Market Tanking
- Thread starter StevieD
- Start date
The new Democrat talking point.
Never let a CRISIS go to waste.
The Democrats take ADVANTAGE of the Stupid people with this kind of PROPAGANDA, that way they can draw the ATTENTION away from their FAILED Policies.
Stevie, are you that ST**ID?
:facepalm:
jmo
Tell me where I am wrong if you are capable of doing anything besides calling names and being wrong? What concession to the DEM's tanked the market. It couldn't be taxing the wealthy because they took thart off table? So wise guy what is it that tanked the market since Bohener got "98% of what he wanted." And that is in his own words.
Everyone KNEW that there was going to be a DEAL on the DEBT LIMIT, to say that is what TANKED the market is FOOLISH, it's going to be USED as an EXCUSE for the DUMBOCRATS to use on the FOOLS that will BELIEVE it.
JMO.
Last edited:
Greek 10-year bond yields hit 18%
16-06-2011 14:02
Share This Article!
Unsurprisingly, Greek bonds were on the slide again, pushing the yield on 10-year bond past 18% as worries over the indebted Eurozone member continued.
Prime minister George Papandreou is to seek a vote of confidence in the Greek parliament today, as talks about a much needed rescue package from the EU continue to drag on.
Papandreou intends to reshuffle his cabinet today, ahead of the confidence vote. There is speculation that finance minister George Papaconstantinou will be replaced by Lucas Papademos, the former European Central Bank vice-president, who is currently acting as an adviser to Papaconstantinou.
The yield on a 10-year Greek bond climbed 29 basis points to 18.01%.
Elsewhere on the periphery of the eurozone, the sale of ?2.84m (?2.5m) of bonds in Spain was slightly short of the government's maximum target.
The yield on a Spanish 10-year bond climbed by 11 basis points to 5.66%.
But in Germany, where equities were on the decline amid worries over the eurozone situation, bunds climbed amid safe haven buying.
The yield on a 10-year bund fell by two basis points to 2.93%.
Poor retail sales here also stoked safe haven buying, helping push the yield on a 10-year UK gilt down five basis points to 3.18%.
In the US, jobs figures were better than expected, but the eurozone situation still loomed large and the yield on a 10-year treasury fell by four basis points to 2.93%.
:SIB
16-06-2011 14:02
Share This Article!
Unsurprisingly, Greek bonds were on the slide again, pushing the yield on 10-year bond past 18% as worries over the indebted Eurozone member continued.
Prime minister George Papandreou is to seek a vote of confidence in the Greek parliament today, as talks about a much needed rescue package from the EU continue to drag on.
Papandreou intends to reshuffle his cabinet today, ahead of the confidence vote. There is speculation that finance minister George Papaconstantinou will be replaced by Lucas Papademos, the former European Central Bank vice-president, who is currently acting as an adviser to Papaconstantinou.
The yield on a 10-year Greek bond climbed 29 basis points to 18.01%.
Elsewhere on the periphery of the eurozone, the sale of ?2.84m (?2.5m) of bonds in Spain was slightly short of the government's maximum target.
The yield on a Spanish 10-year bond climbed by 11 basis points to 5.66%.
But in Germany, where equities were on the decline amid worries over the eurozone situation, bunds climbed amid safe haven buying.
The yield on a 10-year bund fell by two basis points to 2.93%.
Poor retail sales here also stoked safe haven buying, helping push the yield on a 10-year UK gilt down five basis points to 3.18%.
In the US, jobs figures were better than expected, but the eurozone situation still loomed large and the yield on a 10-year treasury fell by four basis points to 2.93%.
:SIB
.
EU says euro area's systemic capacity in doubt
Italy's Minister of Finance Minister Giulio Tremonti (R) talks with state-controlled financing agency 'Cassa Depositi e Prestiti' Chairman Franco Bassanini in Rome, July 28, 2011. REUTERS/Tony Gentile
On Wednesday August 3, 2011, 9:39 am EDT
By Jan Strupczewski and James Mackenzie
BRUSSELS/ROME (Reuters) - The European Union voiced support for Italy and Spain under attack on financial markets but acknowledged that investors now doubt whether the euro zone can overcome its sovereign debt woes.
