I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang
My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang
And very few people on Wall Street can beat the market anyway. I wouldn't put too much faith in their predictive powers. A year before the election, the best we can do is try to estimate the probabilities of the outcome of the election. On InTrade, the probability of either party winning the White House next November is currently trading at about 50%. That seems reasonable to me; a year before the election you'd do just as well flipping a coin. The idea that anyone can be so sure that they know what will happen in the next election which is a year away is ridiculous (especially when even the PRESENT numbers don't agree with their prediction).Hell part of the whole of Wall Street is about predicting the political environment.
Yeah, it's mostly wasted breath. Actually it probably serves to polarize both the electorate and the Congress. That may occasionally work if the president's party has a huge majority in Congress or if the president is extremely popular...but usually that isn't the case. As Matt Yglesias recently put it, "If there’s an issue you’d like to see progress on, your best hope by far is for two relatively obscure members of congress from opposite sides to reach an agreement, then persuade a bunch of their colleagues, and then unveil the proposal as a big bipartisan initiative." So yes, that presidential talking, cajoling, wheedling, threats, and diplomacy is mostly wasted breath. The president's only real power over legislation is the threat to veto it.But it is the President that can, through leadership, guide the way things go. Or has all the talking, cajoling, wheedling, threats, diplomacy that has been issued by Presidents towards the Congress and Senate done by pretty much every single President in US history just wasted breath?
Why Presidential Leadership Doesn't Work Very Well | ThinkProgress
Are you coming to bed?
I can't. This is important.
Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD
The sad thing about it is that many businesses, mine included, have to take steps to limit the negative impact some new legislation has on their businesses. I am not at the point where I'm stopping all hiring, but I can tell you that with the pending, progressive implementation of Obamacare, I am now limiting workers to 30 hours- possibly with the plan to cut hours more to keep below the 50 full time (or FTE) employee limit where we would begin to be required to offer health insurance. Our industry is not conducive to offering health insurance to workers, and we will be unable to do so.... so the choice we have to make is to go ahead and reduce the allowable hours.
These types of decisions are made everyday, and generally hurt the very people they were intended to help.
Last edited by kamikaze483; 11-29-11 at 06:54 PM.
You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo
Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
It is the legislation of this president that presents a marked, real hardship for small businesses. Not the president himself. His was not a political statement as much as it was a business statement. It is his belief that the president's legislative agenda is causing harm to his business. And he's probably right.
Ranking of economies - Doing Business - World Bank Group
Ease of Doing Business Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
we're number four worldwide.
AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.