Jump to content

Blue Wave would provide boost to economy per Goldman Sachs chief economist?


TxHoops

Recommended Posts

Our resident financial guru Nash currently has limited computer/internet access.  So no one thinks he is ignoring the question, he will give us his thoughts when he is able.  I posted this because I was genuinely interested in his opinion having personally found the article a little surprising.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, TxHoops said:

Our resident financial guru Nash currently has limited computer/internet access.  So no one thinks he is ignoring the question, he will give us his thoughts when he is able.  I posted this because I was genuinely interested in his opinion having personally found the article a little surprising.  

I admit I didn’t read the article.   The title of the thread was mind boggling enough.   😳😳😳

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/6/2020 at 9:49 PM, TxHoops said:

Our resident financial guru Nash currently has limited computer/internet access.  So no one thinks he is ignoring the question, he will give us his thoughts when he is able.  I posted this because I was genuinely interested in his opinion having personally found the article a little surprising.  

That Blue Wave is Toilet Water! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The leadership at Goldman Sachs is notoriously democratic-  I can't imagine a blue wave providing any significant boost to the economy.  The markets prefer gridlock where one party does not control all three branches.  What would concern me more is that Biden gets elected and then his very own party mobilizes the 25th amendment and replaces Biden with  Kamala Harris, whom I believe is ill equipped for the Oval Office and very ill equipped to be making any financial decisions for this country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, stevenash said:

The leadership at Goldman Sachs is notoriously democratic-  I can't imagine a blue wave providing any significant boost to the economy.  The markets prefer gridlock where one party does not control all three branches.  What would concern me more is that Biden gets elected and then his very own party mobilizes the 25th amendment and replaces Biden with  Kamala Harris, whom I believe is ill equipped for the Oval Office and very ill equipped to be making any financial decisions for this country.

She s ill equipped to be a “good for America” leader, but a good leader for those that want to fall inline with socialism. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, stevenash said:

The leadership at Goldman Sachs is notoriously democratic-  I can't imagine a blue wave providing any significant boost to the economy.  The markets prefer gridlock where one party does not control all three branches.  What would concern me more is that Biden gets elected and then his very own party mobilizes the 25th amendment and replaces Biden with  Kamala Harris, whom I believe is ill equipped for the Oval Office and very ill equipped to be making any financial decisions for this country.

I can. Certainty in the markets for one thing. Biden won’t call off a legislative deal as significant as the stimulus one day only to call for it the next day then double what everyone else was asking the next.   
Encouraging investment in new technology and making investments in infrastructure will do more for the middle class than a paltry tax cut.
I think the markets are ready to see a functional Congress, and it appears one party control is the only way legislation will ever be passed. Conservatives peed away their opportunity by following Orange Man over the cliff.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, UT alum said:

I can. Certainty in the markets for one thing. Biden won’t call off a legislative deal as significant as the stimulus one day only to call for it the next day then double what everyone else was asking the next.   
Encouraging investment in new technology and making investments in infrastructure will do more for the middle class than a paltry tax cut.
I think the markets are ready to see a functional Congress, and it appears one party control is the only way legislation will ever be passed. Conservatives peed away their opportunity by following Orange Man over the cliff.

 

Bi-partisan congresses have worked up until your socialist democrats have sat on their hands, balked at anything Trump wanted to do, brought false charges about Russia, attempted a coup-de-gras with their false impeachment charges, and have literally watched as America has been set on fire, looted by criminals, divided by communist/racist blm, and attacked by communist antifa. One party rule.....you are right, and it’s called the communist party. Your last sentence is something a 3rd grader would write.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, UT alum said:

I can. Certainty in the markets for one thing. Biden won’t call off a legislative deal as significant as the stimulus one day only to call for it the next day then double what everyone else was asking the next.   
Encouraging investment in new technology and making investments in infrastructure will do more for the middle class than a paltry tax cut.
I think the markets are ready to see a functional Congress, and it appears one party control is the only way legislation will ever be passed. Conservatives peed away their opportunity by following Orange Man over the cliff.

 

Thanks but I think I will stick with my 35 years of involvement with these markets.  You speak of new technology- would that be like the wonderful investment made in Solyndra?  The market has stated repeatedly for many many many years that it prefers a divided power structure as opposed to all three sectors under one political party.  Most reason that it prevents either side from going to an extreme.  Example_ the green new deal would be very damaging to our economic system

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, UT alum said:

I can. Certainty in the markets for one thing. Biden won’t call off a legislative deal as significant as the stimulus one day only to call for it the next day then double what everyone else was asking the next.   
Encouraging investment in new technology and making investments in infrastructure will do more for the middle class than a paltry tax cut.
I think the markets are ready to see a functional Congress, and it appears one party control is the only way legislation will ever be passed. Conservatives peed away their opportunity by following Orange Man over the cliff.