European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said a surge in Italian and Spanish bond yields to 14-year highs was cause for deep concern and did not reflect the true state of the third and fourth largest economies in the currency area.
"In fact, the tensions in bond markets reflect a growing concern among investors about the systemic capacity of the euro area to respond to the evolving crisis," Barroso said in a statement.
He urged member states to speed up parliamentary approval of crisis-fighting measures agreed at a July 21 summit meant to stop contagion from Greece, Ireland and Portugal, which have received EU/IMF bailouts, to larger European economies.
But neither he nor European Monetary Affairs Commissioner Olli Rehn offered any immediate steps to stem the crisis, which has flared again with full force less than two weeks after that emergency meeting.
Italy has borne the brunt of a selloff triggered by the unresolved debt crisis and fears of a global economic slowdown. Its stocks and bonds gained some respite after a further early slump on Wednesday.
Italian Economy Minister Giulio Tremonti held two hours of emergency talks with the chairman of euro zone finance ministers, Jean-Claude Juncker, in Luxembourg but neither disclosed anything of substance after the meeting.
The European Commission said after Rehn spoke to Tremonti that Italy was "doing what is necessary to put the country back on track for higher sustainable growth and ensuring fiscal consolidation."
A Commission spokeswoman said there had been no discussion of a bailout for Italy, which would overwhelm the bloc's existing rescue funds.
The market turmoil caused alarm in some parts of Europe but apparent insouciance in the bloc's biggest economy.
"Italian and Spanish bond yields rose to their new record highs. This is a very alarming and scary thing," Finnish Prime Minister Jyrki Katainen told public broadcaster YLE. "The whole of Europe is in a very dangerous situation."
Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, who has been largely silent, closeted with his lawyers over several ongoing trials, was due to address parliament later. His speech was put back until after Italian markets close.
With many policymakers on holiday, there seemed little prospect of early European policy action, although euro zone governments were in telephone contact on the situation.
German Economics Minister Philipp Roesler said Italy and Spain were not even discussed at Berlin's weekly cabinet meeting on Wednesday which he chaired in place of Chancellor Angela Merkel, who is on vacation and did not call in.
Berlusconi's cabinet did not discuss the market turmoil either and a German government spokesman said Berlin saw no reason for alarm over the selloff of Italian stocks and bonds and was focused on implement the latest euro zone summit decisions.
The euro zone's rescue fund cannot use new powers granted at last month's summit to buy bonds in the secondary market or give states precautionary credit lines until they are approved by national parliaments in late September at the earliest.
The European Central Bank could reactivate its bond-buying program, which temporarily steadied markets last year but has been dormant for more than four months. Weekly data released on Monday show it has so far refrained from doing so despite market rumors to the contrary last week.
Italy and Spain could offer new austerity measures to try to placate the markets, but Rome has just adopted a 48 billion euro savings package and Madrid's lame duck government has just called an early general election for November 20.
EU says euro area's systemic capacity in doubt
Italy's Minister of Finance Minister Giulio Tremonti (R) talks with state-controlled financing agency 'Cassa Depositi e Prestiti' Chairman Franco Bassanini in Rome, July 28, 2011. REUTERS/Tony Gentile
On Wednesday August 3, 2011, 9:39 am EDT
By Jan Strupczewski and James Mackenzie
BRUSSELS/ROME (Reuters) - The European Union voiced support for Italy and Spain under attack on financial markets but acknowledged that investors now doubt whether the euro zone can overcome its sovereign debt woes.
European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said a surge in Italian and Spanish bond yields to 14-year highs was cause for deep concern and did not reflect the true state of the third and fourth largest economies in the currency area.
"In fact, the tensions in bond markets reflect a growing concern among investors about the systemic capacity of the euro area to respond to the evolving crisis," Barroso said in a statement.
