The stock markets aren't happy with the election results.

Discussion in 'Blazers OT Forum' started by blazerboy30, Nov 7, 2012.

  1. Further

    Further Guy

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2008
    Messages:
    11,099
    Likes Received:
    4,039
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Stuff doer
    Location:
    Place
    This type of investment is great for a sharply targeted goal, just as big pharma is great for sharply targeted goals. But if science only tries to solve these easy to reach goals pretty soon progress halts.

    Example, right now companies employ the shotgun method to solve issues like inflammation. They may design a way to test 100,000 samples at a time to see if pro IL1 beta is cleaved, signifying inflammation. Then they go through a catalog of every owned molecule to see which ones cleave. Those that do, are then moved on to further research. This is great to come up with a new medication and it makes sense financially.

    However, they are not researching the mechanism that leads to the cleavage of the pro il1beta. Why, because this is a much longer term project that requires new techniques and much trial and error with far less likelyhood of success. However, over the long haul, it is this type of research that will lead to understanding of how to manipulate the inflamasome and cure issues like septic shock.

    You may find a billionaire, company or devoted group that will invest in highly targeted science, but not in the basic sciences. And it is not the because people are uncaring or stingy, it's because science is hugely complicated and even a fellow scientist that did not work on a specific area could not understand the minutia in that area.

    Both types of investments are needed to keep the USA a top scientific nation. Govt needs to be involved for the benefit of the nation, the economy, the future, the health, and the innovative structure our society is built on.
     
  2. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,976
    Likes Received:
    10,655
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    What if all the rain drops were lemon drops and gum drops?

    Throughout history, there have always been enough like-minded rich people.

    The March of Dimes isn't some rich family funding research into childhood paralysis. It's Jerry Lewis doing telethons raising money from the masses. Those people CHOOSE freely to donate.
     
  3. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,976
    Likes Received:
    10,655
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    How was nylon invented?

    I think you downplay what the private sector has always done. In fact, virtually every scientific discovery before 1960 (aside from the a-bomb) was private sector.
     
  4. jlprk

    jlprk The ESPN mod is insane.

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    30,672
    Likes Received:
    8,852
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired, while you work!
    Surely the suppository was Federally-funded. It wasn't invented in the private sector. Anyone's.
     
  5. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,976
    Likes Received:
    10,655
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    There's more! Even WaPost is piling on.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...a79-11e2-a051-6810d606108d_story.html?hpid=z1

    Obama’s approval drops as Americans take a dimmer view of his economic policies
     
  6. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,976
    Likes Received:
    10,655
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Let's see some compromise. No to the taxes. More cuts along the lines in the Ryan budget. I mean, Murray wants to cut $800B over 10 years. How about Dems stop obstructing what needs to be done and cut $3.25B (meet in the middle) in spending? Another rhetorical question: why should we pay for govt.'s reckless spending habits?

    http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-mon...udget-includes-nearly-1-trillion-in-new-taxes

    Senate Democrats’ budget includes nearly $1 trillion in new taxes

    Murray argues that her budget cuts $1.85 trillion from deficits over 10 years. But once the sequester cuts are turned off, Murray’s budget appears to reduce deficits by about $800 billion, using the Congressional Budget Office’s baseline. The Murray budget does not contain net spending cuts with the sequester turned off.

    The details of Murray’s budget came hours after House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) released his budget, which reduces tax rates and slashes spending much more deeply that Murray’s budget.

    The Ryan budget would balance in 10 years without raising taxes and by reducing spending over the next decade by $5.7 trillion compared to the CBO baseline.
     
  7. blazerboy30

    blazerboy30 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    5,465
    Likes Received:
    423
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Blah, blah, blah. Strawman, stawman, strawman.
     
  8. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,976
    Likes Received:
    10,655
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Obama should get credit for the stock market. Due to his spending, the Fed feels compelled (though independent) to keep interest rates low so the federal government isn't paying vast sums of tax revenue out as interest payments. To do so, they're printing money and buying back notes the govt. issues to borrow money. Reducing the supply of bonds increases the price which inversely decreases the yield.

    Printing money causes inflation. Why wouldn't the price of stocks go up? The price of everything else seems to have gone up, too (gas, food, etc.).

    To boot, with the treasury bonds paying near 0% interest, the stock market is a reasonably safe alternative to putting your savings somewhere that won't earn less than the rate of inflation.
     