 

Are you sure you want socialism? Here is how it works.  
 

This is the hidden content, please

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/10/2020 at 3:06 PM, stevenash said:

The leadership at Goldman Sachs is notoriously democratic-  I can't imagine a blue wave providing any significant boost to the economy.  The markets prefer gridlock where one party does not control all three branches.  What would concern me more is that Biden gets elected and then his very own party mobilizes the 25th amendment and replaces Biden with  Kamala Harris, whom I believe is ill equipped for the Oval Office and very ill equipped to be making any financial decisions for this country.

What are your credentials?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, stevenash said:

Thanks but I think I will stick with my 35 years of involvement with these markets.  You speak of new technology- would that be like the wonderful investment made in Solyndra?  The market has stated repeatedly for many many many years that it prefers a divided power structure as opposed to all three sectors under one political party.  Most reason that it prevents either side from going to an extreme.  Example_ the green new deal would be very damaging to our economic system

That started under Bush

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Big girl said:

That started under Bush

The DOE loan program that 

This is the hidden content, please
 was actually started by President Bush in 2005. It was intended to provide government support for "innovative technologies." 

But the Bush administration never approved Solyndra's loan, saying the application needed more work.
 

Don’t be telling BIG HALF TRUTHS. Bush started the Department of Energy Loan Program not Solyndra. They never approved the loan because of the same reason it failed. Go sell that nonsense to someone else.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/11/2020 at 5:51 PM, stevenash said:

My opinion was solicited rather than offered.

Folks that go to College don’t learn everything.  What they learn is how to find out things.   Tx Hoops solicited your opinion on a financial report and you solicit his opinion on basketball.   Is that just about right?   😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Hagar said:

Folks that go to College don’t learn everything.  What they learn is how to find out things.   Tx Hoops solicited your opinion on a financial report and you solicit his opinion on basketball.   Is that just about right?   😂

Well stated.   I was also going to mention that while Steve Jobs and Bill Gates failed to finish college, the Unabomber and Ted Bundy both had advanced formal educations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,978
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    cfbswami
    Newest Member
    cfbswami
    Joined


  • Posts

    • Tomball takes wild 2nd game 8-6. Both teams had 3 E's. Tomball gave up a late lead but first game pitching star Sampson nailed a 3 run homer to push Tomball to victory. 
    • My understanding is that the falsification of records was the crime that he was convicted of… but for it to have been a felony act, it had to have occurred in the furtherance of another criminal act. The prosecution had to first prove that the criminal act of falsifying documents had occurred. IF the jury believed that records were falsified, they were given three possible criminal acts… any one of the three would allow a felony conviction. The instructions stated that for any of the 34 charges, all twelve of the jurors had to agree that records were falsified, but they also had to believe that the records were falsified in the furtherance of at least one other, different crime. Six jurors could believe that Trump was falsifying records to avoid paying taxes… the other six could believe that it was skirt around election laws. The jurors didn’t have to agree on which of the three alleged criminal acts Trump was trying to further by falsifying records, just so long as they agreed that a) the falsification occurred and that it b) occurred to help him cover up another crime (for which he wasn’t charged and never proven to have committed or to have even occurred, for that matter).     Complete pile of crap as a prosecution, in my opinion.     But, we shouldn’t cry if our nominee is the kind of man who bangs porn stars while his wife is at home with the kid, then tries to buy her silence, then breaks the law in regards to falsifying documents to hide the evidence of the coverup.    If you’re wondering why falsifying those records might be illegal, it’s this. Money paid to your attorney for services performed can be deducted from one’s taxes as a legal expense. If the money is paid to a person to settle a personal claim, then the amount would be taxable-the falsification would have been done to avoid taxation. On the other hand, if campaign funds were spent to pay hush money and the records were falsified to hide the violation of campaign laws, then the felony occurred.    The bottom line is this…. They didn’t have enough evidence to indict trump on any of those three things that allegedly happened… but they DID have evidence that the financial records were falsified, so they point at these other acts which can’t be proven to bump the charges on falsification to a felony.    And the reason Trump didn’t take the stand is that he can’t go on the record about whether or not he had sex with Daniels… I’m certain that they can prove it and hang him up on perjury too.    The most delicious irony is this… Trump gave his supporters too much credit for their integrity. He thought they’d turn on him if they found out what he’d done, when in reality they wouldn’t have given a care… Trump’s whole falsifying records and quest for secrecy wasn’t even needed… his followers don’t have moral objections to his sinful acts.  
    • Wake is about to go from Preseason #1 to the 1st team eliminated 
    • The Republican Party is dying because of folks like you who want to compromise with socialists and folks that proclaim “from the river to the sea” in reference to Israel.  I don’t want a party that folks such as yourself want to save, may as well be democrats, which you apparently are. My standards haven’t changed, yours have.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...