He urged member states to speed up parliamentary approval of crisis-fighting measures agreed at a July 21 summit meant to stop contagion from Greece, Ireland and Portugal, which have received EU/IMF bailouts, to larger European economies.
But neither he nor European Monetary Affairs Commissioner Olli Rehn offered any immediate steps to stem the crisis, which has flared again with full force less than two weeks after that emergency meeting.
Italy has borne the brunt of a selloff triggered by the unresolved debt crisis and fears of a global economic slowdown. Its stocks and bonds gained some respite after a further early slump on Wednesday.
Italian Economy Minister Giulio Tremonti held two hours of emergency talks with the chairman of euro zone finance ministers, Jean-Claude Juncker, in Luxembourg but neither disclosed anything of substance after the meeting.
The European Commission said after Rehn spoke to Tremonti that Italy was "doing what is necessary to put the country back on track for higher sustainable growth and ensuring fiscal consolidation."
A Commission spokeswoman said there had been no discussion of a bailout for Italy, which would overwhelm the bloc's existing rescue funds.
The market turmoil caused alarm in some parts of Europe but apparent insouciance in the bloc's biggest economy.
"Italian and Spanish bond yields rose to their new record highs. This is a very alarming and scary thing," Finnish Prime Minister Jyrki Katainen told public broadcaster YLE. "The whole of Europe is in a very dangerous situation."
Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, who has been largely silent, closeted with his lawyers over several ongoing trials, was due to address parliament later. His speech was put back until after Italian markets close.
With many policymakers on holiday, there seemed little prospect of early European policy action, although euro zone governments were in telephone contact on the situation.
German Economics Minister Philipp Roesler said Italy and Spain were not even discussed at Berlin's weekly cabinet meeting on Wednesday which he chaired in place of Chancellor Angela Merkel, who is on vacation and did not call in.
Berlusconi's cabinet did not discuss the market turmoil either and a German government spokesman said Berlin saw no reason for alarm over the selloff of Italian stocks and bonds and was focused on implement the latest euro zone summit decisions.
The euro zone's rescue fund cannot use new powers granted at last month's summit to buy bonds in the secondary market or give states precautionary credit lines until they are approved by national parliaments in late September at the earliest.
The European Central Bank could reactivate its bond-buying program, which temporarily steadied markets last year but has been dormant for more than four months. Weekly data released on Monday show it has so far refrained from doing so despite market rumors to the contrary last week.
Italy and Spain could offer new austerity measures to try to placate the markets, but Rome has just adopted a 48 billion euro savings package and Madrid's lame duck government has just called an early general election for November 20.
Factory orders dropped 0.8 percent in June
Businesses ordered fewer factory goods in June, cutting demand for planes, cars and machines
:nono:
Businesses ordered fewer factory goods in June, cutting demand for planes, cars and machines
:nono:
Yes he created it. Do you doubt that? Wasn't it his policies set in place by him that started this whole mess? Please explain the State of the Economy when he left office.
StevieD, I forgot, Bush made all of those Subprime loans to people that couldn't afford them, then he made Toxic Financial Instruments, he sure was busy, wasn't he.
:facepalm:
Business
Credit crunch
Toxic shock: how the banking industry created a global crisis
The warnings began eight years ago, but even the most respected financiers did not understand all the risks
Graphic: The incredible shrinking banks
Share4
reddit this
Jill Treanor
The Guardian, Tuesday 8 April 2008
Article history
The banking industry is gripped by a credit crisis that has taken the US economy to the brink of recession. Two banks have, in effect, been nationalised, house prices are tumbling and it is harder to secure a home loan. In a major investigation, Jill Treanor looks at the flawed financial products at the heart of the credit crunch and explores how the banks brought the crisis on themselves and how it could mark a return to basics.
In a luxurious chateau in Alsace eight years ago, a top financier made a confession: some of the complex financial instruments being pumped out by the world's biggest investment banks were potentially "toxic". Top regulators were left in no doubt of the perils hiding in the financial system after the two-day summit aimed at finding and disarming the bombs waiting to explode.
