Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Consumer confidence at an 18 year high
DerekJohnson
Administrator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 68,325 
in Tug Tavern
Comments
-
Obunghole built that!
-
I'm hearing consumer confidence is at an all time high!!!! Great things have happened!!!
-
Socialists hate success.2001400ex said:I'm hearing consumer confidence is at an all time high!!!! Great things have happened!!!
-
Not Harley Davidson consumers.
-
That was an epic Superman handlebar grab until she went over the front.NEPTUNE said:Not Harley Davidson consumers.
-
-
Not enough chins. Tell a post-doc or professor their maff is wrong, then pop-off.greenblood said: -
He did.Sledog said:Obunghole built that!
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/consumer-confidence
-
Stifle Edith.UWhuskytskeet said:
He did.Sledog said:Obunghole built that!
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/consumer-confidence
The Tug Elite can't give credit to a black, Mooselimb, community organizer. It doesn't jibe with their senses. -
So what's your problem with Trump then?UWhuskytskeet said:
He did.Sledog said:Obunghole built that!
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/consumer-confidence
Other than he actually gets the results you have to pretend Obama got. -
See?
-
WTF is consumer confidence? Is that when pour people have been tricked into thinking they aren't pour?
If you're not pour you are always a confident consumer. -
Tariffs (way before hating them was cool), shitty diplomacy, nepotism, fueling distrust of media.RaceBannon said:
So what's your problem with Trump then?UWhuskytskeet said:
He did.Sledog said:Obunghole built that!
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/consumer-confidence
Other than he actually gets the results you have to pretend Obama got.
I grew up in a conservative household so I don't have issues with conservatives in general, but Trump is like a shitty caricature of a Republican. -
What's Trump's excuse?greenblood said: -
-
Trump is a DemocratUWhuskytskeet said:
Tariffs (way before hating them was cool), shitty diplomacy, nepotism, fueling distrust of media.RaceBannon said:
So what's your problem with Trump then?UWhuskytskeet said:
He did.Sledog said:Obunghole built that!
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/consumer-confidence
Other than he actually gets the results you have to pretend Obama got.
I grew up in a conservative household so I don't have issues with conservatives in general, but Trump is like a shitty caricature of a Republican.
Nice list of non issues. Maybe stop watching so much CNN
That's how we do it right? -
Pretty simple to make the argument that in his second, lame-duck term, where Obama actually did almost nothing of consequence except construct his legacy, the economy actually recovered and grew well on it's own.UWhuskytskeet said:
He did.Sledog said:Obunghole built that!
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/consumer-confidence
The Lesson: When the politicians and bureaucrats get the fuck out of the way, the much-wiser private sector business community thrives and grows on it's own. -
I get my news from HHRaceBannon said:
Trump is a DemocratUWhuskytskeet said:
Tariffs (way before hating them was cool), shitty diplomacy, nepotism, fueling distrust of media.RaceBannon said:
So what's your problem with Trump then?UWhuskytskeet said:
He did.Sledog said:Obunghole built that!
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/consumer-confidence
Other than he actually gets the results you have to pretend Obama got.
I grew up in a conservative household so I don't have issues with conservatives in general, but Trump is like a shitty caricature of a Republican.
Nice list of non issues. Maybe stop watching so much CNN
That's how we do it right? -
The “much wiser” private sector tanked the economy in the first place, leaving Obama to clean up the recession when he took the job. While I generally agree with your sentiment, it’s bullshit to blame him for inheriting a shit sandwich that was none of his doing, and then blaming him some more because he didn’t magically fix it overnight. I don’t agree with some of the moves he made (or didn’t make) but he led us out of it. Meanwhile Trump inherits a thriving economy and he takes all the credit. Has he made moves of his own? Of course. And hopefully they work. But he’s the definition of born on third and thinking he hit a triple.TurdBuffer said:
Pretty simple to make the argument that in his second, lame-duck term, where Obama actually did almost nothing of consequence except construct his legacy, the economy actually recovered and grew well on it's own.UWhuskytskeet said:
He did.Sledog said:Obunghole built that!
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/consumer-confidence
The Lesson: When the politicians and bureaucrats get the fuck out of the way, the much-wiser private sector business community thrives and grows on it's own. -
I voted for Obama twice, and his two main hugely disappointing reversals were abandoning the public option portion of Obamacare, which was the central component to his healthcare reform package during his campaign, and making the Bush Tax Cuts he campaigned against, permanent. So, don't even pretend he had anything to do with cleaning up the recession. He sucked off the banks the same as Bush did, and Clinton before them.ThomasFremont said:
The “much wiser” private sector tanked the economy in the first place, leaving Obama to clean up the recession when he took the job. While I generally agree with your sentiment, it’s bullshit to blame him for inheriting a shit sandwich that was none of his doing, and then blaming him some more because he didn’t magically fix it overnight. I don’t agree with some of the moves he made (or didn’t make) but he led us out of it. Meanwhile Trump inherits a thriving economy and he takes all the credit. Has he made moves of his own? Of course. And hopefully they work. But he’s the definition of born on third and thinking he hit a triple.TurdBuffer said:
Pretty simple to make the argument that in his second, lame-duck term, where Obama actually did almost nothing of consequence except construct his legacy, the economy actually recovered and grew well on it's own.UWhuskytskeet said:
He did.Sledog said:Obunghole built that!
