000 Gucci handbags. You see it in the luxury-car market and housing.' ... The stereo-type of the rich living mainly off dividends and interest income is increasingly outdated. Many of the wealthy are owners of small businesses whose well-being is -- to some extent -- hostage to the business cycle. ... The criticism usually presumes that if the rich and near rich get less, someone else will get more." You know, the old zero-sum game. Redistribution achieves a better social balance. Sometimes that happens. But sometimes when the rich get less, no one else gets more. Regardless of how the rich earned their money -- trading bonds, performing surgery, starting new companies, providing legal work -- it's no longer so lucrative.

    "The rich get poorer, but no one else gets richer. Society is worse off," and that's what Obama wants. He's nailed it. Without saying it he's nailed what President Obama is out for. "[A] tenth of American families [in 2004] made nearly half of all gifts." That's going to be cut back. Not to mention because of the wealth, but the tax deduction's going to go away for charity. "...George W. Bush's favorable tax changes. But cheering at its eclipse may be premature and misguided. The contradiction is that many of the large gains at the top," rich incomes, "that are routinely deplored also provide the economic fuel for desired spending at the bottom. If the rich -- however defined -- remain stuck in neutral, the overall economy may not do much better." Robert Samuelson. Now, he doesn't say so but this is exactly what the Obama people have in mind. He makes a brilliant point. Everybody thinks if you raise taxes on the rich, somehow that money is going to end up back in the pie and the middle class is going to get richer. That's not going to happen. That's not how it happens. This money is being taken out of the economy. It's being spent ten years down the line. Money that has not even been earned or printed yet, is being spent.
    The Rich Are No Longer Recession-Proof | Newsweek Business | Newsweek.com
     
  2. edthecynic
    Offline

    edthecynic Censored for Cynicism

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
    Messages:
    26,672
    Thanks Received:
    3,087
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,732
    Talent for LYING on loan from Gawwwwd-da.

    November 5, 2008
    RUSH: I hope all your Joe the Plumbers are unemployed in six months! There.

    February 13, 2009
    I Hope the Stimulus Package Fails
    RUSH: I hope it prolongs the recession.

    July 13, 2009
    RUSH: I did not want 10% unemployment and going higher. I did not want people losing jobs. I did not want the economy stagnating. I wanted Obama to fail.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. ozzmdj
    Offline

    ozzmdj Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,163
    Thanks Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Wolf Creek, Missouri
    Ratings:
    +69
    Thank you kook
     
  4. Terry
    Offline

    Terry Shut the $%$ Up!

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    5,222
    Thanks Received:
    1,090
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,091
    Do you listen to Rush on a weekly bases or even montly bases?
     
  5. tigerbob
    Offline

    tigerbob Increasingly jaded.

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Messages:
    6,225
    Thanks Received:
    971
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +972
    Damn - end of the first sentence and already I've lost interest.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,618
    Yes, there is undoubtably something to the observation that things are getting so bad that even the advantaged are frightened by the state of the economy.

    Certainly not all the well off are immune from the problems this economy is causing.

    And, ironically, the more honestly that those well off actually served the people of this economy, the more likely they are to be hurt when it goes South, too.

    At the super-weathy plane of existence the actual numbers (meaning the dollar values of their assets) are practically meaningless, however.

    As long as they control the assets that society depends on outright, their intensic value remains high (relative to everything else).

    Somewhat like those of us who own our homes (outright) who have no desire (or need) to sell them.

    The house is the same, (hence it gives you the same "value in use") regardless of what the market might tell you it's worth.
     
  7. Big Black Dog
    Offline

    Big Black Dog Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    22,930
    Thanks Received:
    5,118
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,757
    Besides bashing Rush, what are you folks trying to say?
     
  8. edthecynic
    Offline

    edthecynic Censored for Cynicism

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
    Messages:
    26,672
    Thanks Received:
    3,087
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,732
    Obviously I listen enough to catch your MessiahRushie in his lies. LOL

    But this is a typical CON$ervative tactic, they condemn you for not listening enough AND for listening too much. :cuckoo:
     
  9. Terry
    Offline

    Terry Shut the $%$ Up!

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    5,222
    Thanks Received:
    1,090
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,091
    I asked a simple question so I can assertain how much you listen to Rush is all. Where did you get my MESSIAHRUSHIE from that? Talk about a partisan kool-aid hack...you fit that to a "T"
     
  10. noose4
    Offline

    noose4 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    4,127
    Thanks Received:
    610
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Hell's Kitchen N.Y.C.
    Ratings:
    +610
    god foreclosed on that loan a long time ago.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2

Share This Page