The warning proved to be prescient. About a year ago one of these bombs exploded. The ensuing credit crunch could lead to a complete redrawing of the financial map and may even herald the end of globalisation.
The toxic instruments highlighted by the banker were collateralised debt obligations (CDOs). Little was known of them when this regulatory teach-in was taking place, but since then banks have embraced them as a way of shifting debt off their balance sheets, enabling them to lend more. They have been bought enthusiastically by many investors across the financial system. As they began to blow up last year, there was mayhem at banks and brokers on Wall Street, which, in turn, sent shock waves through the world's financial markets.
CDOs are the villains of the market turmoil but before they unravelled they fuelled easy credit and economic growth in many developed economies. Britons amassed a record ?1.4tr of debts - more than the UK's gross domestic product - as banks loosened their lending criteria. Millions of Americans with poor credit histories who might not otherwise have bought their homes were granted sub-prime mortgages.
But as gridlock gripped the markets, the repercussions have been painful. A record number of Americans are having their homes repossessed. Britons are finding it tougher to obtain credit and home loans. The damage is still being quantified but is already far-reaching. Northern Rock was nationalised by an embarrassed British government. The US Federal Reserve orchestrated the rescue takeover of the investment bank Bear Stearns. Rogue traders were found at the French bank Soci?t? G?n?rale and the Swiss bank Credit Suisse.
Financial regulators now talk of a return to "old-fashioned banking", where banks grant loans only to clients they know and from resources already available. It is starting to happen.
Last week First Direct, part of HSBC, withdrew all mortgages apart from those for existing customers, while other lenders are demanding bigger deposits before handing out home loans. The US is redrawing the regulatory landscape for its financial services industry as it last did after the Great Depression and the UK's Financial Services Authority (FSA) is hiring 100 new regulators. Some bankers concede that fear is stalking the financial system and that markets have become so complicated that it is difficult to work out exactly what is going on.
Terry Smith, who 20 years ago was the City's top-rated banks analyst and is now chief executive of the money-broker Tullett Prebon, admits that calculating banks' vulnerabilities is harder now. "I could tell you Barclays' sensitivity to a 1% move in interest rates," Smith says of 20 years ago. These days, the straightforward business of taking in deposits and lending the money out to others has become more sophisticated through the use of financial engineering such as CDOs.
Sir Howard Davies, who heard the warning about CDOs in Alsace in 2000, first warned the City about the toxic nature of some financial instruments in January 2002, when he was chairman of the FSA. "One investment banker recently described synthetic CDOs to me as 'the most toxic element of the financial markets today'," he told a City audience. "When an investment banker talks of toxicity, a regulator is bound to take a heightened interest."
Six years on, Davies is director of the London School of Economics and modest about his ability to claim that he was one of the first to foresee the events of the summer of 2007, when these CDOs proved their toxicity. He refuses to identify the banker and launches into a lengthy description of what was worrying him. The distilled version is that insurance companies were buying products they did not understand because they were attracted by the higher returns on offer. Little attention was paid to any potential risk because the rewards were so attractive. He describes the buyers of these CDOs as "naive capital".
His remarks at the time were aimed at insurance companies. But it is clear that investment in CDOs and other complex derivatives was much more widespread. The business had certainty boomed from when the first CDO was said to have been issued in 1987 by bankers at the now defunct Drexel Burnham Lambert. In 20 years, the size of the market was estimated to have reached $2tr (?1tr). It boomed between 2004 and 2007. But its demise has been rapid. Last week the Bank for International Settlements, the central bank for central bankers, reckoned that the market for certain types of asset-backed CDOs was likely to disappear entirely.
:facepalm:
Business
Credit crunch
Toxic shock: how the banking industry created a global crisis
The warnings began eight years ago, but even the most respected financiers did not understand all the risks
Graphic: The incredible shrinking banks
Share4
reddit this
Jill Treanor
The Guardian, Tuesday 8 April 2008
Article history
The banking industry is gripped by a credit crisis that has taken the US economy to the brink of recession. Two banks have, in effect, been nationalised, house prices are tumbling and it is harder to secure a home loan. In a major investigation, Jill Treanor looks at the flawed financial products at the heart of the credit crunch and explores how the banks brought the crisis on themselves and how it could mark a return to basics.