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/consumer-confidence
The Lesson: When the politicians and bureaucrats get the fuck out of the way, the much-wiser private sector business community thrives and grows on it's own.
And we wouldn't have had that housing crisis if Clinton hadn't repealed Glass-Steagall and loosened the credit restrictions on mortgaged debt before he left office. And the only reason Clinton did so, after fighting against the banks for his entire presidency, was because Hillary couldn't win Bobby Kennedy's old senate seat in NY without Wall Street's backing.
I would expect that pro-bank behavior from the Gingrich-led monkeys in congress, and W, but not from Clinton or Obama.
Republicans get rich and go to Washington to protect their wealth and stay rich. Democrats go to Washington to become rich by selling out at every opportunity. Tell me which is worse? -
Full Disclosure: I voted for Clinton twice, too.
If you want the cite, google it. But this is from Time Magazine, not exactly a Conservative Rag:
President Clinton's tenure was characterized by economic prosperity and financial deregulation, which in many ways set the stage for the excesses of recent years. Among his biggest strokes of free-wheeling capitalism was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, a cornerstone of Depression-era regulation. He also signed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which exempted credit-default swaps from regulation. In 1995 Clinton loosened housing rules by rewriting the Community Reinvestment Act, which put added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods. It is the subject of heated political and scholarly debate whether any of these moves are to blame for our troubles, but they certainly played a role in creating a permissive lending environment. -
Both parties are paid to represent their donors.TurdBuffer said:
I voted for Obama twice, and his two main hugely disappointing reversals were abandoning the public option portion of Obamacare, which was the central component to his healthcare reform package during his campaign, and making the Bush Tax Cuts he campaigned against, permanent. So, don't even pretend he had anything to do with cleaning up the recession. He sucked off the banks the same as Bush did, and Clinton before them.ThomasFremont said:
The “much wiser” private sector tanked the economy in the first place, leaving Obama to clean up the recession when he took the job. While I generally agree with your sentiment, it’s bullshit to blame him for inheriting a shit sandwich that was none of his doing, and then blaming him some more because he didn’t magically fix it overnight. I don’t agree with some of the moves he made (or didn’t make) but he led us out of it. Meanwhile Trump inherits a thriving economy and he takes all the credit. Has he made moves of his own? Of course. And hopefully they work. But he’s the definition of born on third and thinking he hit a triple.TurdBuffer said:
Pretty simple to make the argument that in his second, lame-duck term, where Obama actually did almost nothing of consequence except construct his legacy, the economy actually recovered and grew well on it's own.UWhuskytskeet said:
He did.Sledog said:Obunghole built that!
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/consumer-confidence
The Lesson: When the politicians and bureaucrats get the fuck out of the way, the much-wiser private sector business community thrives and grows on it's own.
And we wouldn't have had that housing crisis if Clinton hadn't repealed Glass-Steagall and loosened the credit restrictions on mortgaged debt before he left office. And the only reason Clinton did so, after fighting against the banks for his entire presidency, was because Hillary couldn't win Bobby Kennedy's old senate seat in NY without Wall Street's backing.
I would expect that pro-bank behavior from the Gingrich-led monkeys in congress, and W, but not from Clinton or Obama.
Republicans get rich and go to Washington to protect their wealth and stay rich. Democrats go to Washington to become rich by selling out at every opportunity. Tell me which is worse?
The republicans accomplish that by selling out to their donors at every opportunity and being completely ruthless while doing so.
The democrats on the other hand accomplish that by being a bunch of mealy mouthed losers who stand for nothing, while pretending to be progressive under the guise of identity.
-
But, but, butt: Republicans may be sinister, evil and money-grubbing, but they understand money and don't hide their love of it. Dems think it grows on trees, and if not, they're perfectly comfortable taking it from you and giving it to someone else. Again, which is worse?dhdawg said:
Both parties are paid to represent their donors.TurdBuffer said:
I voted for Obama twice, and his two main hugely disappointing reversals were abandoning the public option portion of Obamacare, which was the central component to his healthcare reform package during his campaign, and making the Bush Tax Cuts he campaigned against, permanent. So, don't even pretend he had anything to do with cleaning up the recession. He sucked off the banks the same as Bush did, and Clinton before them.ThomasFremont said:
The “much wiser” private sector tanked the economy in the first place, leaving Obama to clean up the recession when he took the job. While I generally agree with your sentiment, it’s bullshit to blame him for inheriting a shit sandwich that was none of his doing, and then blaming him some more because he didn’t magically fix it overnight. I don’t agree with some of the moves he made (or didn’t make) but he led us out of it. Meanwhile Trump inherits a thriving economy and he takes all the credit. Has he made moves of his own? Of course. And hopefully they work. But he’s the definition of born on third and thinking he hit a triple.TurdBuffer said:
Pretty simple to make the argument that in his second, lame-duck term, where Obama actually did almost nothing of consequence except construct his legacy, the economy actually recovered and grew well on it's own.UWhuskytskeet said:
He did.Sledog said:Obunghole built that!