  9. blazerboy30

    blazerboy30 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    5,465
    Likes Received:
    423
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Interestingly, these policies are just helping the rich get richer and richer while raising costs on the poor and middle class. The ability to borrow almost-free money and an ever-rising artificial stock market provides a MUCH larger advantage for those with income to invest and will just increase the disparity between rich and poor.

    I wonder how the progressives on this board feel about that dilemma.
     
  10. The_Lillard_King

    The_Lillard_King Westside

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,405
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    83

    Don't know if I buy all this, but if the rich get some windfall from Obama being president, I got no problem with that. I still consider him to be more of a president for the middle and lower class, so if the rich get some benefits while he is in office, seems fair.
     
  11. BLAZINGGIANTS

    BLAZINGGIANTS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2008
    Messages:
    22,015
    Likes Received:
    14,574
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Honestly, I'm shocked his rating is as high as it is, if for no other reason than nearly all big Obama supporters I know have turned on him. Not that that makes up a significant population of people, but I figured if they've changed their mind......
     
  12. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,976
    Likes Received:
    10,655
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    How is he for the middle and lower class? Keeping them unemployed and on welfare is hardly what I'd call even humane treatment.

    ObamaCare? Welcome to the DMV of health care. It is going to take many pages of ObamaCare specific forms to fill out to get treated.
     
  13. blazerboy30

    blazerboy30 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    5,465
    Likes Received:
    423
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Which part do you think I'm wrong about?
     
  14. The_Lillard_King

    The_Lillard_King Westside

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,405
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I thought unemployment hit a five yr low? Anyways, increasing taxes on the rich, Obamacare, pro-union . . . just seems like he is more about the middle class. It would be ironic if the Obama is more advantgeous for the rich than the middle class. If that is the case, middle class can't catch a break. With either Romney or Obama . . . rich get richer and poor get poorer.

    But again, I'm not convinced Obama is bad for the lower and middle class.
     
  15. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,976
    Likes Received:
    10,655
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    I'm convinced he's bad for everyone. The rich may make out well now, but I can't help but look at the fiscal fundamentals of the country and see a major catastrophe coming. Obama knows it won't be on his watch, so he's living it up like there's no tomorrow.

    More like 2020 there really won't be no tomorrow.
     
  16. The_Lillard_King

    The_Lillard_King Westside

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,405
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Well you talk about a stock market that is a bubble and going to burst yet rich people get the advanatage of investing in it while others don't.

    And with all due respect, you are someone who knee jerked and sold all your equiteies when Obama was elected, which was a wrong call. So hard to take what you say as gospel if your dumping all your equities because Obama is president.
     
  17. BLAZINGGIANTS

    BLAZINGGIANTS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2008
    Messages:
    22,015
    Likes Received:
    14,574
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I still don't understand the concept of this "penalty" against those that don't have health care (and maybe it's been changed since I initially heard about this). As I understand it, and please help me fill in what I'm missing........ If you don't have health care, you will be fined? So, if I can't afford health care for myself, I am going to be fined, which puts me further into the hole? I really am asking the question. I had read this in one of the ObamaCare summaries when this was first being launched, so I'm not sure if this is still part of the plan.
     
  18. The_Lillard_King

    The_Lillard_King Westside

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,405
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    83
    People were saying the same thigs during the Bush era. Hard to know what to believe these days.
     
  19. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,976
    Likes Received:
    10,655
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    You never feel the pain while charging up your credit cards. Only when the bills come due.

    We're paying for Bush's medicare prescription drug benefit (huge expense) now as Obama's recklessly running up the debt spending on anything else.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/healthcare/283493-cbos-wake-up-call

    However, in a remarkable example of whistling past the graveyard, the president did little to substantively address the biggest crisis we face: the federal budget.

    The president needed only to look at last week’s report by the Congressional Budget Office to see the scale of the problem.

    In their budget and economic outlook for 2013-2023, CBO sees near trillion-dollar annual deficits, at least $7 trillion in new debt, and more spending on interest payments on the debt ($5.4 trillion) than on Medicaid ($4.3 trillion).


    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...t-anonymous-why-america-needs-to-act-now.html

    In 2027 Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and interest on the debt will consume all tax revenue, according to the GAO.

    ---

    Read that last one carefully. There simply won't be any money to spend on anything else. From the military to roads to the courts.

    The amount of tax hikes needed to pay for it all are going to be staggering. I can't imagine the lower class paying 85% tax rate and not revolting.
     
  20. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,976
    Likes Received:
    10,655
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal

Share This Page