In a luxurious chateau in Alsace eight years ago, a top financier made a confession: some of the complex financial instruments being pumped out by the world's biggest investment banks were potentially "toxic". Top regulators were left in no doubt of the perils hiding in the financial system after the two-day summit aimed at finding and disarming the bombs waiting to explode.
The warning proved to be prescient. About a year ago one of these bombs exploded. The ensuing credit crunch could lead to a complete redrawing of the financial map and may even herald the end of globalisation.
The toxic instruments highlighted by the banker were collateralised debt obligations (CDOs). Little was known of them when this regulatory teach-in was taking place, but since then banks have embraced them as a way of shifting debt off their balance sheets, enabling them to lend more. They have been bought enthusiastically by many investors across the financial system. As they began to blow up last year, there was mayhem at banks and brokers on Wall Street, which, in turn, sent shock waves through the world's financial markets.
CDOs are the villains of the market turmoil but before they unravelled they fuelled easy credit and economic growth in many developed economies. Britons amassed a record ?1.4tr of debts - more than the UK's gross domestic product - as banks loosened their lending criteria. Millions of Americans with poor credit histories who might not otherwise have bought their homes were granted sub-prime mortgages.
But as gridlock gripped the markets, the repercussions have been painful. A record number of Americans are having their homes repossessed. Britons are finding it tougher to obtain credit and home loans. The damage is still being quantified but is already far-reaching. Northern Rock was nationalised by an embarrassed British government. The US Federal Reserve orchestrated the rescue takeover of the investment bank Bear Stearns. Rogue traders were found at the French bank Soci?t? G?n?rale and the Swiss bank Credit Suisse.
Financial regulators now talk of a return to "old-fashioned banking", where banks grant loans only to clients they know and from resources already available. It is starting to happen.
Last week First Direct, part of HSBC, withdrew all mortgages apart from those for existing customers, while other lenders are demanding bigger deposits before handing out home loans. The US is redrawing the regulatory landscape for its financial services industry as it last did after the Great Depression and the UK's Financial Services Authority (FSA) is hiring 100 new regulators. Some bankers concede that fear is stalking the financial system and that markets have become so complicated that it is difficult to work out exactly what is going on.
Terry Smith, who 20 years ago was the City's top-rated banks analyst and is now chief executive of the money-broker Tullett Prebon, admits that calculating banks' vulnerabilities is harder now. "I could tell you Barclays' sensitivity to a 1% move in interest rates," Smith says of 20 years ago. These days, the straightforward business of taking in deposits and lending the money out to others has become more sophisticated through the use of financial engineering such as CDOs.
Sir Howard Davies, who heard the warning about CDOs in Alsace in 2000, first warned the City about the toxic nature of some financial instruments in January 2002, when he was chairman of the FSA. "One investment banker recently described synthetic CDOs to me as 'the most toxic element of the financial markets today'," he told a City audience. "When an investment banker talks of toxicity, a regulator is bound to take a heightened interest."
Six years on, Davies is director of the London School of Economics and modest about his ability to claim that he was one of the first to foresee the events of the summer of 2007, when these CDOs proved their toxicity. He refuses to identify the banker and launches into a lengthy description of what was worrying him. The distilled version is that insurance companies were buying products they did not understand because they were attracted by the higher returns on offer. Little attention was paid to any potential risk because the rewards were so attractive. He describes the buyers of these CDOs as "naive capital".
His remarks at the time were aimed at insurance companies. But it is clear that investment in CDOs and other complex derivatives was much more widespread. The business had certainty boomed from when the first CDO was said to have been issued in 1987 by bankers at the now defunct Drexel Burnham Lambert. In 20 years, the size of the market was estimated to have reached $2tr (?1tr). It boomed between 2004 and 2007. But its demise has been rapid. Last week the Bank for International Settlements, the central bank for central bankers, reckoned that the market for certain types of asset-backed CDOs was likely to disappear entirely.