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/consumer-confidence
The Lesson: When the politicians and bureaucrats get the fuck out of the way, the much-wiser private sector business community thrives and grows on it's own.
And we wouldn't have had that housing crisis if Clinton hadn't repealed Glass-Steagall and loosened the credit restrictions on mortgaged debt before he left office. And the only reason Clinton did so, after fighting against the banks for his entire presidency, was because Hillary couldn't win Bobby Kennedy's old senate seat in NY without Wall Street's backing.
I would expect that pro-bank behavior from the Gingrich-led monkeys in congress, and W, but not from Clinton or Obama.
Republicans get rich and go to Washington to protect their wealth and stay rich. Democrats go to Washington to become rich by selling out at every opportunity. Tell me which is worse?
The republicans accomplish that by selling out to their donors at every opportunity and being completely ruthless while doing so.
The democrats on the other hand accomplish that by being a bunch of mealy mouthed losers who stand for nothing, while pretending to be progressive under the guise of identity. -
So after he drove it to the lowest point it went up?UWhuskytskeet said:
He did.Sledog said:Obunghole built that!
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/consumer-confidence -
Repeal of glass steagal was a republican bill that many Democrats voted against. They Clinton signed. When he signed it, there was a veto proof majority and he said he didn't like the bill.TurdBuffer said:
I voted for Obama twice, and his two main hugely disappointing reversals were abandoning the public option portion of Obamacare, which was the central component to his healthcare reform package during his campaign, and making the Bush Tax Cuts he campaigned against, permanent. So, don't even pretend he had anything to do with cleaning up the recession. He sucked off the banks the same as Bush did, and Clinton before them.ThomasFremont said:
The “much wiser” private sector tanked the economy in the first place, leaving Obama to clean up the recession when he took the job. While I generally agree with your sentiment, it’s bullshit to blame him for inheriting a shit sandwich that was none of his doing, and then blaming him some more because he didn’t magically fix it overnight. I don’t agree with some of the moves he made (or didn’t make) but he led us out of it. Meanwhile Trump inherits a thriving economy and he takes all the credit. Has he made moves of his own? Of course. And hopefully they work. But he’s the definition of born on third and thinking he hit a triple.TurdBuffer said:
Pretty simple to make the argument that in his second, lame-duck term, where Obama actually did almost nothing of consequence except construct his legacy, the economy actually recovered and grew well on it's own.UWhuskytskeet said:
He did.Sledog said:Obunghole built that!
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/consumer-confidence
The Lesson: When the politicians and bureaucrats get the fuck out of the way, the much-wiser private sector business community thrives and grows on it's own.
And we wouldn't have had that housing crisis if Clinton hadn't repealed Glass-Steagall and loosened the credit restrictions on mortgaged debt before he left office. And the only reason Clinton did so, after fighting against the banks for his entire presidency, was because Hillary couldn't win Bobby Kennedy's old senate seat in NY without Wall Street's backing.
I would expect that pro-bank behavior from the Gingrich-led monkeys in congress, and W, but not from Clinton or Obama.
Republicans get rich and go to Washington to protect their wealth and stay rich. Democrats go to Washington to become rich by selling out at every opportunity. Tell me which is worse?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm–Leach–Bliley_Act -
While Clinton did sign a couple bills and had his hand in it. What do you think this was about?TurdBuffer said:Full Disclosure: I voted for Clinton twice, too.
If you want the cite, google it. But this is from Time Magazine, not exactly a Conservative Rag:
President Clinton's tenure was characterized by economic prosperity and financial deregulation, which in many ways set the stage for the excesses of recent years. Among his biggest strokes of free-wheeling capitalism was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, a cornerstone of Depression-era regulation. He also signed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which exempted credit-default swaps from regulation. In 1995 Clinton loosened housing rules by rewriting the Community Reinvestment Act, which put added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods. It is the subject of heated political and scholarly debate whether any of these moves are to blame for our troubles, but they certainly played a role in creating a permissive lending environment.
https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/12/20031216-9.html -
I like people like you and turd. Reagan created the economy of the 90s. Clinton is to blame for the great recession. And Trump gets the credit for a good economy now. Not even 2 years into his term.Sledog said:
So after he drove it to the lowest point it went up?UWhuskytskeet said:
He did.Sledog said:Obunghole built that!
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/consumer-confidence
