What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

Are there enough jails to hold them all?
Commentator on SNN had a good line:
"Obama is beholden to the Goldman Sachs sixth floor, Romney to the fifth floor!"
.

Heh, "Keynesian brain fart" gotta love that one.

Here's another : "Fed Reserve credit Dysentery"

and another : "zombie banking flatulence"

If the car had "Economy" written on the side it would need no explanation. All they have really done is move all the sub prime loans from the housing market to the auto market. That should work out well.

Goodm times ahead for the repo-men...

There's another thread on that blog; 'Reality vs Obama: Is it really a revenue problem?'

Lays it out very simply

"In 8 years, George W. Bush spent ~$2 Trillion more than he took in.

- In Obama's first 3 years, he has spent ~$4 Trillion more than he has taken in.

So in other words, it's taken 3 years for Obama to double GW's total deficit."

And notes that Obama has taken in more revenue that any other administration but as noted, the problem isn't revenue, it's spending.

It's going to be a very tight race. The Obama campaign is focused around identity blocs: blacks, hispanics, women. He's not focusing on the jobs or economy. The Romney campaign is focused around jobs and the economy not around identity blocs.

The fact that ideology for the Democrats trumps reality was shown by the DNC vote to reinsert God and Jerusalem into the platform. Three times they asked for a voice vote, and three times it was clear that the vote was 'no'. But the words, which had already been written, rejected the vote from the floor, and stated that 'two-thirds voted yes'. Remarkable. That's how Obama operates. And it worked; don't ignore this; it worked.

Now, the Romney campaign operates not within ideology but within, as Ryan pointed out, an 'idea' embedded in the Constitution, of freedom for the individual. The policies that enable this are to be decided by the people. By vote. Will Americans decide on reality or ideology?

Luxury cars are selling well. I've imported a number of used vehicles from the southern states to sell in Saskatchewan because they're cheaper down there and our economy is booming. Brokers like Texas Direct have as many as 19 salesmen working internet sales.

What I haven't noticed is a comparative decrease in the price of high end vehicles. My apologies to hard core right wingers, but it's made me wonder who is really facing a recession. It doesn't seem to be the wealthy.

I have no problem with this policy that ensures the deadbeat getting his. With all the trillions spent on ensuring bankers and traders sleep well at night,, why not. I have accepted the fact that the whole rotten mess will have to collapse for meaningful change to happen. You can't addict children to candy and then suddenly take it away and expect them to remain silent.

Here is a 13 min. video of what will happen when the economic sh*t hits the fan.

http://www.forbiddenknowledgetv.com/videos/collapse/economic-collapse-a-mathematical-certainty---top-5-places-where-not-to-be.html

No tin foil hat needed to see the truth in this.

What the hell is Honey Boo Boo? A TV show? Never heard of it. Mind you, I also no longer have any debt and drive a 1990 Jetta Diesel that I bought as a write off and fixed up myself. I guess I'm the 1%?

This is why shares in Ritchie Brother auction operation have gone through the roof. Amazing the self-delusion calculations of the left-wing ideologists.

'Looks like a Clint Eastwood movie!

From Bernard Goldberg's website.

It is obvious from the Democratic convention this week that the Obama campaign believes that their intervention in the failure of GM and Chrysler was a positive. They seem to be making the case that without the administration making a deal while ignoring the rules of bankruptcy law, GM and Chrysler wouldn’t exist now.

http://www.bernardgoldberg.com/were-we-going-to-run-out-of-cars/?utm_source=BernardGoldberg.com+Newsletter&utm_campaign=e7cd1e5a04-NEWSLETTER&utm_medium=email

Thanks for that great article, lance. I hope everyone reads it carefully. The use of subprime auto loans to window dress the 'indicators' is just another bellwether warning that things are destined to go seriously south in the near-term if Obama remains in office, and that, unfortunately, they'll probably go south in the longer term even if Romney gets in for a term or two. When you're at the point where about fifty percent of Americans aren't paying net federal income tax, and they become inured to the idea of getting free/cheap "stuff", and loans for 'whatev' at the expense of others, the democratic process can easily be used for destructive purposes, which clearly suits the Alinskyite president just fine. The fact that the "government/corporate/banker/media effort to funnel taxpayer funds to deadbeats across the land in a fruitless attempt to create a facade of recovery" is disastrous for the economy, and for America's future, is neither here nor there for the current administration, because it's potentially a winner *politically*.

Based on his disastrous economic record alone Obama should be polling at 20 percent, but his anti-American, hate-based redistribution scheme is highly attractive to pretty much half of the population at this point. It's sad to see, but there it is.

Batten down the hatches, there's a thumb-of-god storm ahead.

I don't know if I am guilty or not. I have 4 years left of a 0%, 0 down auto loan for my Mazda. The catch is that I have the money to pay cash for the thing sitting in a bank account earning a whopping 1% interest! Same with my fridge, interest free for a year. The biggest thing to remember is not to touch that money to use anywhere else.

In light of other SDA posts of late, one thing they should teach in school is basic home economics, as in balancing a budget so when you finally leave the family basement you understand that those nice folks a "Payday Loans" and/or cousin Vinny aren't there to help you out. Balancing your cheque book 101 should be a required course in high school, screw the Latin/French stuff.

@ Texas
Nothing wrong with what you're doing as long as you've read the fine print.

I just brought home a 'new to me' used car yesterday.

I was choosing between a 2008 with 43,000K, priced at $19,995 or a 2005 with 65,000K priced at $10,700 - both were in comparable condition with very similar options.

The 'consumer' side of me said ooohh, isn't that newer vehicle nice. But the pratical side prevailed and I want the lowest cost per kilometer I can buy.

Better to keep the extra $10K in the bank, because both cars will last about the same amount of time. The neighbours see my car, but I live with my bank account.

No Guff makes the real point here. Which is that a seven year old car sells for $10K. Which is obscene.

IMHO the truth about cars is that no one can afford them. The reason for that is regulations. You can't demand completely new engine technologies and crash mitigating technologies every five years and expect normal people to be able to afford the results.

Thelma and Louise wasn't a great movie. For one thing, how did they survive driving into the Grand Canyon at the very end? Sloppy.

Phantom, sure its' a 7 year old car but here's the rub: seven years ago it was a $40,000 vehicle. I've got a car that looks like new, drives like new and has only about 20% of it's useful life behind it but paid about a quarter of the new price.

I was tempted by a 2005 BMW 750iL with about 75K on the clock. Originally priced at $118,000, I could have picked it up for $25,000. Beautiful car, but then I thought about having to re-mortgage the house when it needed a brake job.