No doubt that had a lot to do with it too. But didn't brag about how home ownership was at it's highest levels ever under his regime? LOL!!!!! Nice try.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/worldbusiness/21iht-admin.4.18853088.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/worldbusiness/21iht-admin.4.18853088.html
Market NEEDS to tank to allow 2 things to happen:
1. the Bernanke to fire up the printing presses and initiate QE3....with the market tanking, everyone will go along with it.
2. Another round of stimulus, timed to affect the re-election efforts of the POTUS.
Worry not, StevieD - everything is working as planned.
1. the Bernanke to fire up the printing presses and initiate QE3....with the market tanking, everyone will go along with it.
2. Another round of stimulus, timed to affect the re-election efforts of the POTUS.
Worry not, StevieD - everything is working as planned.
I agree its a plan. They will wait until the retail investors get out of the market, at a loss of course, before they bring it up.
Not sure why the Conservatives hate Obama. He has caved on every issue i can think of. Even going so far as keeping Bush's people, Bernanke, for example.
This reminds of when Nixon ran with a plan to End the war. Humphry was going to keep it going until South Vietnam could defend itself. Then once Nixon got in we found out his plan was the same as Humphrys!
It is a disgrace!
Looks like the market CLOSED GREEN, I guess it was BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:0074
:0074
Massively oversold conditions and hit a support zone.
Relief rally.
Could fizzle in a few days or set a new high 2011? Would not be out of the question to see 1388 on the SnP.
Tightest range for the SnP 500 in decades. Range was essentially 1260 - 1360 all year. They are expanding the range but the real risk (IMO) is to the downside.
Relief rally.
Could fizzle in a few days or set a new high 2011? Would not be out of the question to see 1388 on the SnP.
Tightest range for the SnP 500 in decades. Range was essentially 1260 - 1360 all year. They are expanding the range but the real risk (IMO) is to the downside.
Yeah, I agree Stevie. Let's just keep giving those "job creating" :mj07: Republicans whatever they want.
Like the union-busting FAA shutdown going on right now that's resulting in $28.6 million per day in lost aviation taxes. The same FAA shutdown that will result in $1.3 billion in lost tax revenue if Congress ignores it until they return to Washington on Sept. 7th. The same FAA shutdown that's put 4000 FAA employees and 70,000 construction workers out of work.
At the rate they're going, the Republicans will soon have anyone that makes more than $250K paying no taxes and rest of us unemployed. But as long as they can keep convincing their gullible base that our sick economy is all Obama's fault, why would they stop? :shrug:
Gee Stevie have you been in coma since 2006 and just woke up? Thats last time GOP had the reins.
You must like constant replay of these charts--
Note the R's and D's (I helped you a bit) Dems have had control since 2006--seriously I not kidding.
I see where your mentor explained in speech in Chicago yesterday -Per total failure on economy/market/defict/jobs etc.
