OT : Obama Announces Meat Purchases, Buys More (Flagging) Support

[mo_ntresor]

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-08-13/obama-to-urge-agriculture-bill-as-usda-buys-170-million-of-meat

"President Barack Obama, campaigning in Iowa today, announced $170 million
in government meat purchases to help farmers struck by drought, helping to
send hog prices to a one-week high."


any idea how farmers have done the last three years? save when things are
great to pay your way when they aren't. can somebody explain this to the
world class moron we have for a president?

mo_ntresor

[Clave]

"mo_ntresor" <amontillad...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:eqrof9x...@news.ezprovider.com...

<...>

> can somebody explain this to the
> world class moron we have for a president?

mo_ron thinks he's smarter than Barack Obama.

That's fucking hilarious.

Jim

[VegasJerry]

He also thinks he's smarter than the Republicans. They block the Farm Bill in order to get idiots like mo_ron to believe it's Obama's fault. The Republican's only hope is idiots like mo_ron, Truth(not)Seaker and Jason; voting against their own economic wellbeing.

That's fucking sad.

[mo_ntresor]

On Aug 14 2012 11:24 AM, VegasJerry wrote:

> > mo_ron thinks he's smarter than Barack Obama.
> >
> > That's fucking hilarious.
>

> He also thinks he's smarter than the Republicans. They block the Farm Bill
in order to get idiots
> like mo_ron to believe it's Obama's fault. The Republican's only hope is
idiots like mo_ron,
> Truth(not)Seaker and Jason; voting against their own economic wellbeing.
>
> That's fucking sad.

we don't need more farm bills. we don't need more bailouts of idiots. we
need a market enforcing discipline on parties taking risks.

mo_ntresor

[O-PGManager]

Says the guy who supported TARP.

Opie G. Manager
Rec.Gambling.Poker
Assistant Newsgroup Coordinator Emeritus (2009-2011)

[mo_ntresor]

On Aug 14 2012 12:23 PM, O-PGManager wrote:

> > we don't need more farm bills. we don't need more bailouts of idiots. we
> > need a market enforcing discipline on parties taking risks.
>

> Says the guy who supported TARP.

you're so fucking stupid sometimes, it's hard to believe what i'm reading.
the financial bailout was necessary. auto and farm bailouts are handouts
predicated on an emotional electorate's inability to think.

mo_ntresor

[O-PGManager]

Ohhhhhhhh it was "necessary" - so the "need a market enforcing discipline
on parties taking risks" requirement can be thrown out the window.

Hey Mo - did you know in addition to voting for the Medicare budget
exploding Part D Paul Ryan also favors INCREASED DEFENSE SPENDING....

"Over the ten-year period covered by the budget resolution, this budget
restores about half of the funding cut by the President and ensures that
the defense budget grows in real terms in each year..."

A real deficit warrior that one!

http://nation.time.com/2012/08/13/ryans-hope-dont-cut-military-spending-so-deeply/

[mo_ntresor]

On Aug 14 2012 8:55 PM, O-PGManager wrote:

> > you're so fucking stupid sometimes, it's hard to believe what i'm reading.
> > the financial bailout was necessary. auto and farm bailouts are handouts
> > predicated on an emotional electorate's inability to think.
>

> Ohhhhhhhh it was "necessary" - so the "need a market enforcing discipline
> on parties taking risks" requirement can be thrown out the window.
>
> Hey Mo - did you know in addition to voting for the Medicare budget
> exploding Part D Paul Ryan also favors INCREASED DEFENSE SPENDING....
>
> "Over the ten-year period covered by the budget resolution, this budget
> restores about half of the funding cut by the President and ensures that
> the defense budget grows in real terms in each year..."
>
> A real deficit warrior that one!
>
>
http://nation.time.com/2012/08/13/ryans-hope-dont-cut-military-spending-so-deeply/

yes, tarp was absolutely necessary. it also cost taxpayers NOTHING.
compare that to democrat babies fnm, fre, and autos. that's REALITY.

mo_ntresor

[O-PGManager]

Any comment on your "financial guy" hero Paul Ryan's calls for INCREASING
our insanely bloated defense budget?

[mo_ntresor]

On Aug 15 2012 8:51 AM, O-PGManager wrote:

>
http://nation.time.com/2012/08/13/ryans-hope-dont-cut-military-spending-so-deeply/
> >
> > yes, tarp was absolutely necessary. it also cost taxpayers NOTHING.
> > compare that to democrat babies fnm, fre, and autos. that's REALITY.
>

> Any comment on your "financial guy" hero Paul Ryan's calls for INCREASING
> our insanely bloated defense budget?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Defense_Spending_Trends.png
http://paulryan.house.gov/uploadedfiles/pathtoprosperity2013.pdf

page 17, "$6.2T over the next decade". doesn't look like an increase to
me.

mo_ntresor

[mo_ntresor]

On Aug 15 2012 9:24 AM, ChrisRobin wrote:

> > yes, tarp was absolutely necessary. it also cost taxpayers NOTHING.
>

> That's quite possibly the dumbest thing you've ever said, and it's not
> exactly suffering from an absence of competition.

sure, let's figure it out. where are your numbers?

mo_ntresor

[ChrisRobin]

On Aug 15 2012 6:55 AM, mo_ntresor wrote:

> yes, tarp was absolutely necessary. it also cost taxpayers NOTHING.

[mo_ntresor]

On Aug 15 2012 9:26 AM, mo_ntresor wrote:

> > That's quite possibly the dumbest thing you've ever said, and it's not
> > exactly suffering from an absence of competition.
>
> sure, let's figure it out. where are your numbers?

http://www.foxbusiness.com/news/2012/08/13/treasury-raises-tarp-cost-estimate-as-share-prices-shift/

"The Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, will ultimately cost
taxpayers $47.75 billion, the Treasury said in a monthly report sent to
Congress Friday. That is up from the previous estimate of $43.32 billion."

but wait!

"The latest calculation puts the cost of the auto bailout at $25.05
billion, up from the previous estimate of $21.70 billion."

so $22B (less than autos mind you). which can be found in two banks (aid,
citi):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program

satisfied?

mo_ntresor

[mo_ntresor]

On Aug 15 2012 9:40 AM, mo_ntresor wrote:

>
http://www.foxbusiness.com/news/2012/08/13/treasury-raises-tarp-cost-estimate-as-share-prices-shift/
>
> "The Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, will ultimately cost
> taxpayers $47.75 billion, the Treasury said in a monthly report sent to
> Congress Friday. That is up from the previous estimate of $43.32 billion."
>
> but wait!
>
> "The latest calculation puts the cost of the auto bailout at $25.05
> billion, up from the previous estimate of $21.70 billion."
>
> so $22B (less than autos mind you). which can be found in two banks (aid,
> citi):
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program
>
> satisfied?

if these estimates meet your astute, critical, and mathematical minds, we
can then talk about the benefits of the program. let me know when you're
ready.

mo_ntresor

[mo_ntresor]

On Aug 15 2012 4:55 AM, mo_ntresor wrote:

> yes, tarp was absolutely necessary. it also cost taxpayers NOTHING.
> compare that to democrat babies fnm, fre, and autos. that's REALITY.

i would like to correct my statement about tarp costing taxpayers
"nothing". clearly that was wrong. after thorough analysis, i'd say tarp
MADE taxpayers many multiples of the initial investment (ex-auto, of
course!).

mo_ntresor

[ChrisRobin]

Why compound one moronic error with another?

[ChrisRobin]

TARP itself, estimated at $59.75 billion:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/07/27/the-48-billion-tarp-puzzle/

However, you're being willfully disingenuous (and you know it) by focusing
on TARP alone, because it was just a drop in the bucket when compared to
the greater bailout. WSJ estimates that nearly $2 trillion is still at
risk from the non-TARP bailouts, plus an additional $1.1 trillion of MBSs
that the Fed was forced to swallow:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703899704576204383282043422.html

None of this, of course, takes into account the casualties inflicted by
the zero-interest rate policies (ZIRP) the Fed instituted as part of the
bailout. Its sole function is to buoy banks' balance sheets at the expense
of taxpayers' savings. How's an estimated $384.5 billion annually?:

http://www.nysun.com/national/bernankes-zero-interest-rate-policy-turns-out/87738/

Satisfied?

[O-PGManager]

It's an increase from their scheduled decrease. For fuck's sake, you
really are with Paul Ryan on saying Obama's puny defense cuts are
"dangerous"?

[O-PGManager]

On Aug 15 2012 12:01 PM, ChrisRobin wrote:

> On Aug 15 2012 11:26 AM, mo_ntresor wrote:
>
> > On Aug 15 2012 9:24 AM, ChrisRobin wrote:
> >
> > > > yes, tarp was absolutely necessary. it also cost taxpayers NOTHING.
> > >
> > > That's quite possibly the dumbest thing you've ever said, and it's not
> > > exactly suffering from an absence of competition.
> >
> > sure, let's figure it out. where are your numbers?
>
> TARP itself, estimated at $59.75 billion:
>
>
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/07/27/the-48-billion-tarp-puzzle/
>
> However, you're being willfully disingenuous (and you know it)

No, he doesn't know it. The guy thinks Paul Ryan wants to cut defense
spending. He sees only what he wants to see.

[ChrisRobin]

On Aug 15 2012 4:14 PM, O-PGManager wrote:

> No, he doesn't know it. The guy thinks Paul Ryan wants to cut defense
> spending. He sees only what he wants to see.

Ryan's planned Medicare budget is also bigger than Obama's. Shocking, I
know.

[johnny_t]

On 8/14/12 10:53 AM, mo_ntresor wrote:

> we don't need more farm bills. we don't need more bailouts of idiots. we
> need a market enforcing discipline on parties taking risks.

Is it society's best interest in having a food market that is in
abundance as often as possible, 100% of the time if possible?

Or one that is bound by market constraints, and suffers from cartel-ism,
destructive speculation, physical disaster, so in the best of times
there is slightly too little, in moderately bad times, we suffer from
massive inflation and hunger.

The manipulation of agricultural markets in the west and the United
States in particular has been one of the massively most successful
programs from a societal standpoint, the world has ever seen. Breaking
the markets by overstimulating demand through many different societal
wide programs (paid with tax dollars), has created an abundance of
supply resulting in plenty of supply, and keeping suppliers happy enough
to keep doing it, year after year...

(If you believe that you need to call me a communist because of the
above paragraph, you are wrong. A socialist, you are wrong. But I am
definitely not a believer in unconstrained capitalism. And that there
are certain constraints and manipulations of market by society that are
to society's benefit).

The worst drought in 60 years, is not bailouts of idiots. It is
precisely the kind of thing a nation rallies around to help solve.

Seriously dude, what the f##k is wrong with you?

[mo_ntresor]

On Aug 15 2012 2:10 PM, O-PGManager wrote:

> > > Any comment on your "financial guy" hero Paul Ryan's calls for INCREASING
> > > our insanely bloated defense budget?
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Defense_Spending_Trends.png
> > http://paulryan.house.gov/uploadedfiles/pathtoprosperity2013.pdf
> >
> > page 17, "$6.2T over the next decade". doesn't look like an increase to
> > me.
>
> It's an increase from their scheduled decrease. For fuck's sake, you
> really are with Paul Ryan on saying Obama's puny defense cuts are
> "dangerous"?

you said ryan wanted to increase defense spending, that was factually
incorrect. now, you want to put words in my mouth.

mo_ntresor

[FL Turbo]

On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 20:04:14 -0700, "mo_ntresor"
<amontillad...@gmail.com> wrote:

>http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-08-13/obama-to-urge-agriculture-bill-as-usda-buys-170-million-of-meat
>
>"President Barack Obama, campaigning in Iowa today, announced $170 million
>in government meat purchases to help farmers struck by drought, helping to
>send hog prices to a one-week high."
>

Obama solidifies his position as Panderer-in-Chief.
Add this latest pander to special interest groups (Iowa farmers) to
his previous record.

1. Pandering to the Welfare Lobby by relaxing work requirements for
Welfare eligibility.

2. Pandering to the Gay Lobby with his new, improved position on Gay
Marriage.

3. Pandering to the Illegal Alien Lobby with his refusal to uphold the
immigration laws.

---------------------------------------------------------
"If you voted for Obama to prove you aren't a Racist, you now have to
vote for Romney to prove you aren't stupid."
(Obamabots excepted - we already know they are stupid.)

[Pepe Papon]

He's also smarter than Nobel economist Paul Krugman. Nobel prizes
mean nothing, you know. Idiots get Nobel prizes in Economics.

But the University of Chicago has lots of Nobel Prize winners on the
faculty, and therefore, it's the greatest university in the world.
Even though the teachers there can't teach.

--

Pepe "The Revelation" Papon

[mo_ntresor]

On Aug 15 2012 3:32 PM, ChrisRobin wrote:

> > No, he doesn't know it. The guy thinks Paul Ryan wants to cut defense
> > spending. He sees only what he wants to see.
>
> Ryan's planned Medicare budget is also bigger than Obama's. Shocking, I
> know.

obama's got a budget? CHECK IT! how accurate did his 2008 "plan" or
"budget" turn out to be? i don't remember the commercials where he
promised $6T in debt. are they on youtube?

mo_ntresor

[mo_ntresor]

On Aug 15 2012 10:01 AM, ChrisRobin wrote:

> > sure, let's figure it out. where are your numbers?
>
> TARP itself, estimated at $59.75 billion:
>
>
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/07/27/the-48-billion-tarp-puzzle/
>
> However, you're being willfully disingenuous (and you know it) by focusing
> on TARP alone, because it was just a drop in the bucket when compared to
> the greater bailout. WSJ estimates that nearly $2 trillion is still at
> risk from the non-TARP bailouts, plus an additional $1.1 trillion of MBSs
> that the Fed was forced to swallow:
>
>
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703899704576204383282043422.html
>
> None of this, of course, takes into account the casualties inflicted by
> the zero-interest rate policies (ZIRP) the Fed instituted as part of the
> bailout. Its sole function is to buoy banks' balance sheets at the expense
> of taxpayers' savings. How's an estimated $384.5 billion annually?:
>
>
http://www.nysun.com/national/bernankes-zero-interest-rate-policy-turns-out/87738/
>
> Satisfied?

we were talking about tarp, but i'm happy to talk about the bailout
generally. in 08-09, all banks were leveraged 30-50* and multiples of
broke. insurance was pointless, and if they were allowed to fail, all
american savings would have been wiped clean. that makes the investment
worth it.

mo_ntresor

[johnny_t]

On 8/16/12 9:39 AM, mo_ntresor wrote:
> we were talking about tarp, but i'm happy to talk about the bailout
> generally. in 08-09, all banks were leveraged 30-50* and multiples of
> broke. insurance was pointless, and if they were allowed to fail, all
> american savings would have been wiped clean. that makes the investment
> worth it.

They still are. And it wasn't savings so much, as much of that was
"insured", it was corporate reserves. Uninsured, and ridiculous
quantities of cash, all stored in MM accounts as per corporate decree.

[mo_ntresor]

not american banks, jon. companies (their money markets) are owned by
investors.

mo_ntresor

[O-PGManager]

On Aug 15 2012 10:10 PM, FL Turbo wrote:

> On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 20:04:14 -0700, "mo_ntresor"
> <amontillad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-08-13/obama-to-urge-agriculture-bill-as-usda-buys-170-million-of-meat
> >
> >"President Barack Obama, campaigning in Iowa today, announced $170 million
> >in government meat purchases to help farmers struck by drought, helping to
> >send hog prices to a one-week high."
> >
>
> Obama solidifies his position as Panderer-in-Chief.
> Add this latest pander to special interest groups (Iowa farmers) to
> his previous record.
>
> 1. Pandering to the Welfare Lobby by relaxing work requirements for
> Welfare eligibility.

Who is the 'welfare lobby'? I'm pretty sure the poor can't afford
lobbyists.

[FL Turbo]

The Poor don't need paid lobbyists.
They have all the lobby they need in government leaches who owe their
jobs to programs like food stamps and other Big Government welfare
programs.

------------------------------
Barack Obama - the Food Stamp President

[VegasJerry]

> Barack Obama - the Food Stamp President

Has anyone clued you in on who and what invented and pushed for Food Stamps?

Jerry

[O-PGManager]

Right. Lots of big money in food stamps. The NYPD just blew through 3
billion dollars unconstitutionally spying on muslims (investigations it
led to: ZERO)... but yeah, we know where the real wasteful spending is.

[FL Turbo]

On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 14:43:01 -0700, "O-PGManager"

Yeah, yeah.
It's the familiar "Hey! Look over there!" Syndrome.

It doesn't even have to be about controversial topics like the 2
mentioned.
Even the most insignificant, useless Big Government spending program
you can imagine gets the same response.

"Well, how about the money spent on <fill in the blank>?"
Same song, different verse.

Is it any wonder that no politician wants to get specific on proposed
cuts to Federal spending?
Is it any wonder that the spending keeps going up and never down, year
after year after year?

[O-PGManager]

Not from me. There are lots of places to cut spending - food for the poor
for the price of a few months in Iraq isn't one.

>
> "Well, how about the money spent on <fill in the blank>?"
> Same song, different verse.
>
> Is it any wonder that no politician wants to get specific on proposed
> cuts to Federal spending?
> Is it any wonder that the spending keeps going up and never down, year
> after year after year?

[VegasJerry]

Looks like you folks still don’t get it. Food stamps were invented by the Republicans through their corporate farmers. You know, the corporate farmers that are still getting handouts and subsidies. They wanted a bigger demand for their products in order to make more money. All part of your Farm Bill. I believe it's just about to $1 trillion dollars. Gee, them farmers still got their hands out. And you weren’t aware.

- The biggest danger to our country is an uninformed electorate.


Jerry (as a public service) 'n Vegas