Electoral College Guess

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Politics ▸ Electoral College Guess
Q

QuakerOats

Senior Member

8,740 posts
Oct 18, 2012 7:39 PM
Ty Webb;1298583 wrote:You cannot be serious believing that can you?
Yes, I can.


BTW, Bill Clinton in Ohio is about the most notable sign that the obama ship is sinking that I have seen to date.
Oct 18, 2012 7:39pm
Ty Webb's avatar

Ty Webb

Senior Member

2,798 posts
Oct 18, 2012 7:40 PM
QuakerOats;1298586 wrote:Yes, I can.


BTW, Bill Clinton in Ohio is about the most notable sign that the obama ship is sinking that I have seen to date.
You're kidding me right? He is the best surrogate in the Democratic Party...

That PA poll is like the one where President Obama was leading Arizona
Oct 18, 2012 7:40pm
Q

QuakerOats

Senior Member

8,740 posts
Oct 18, 2012 7:43 PM
Ty,

There is still time to see the light and join the winning team. Please come over to our side and be happy on Nov 6th.

'Oats
Oct 18, 2012 7:43pm
Ty Webb's avatar

Ty Webb

Senior Member

2,798 posts
Oct 18, 2012 7:45 PM
QuakerOats;1298589 wrote:Ty,

There is still time to see the light and join the winning team. Please come over to our side and be happy on Nov 6th.

'Oats
I'll be plenty happy when we re-elect President Obama
Oct 18, 2012 7:45pm
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
Oct 18, 2012 7:52 PM
We should start another thread guessing which poll might actually be remotely accurate.
Oct 18, 2012 7:52pm
ZWICK 4 PREZ's avatar

ZWICK 4 PREZ

Senior Member

7,733 posts
Oct 18, 2012 8:39 PM
gut;1298501 wrote:Great point. Ask Rome if there's any flaw in your logic. Ask the USSR.

I can go on and on. That is a completely idiotic position for you to take. There's a lot of research out there that there is a tipping point (to which we are perilously close) where a nearly irreversible slide toward default begins.
I will right after you answer how many times the US Gov has gone bankrupt. Even after that horrible horrible FDR.
Oct 18, 2012 8:39pm
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
Oct 18, 2012 9:18 PM
ZWICK 4 PREZ;1298627 wrote:I will right after you answer how many times the US Gov has gone bankrupt. Even after that horrible horrible FDR.
Is it not 0? And your argument is because it's never happened that it can't and won't happen? Seriously? That's the height of stupid irresponsibility.
Oct 18, 2012 9:18pm
BGFalcons82's avatar

BGFalcons82

Senior Member

2,173 posts
Oct 18, 2012 9:58 PM
gut;1298661 wrote:Is it not 0? And your argument is because it's never happened that it can't and won't happen? Seriously? That's the height of stupid irresponsibility.
Didn't Standard & Poors send a shot across our bow regarding going bankrupt? Should we at least listen to creditors for once?
Oct 18, 2012 9:58pm
believer's avatar

believer

Senior Member

8,153 posts
Oct 18, 2012 10:24 PM
BGFalcons82;1298689 wrote:Didn't Standard & Poors send a shot across our bow regarding going bankrupt? Should we at least listen to creditors for once?
Ben's got us covered. Crank up the gubmint printing presses. Time for some old fashioned quantitative easing to fix the problem.
Oct 18, 2012 10:24pm
sleeper's avatar

sleeper

Legend

27,879 posts
Oct 18, 2012 10:25 PM
ZWICK 4 PREZ;1298627 wrote:I will right after you answer how many times the US Gov has gone bankrupt. Even after that horrible horrible FDR.
And every day in history before 9/10/2001, how many planes had flown into the World Trade Center Towers?

Your logic is so broken it's embarrassing.
Oct 18, 2012 10:25pm
ZWICK 4 PREZ's avatar

ZWICK 4 PREZ

Senior Member

7,733 posts
Oct 19, 2012 6:00 AM
gut;1298661 wrote:Is it not 0? And your argument is because it's never happened that it can't and won't happen? Seriously? That's the height of stupid irresponsibility.
A government can't go bankrupt. Bankruptcy is a formal process with a legal outcome that leads to discharging debts. It’s only available only to individuals and certain classes of organizations. Individuals, most private companies, and local governments can go bankrupt but state and federal governments, banks, and insurers can’t. Banks and insurers “become insolvent” and have government-run or mandated insurers pay some or all what they owe. Basically all the US government can do is say we're not paying your pensions or Social Security because we can't afford to. They can't go through bankruptcy.
Oct 19, 2012 6:00am
C

Con_Alma

Senior Member

12,198 posts
Oct 19, 2012 6:47 AM
Very true zwick. It's not the government going "bankrupt" that's the concern but rather the lack of organization in commerce and confidence in the currency that would create chaos and disrupt people's lives.
Oct 19, 2012 6:47am
J

jmog

Senior Member

6,567 posts
Oct 19, 2012 8:18 AM
ZWICK 4 PREZ;1298471 wrote:I vote Republican b/c I think privatizing everything is a really great idea with no risks whatsoever.

Especially since no ones investments tanked 4 years ago.
As an engineer who understands math I would hope you understand the stock market a LITTLE better than looking at a snapshot of a few months.

Look at the market over many years, it is ALWAYS trending up, SS right now gets pretty much 0%. Anything positive over time is better than 0. Its compound interest, they teach that in pre-calculus which I assume you had in 11th grade.
Oct 19, 2012 8:18am
ZWICK 4 PREZ's avatar

ZWICK 4 PREZ

Senior Member

7,733 posts
Oct 19, 2012 9:04 AM
jmog;1298853 wrote:As an engineer who understands math I would hope you understand the stock market a LITTLE better than looking at a snapshot of a few months.

Look at the market over many years, it is ALWAYS trending up, SS right now gets pretty much 0%. Anything positive over time is better than 0. Its compound interest, they teach that in pre-calculus which I assume you had in 11th grade.

The math is very simple.. There were people who were ready to retire that lost 100,000-300,000 on their 401k who no longer could afford to retire and are still working today. Trending upwards means very little when the market crashes and you lose at a much larger/faster rate.
Oct 19, 2012 9:04am
C

Con_Alma

Senior Member

12,198 posts
Oct 19, 2012 9:09 AM
The people who were "ready to retire" should not have had their assets in volatile equities. That was a mistake.

Why were they not reducing their exposure as their magical date drew near?
Oct 19, 2012 9:09am
ZWICK 4 PREZ's avatar

ZWICK 4 PREZ

Senior Member

7,733 posts
Oct 19, 2012 9:13 AM
Con_Alma;1298880 wrote:The people who were "ready to retire" should not have had their assets in volatile equities. That was a mistake.

Why were they not reducing their exposure as their magical date drew near?
Probably b/c everything was a volatile equity. If you had some magical equity 4 years ago that didn't lose you a great deal of money I'd like to hear what it was b/c you're the first person I've heard from that didn't.
Oct 19, 2012 9:13am
C

Con_Alma

Senior Member

12,198 posts
Oct 19, 2012 9:15 AM
They should not have had assets in equities that they were counting on to use as income in the short term.

There's nothing magical about that. They chose poorly.
Oct 19, 2012 9:15am
ZWICK 4 PREZ's avatar

ZWICK 4 PREZ

Senior Member

7,733 posts
Oct 19, 2012 9:33 AM
Con_Alma;1298884 wrote:They should not have had assets in equities that they were counting on to use as income in the short term.

There's nothing magical about that. They chose poorly.
What if you were close to retirement. You were 60. Planned on going at 65 and the market crashed. With the market crashing meant loss of jobs. With the loss off jobs your position was eliminated. You're no longer retiring at 65 or you are with a much lower balance as you try to find a job in the next years.
Oct 19, 2012 9:33am
C

Con_Alma

Senior Member

12,198 posts
Oct 19, 2012 9:37 AM
ZWICK 4 PREZ;1298897 wrote:What if you were close to retirement. You were 60. Planned on going at 65 and the market crashed. With the market crashing meant loss of jobs. With the loss off jobs your position was eliminated. You're no longer retiring at 65 or you are with a much lower balance as you try to find a job in the next years.
5 years is too close to have assets in equities that you will rely upon for income although it's getting close.
Oct 19, 2012 9:37am
ZWICK 4 PREZ's avatar

ZWICK 4 PREZ

Senior Member

7,733 posts
Oct 19, 2012 9:40 AM
Con_Alma;1298901 wrote:5 years is too close to have assets in equities that you will rely upon for income although it's getting close.
Really? b/c financial advisors are telling you to take advantage of the extra 5500 pre-tax contribution.
Oct 19, 2012 9:40am
C

Con_Alma

Senior Member

12,198 posts
Oct 19, 2012 9:43 AM
ZWICK 4 PREZ;1298905 wrote:Really? b/c financial advisors are telling you to take advantage of the extra 5500 pre-tax contribution.
I didn't say not contribute. I said the assets shouldn't be in an equity....those that would be relied upon for income in the near future.

If a cash equivalent isn't available in the plan then the risk reward must be evaluated. It is still a risk they must ultimately decide. In the case you provided. They chose poorly.
Oct 19, 2012 9:43am
ZWICK 4 PREZ's avatar

ZWICK 4 PREZ

Senior Member

7,733 posts
Oct 19, 2012 9:45 AM
Con_Alma;1298907 wrote:I didn't say not contribute. I said the assets shouldn't be in an equity....those that would be relied upon for income in the near future.

If a cash equivalent isn't available in the plan then the risk reward must be evaluated. It is still a risk they must ultimately decide. In the case you provided. They chose poorly.
We also don't know what kind of options we'd have in a privatized social security system.
Oct 19, 2012 9:45am
Belly35's avatar

Belly35

Elderly Intellectual

9,716 posts
Oct 19, 2012 9:47 AM
ZWICK 4 PREZ;1298897 wrote:What if you were close to retirement. You were 60. Planned on going at 65 and the market crashed. With the market crashing meant loss of jobs. With the loss off jobs your position was eliminated. You're no longer retiring at 65 or you are with a much lower balance as you try to find a job in the next years.
I'm 63 and because of the Obama failure I and many like me will have to take our retirement at 65 but continue to work for additional 10 years to make up for loses. I never planned or truely retiring I will alway work at something just not as hard.
What once was successful buinesses able to be sold with a profitable income to me is now not hold the same value they once had four years ago.
I have to rebuild what I built that Obama didn't build
Oct 19, 2012 9:47am
C

Con_Alma

Senior Member

12,198 posts
Oct 19, 2012 9:54 AM
ZWICK 4 PREZ;1298911 wrote:We also don't know what kind of options we'd have in a privatized social security system.
It is not the privatized SS program I was speaking of but I agree, we do not know what it may or may not have as an option.
Oct 19, 2012 9:54am