He said "change" he promised- would not be overnite and noted he needed 4 more years.:SIB
Here's your charts again --I'll keep them up to date--in case you have another --(Rebs been in control last 5 years) moment.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://www.davemanuel.com/history-of...ted-states.php
This chart will give you the 3's including pres-senate-house #'s
Deficits/Surpluses From 1940 Until 2010
1* - Presidential control
2* - Senate control
3* - House control
D = Democrat R = Republican
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#c5c5c5 height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>Year</TD><TD width=164 align=left>Nominal Dollars</TD><TD width=164 align=left>Inflation Adjusted</TD><TD width=28 align=left>1*</TD><TD width=28 align=left>2*</TD><TD width=28 align=left>3*</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>1990</TD><TD width=164 align=left>221.2 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>358.344 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>1991</TD><TD width=164 align=left>269.3 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>420.108 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>1992</TD><TD width=164 align=left>290.4 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>438.504 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>1993</TD><TD width=164 align=left>255.1 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>374.997 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>1994</TD><TD width=164 align=left>203.2 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>290.576 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>1995</TD><TD width=164 align=left>164 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>227.96 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>1996</TD><TD width=164 align=left>107.5 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>145.125 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>1997</TD><TD width=164 align=left>22 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>29.04 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>1998</TD><TD width=164 align=left>69.2 Billion Dollar Surplus</TD><TD width=164 align=left>89.96 Billion Surplus</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>1999</TD><TD width=164 align=left>125.6 Billion Dollar Surplus</TD><TD width=164 align=left>159.512 Billion Surplus</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>2000</TD><TD width=164 align=left>236.4 Billion Dollar Surplus</TD><TD width=164 align=left>290.772 Billion Surplus</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>2001</TD><TD width=164 align=left>127.3 Billion Dollar Surplus</TD><TD width=164 align=left>152.76 Billion Surplus</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>2002</TD><TD width=164 align=left>157.8 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>186.204 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>2003</TD><TD width=164 align=left>374 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>430.1 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>2004</TD><TD width=164 align=left>413 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>462.56 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>2005</TD><TD width=164 align=left>319 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>347.71 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>2006</TD><TD width=164 align=left>248 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>260.4 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>2007</TD><TD width=164 align=left>162 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>165.24 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>2008</TD><TD width=164 align=left>455 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>455 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>2009</TD><TD width=164 align=left>1416 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>1416 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>2010</TD><TD width=164 align=left>1294 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>1294 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width="100%" bgColor=#ededed height=16><TBODY><TR><TD height=20 width=47 align=left>2011</TD><TD width=164 align=left>1650 Billion Dollar Deficit</TD><TD width=164 align=left>1650 Billion Deficit</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>D</TD><TD width=28 align=left>R</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
UNEMPLOYMENT
I've included Clintons #'s to show comparision for benefit of our liberals best of time vs their reported worse jobs record since great depression--while Clinton and GW are tit for tat--Gumby's is in a league of his own.
Past 20 years
http://www.bls.gov/cps/prev_yrs.htm
<TABLE border=1 cellSpacing=0><TBODY><TR bgColor=#99ccff><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>1990</TH><TD align=center>5.6</TD></TR><TR><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>1991</TH><TD align=center>6.8</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#99ccff><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>1992</TH><TD align=center>7.5</TD></TR><TR><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>1993</TH><TD align=center>6.9</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#99ccff><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>1994</TH><TD align=center>6.1</TD></TR><TR><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>1995</TH><TD align=center>5.6</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#99ccff><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>1996</TH><TD align=center>5.4</TD></TR><TR><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>1997</TH><TD align=center>4.9</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#99ccff><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>1998</TH><TD align=center>4.5</TD></TR><TR><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>1999</TH><TD align=center>4.2</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#99ccff><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>2000</TH><TD align=center>4.0</TD></TR><TR><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>2001</TH><TD align=center>4.7</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#99ccff><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>2002</TH><TD align=center>5.8</TD></TR><TR><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>2003</TH><TD align=center>6.0</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#99ccff><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>2004</TH><TD align=center>5.5</TD></TR><TR><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>2005</TH><TD align=center>5.1</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#99ccff><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>2006</TH><TD align=center>4.6</TD></TR><TR><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>2007</TH><TD align=center>4.6</TD></TR><TR bgColor=#99ccff><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>2008</TH><TD align=center>5.8</TD><TR><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>2009</TH><TD align=center>9.3 <TR bgColor=#99ccff><TH bgColor=#c0c0c0>2010</TH><TD align=center>9.6</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Amazing how transparent it is when broken down to simplest of facts-
-and how much ink/time/charts/grafts etc is spent trying to distort the obvious
Doggie poo. Good to se you. Now maybe you can answer a question. Name me one piece of legislation that Pelosi didn't deliver the votes that Bush wanted. Did she ever over ride any of his veto's? If you can point to one then you can start blaming the DEMS. You should love Obama he has given you everything you want.
Well??????:0corn :0corn
Well??????:0corn :0corn
Last edited:
