the decade from hell - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-06-2010, 08:48 PM   #61
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 06:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2387 View Post
Strongbow has no concept of anything, never mind basic statistics.

She has a long history of proving this.
Wait. . .

Strongbow is a SHE?

Really?
__________________

__________________
maycocksean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2010, 08:58 PM   #62
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 11:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Those 27 months coincide more or less with the bubble period - i.e., unsustainable. Asset price bubbles are of their nature unsustainable.
Well, one could argue about all the things that went into impacting the unemployment rate during that time period, but the point remains that this was a very long period of sustained low unemployment in the country's history that is being ignored or is in fact unknown to many people in this forum. People claim this was the decade from hell, but one quarter of this decade had some of the lowest unemployment rates in the country's history.
__________________

__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2010, 09:06 PM   #63
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 06:39 PM
the total lack of analysis is mind boggling.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2010, 09:11 PM   #64
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 11:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
the total lack of analysis is mind boggling.
Your analysis on this topic I agree has been lacking. You need to consider a few things before jumping on the liberal bandwagon and calling it the decade from hell.
__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2010, 09:15 PM   #65
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,496
Local Time: 06:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post






we have an extensive piece of analysis by one of the biggest magazines in the world on one hand, and we have our most slavishly agenda-oriented poster on the other.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2010, 09:20 PM   #66
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 06:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post




we have an extensive piece of analysis by one of the biggest magazines in the world
One of the biggest LIBERAL magazines in the world. . .
__________________
maycocksean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2010, 10:20 PM   #67
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 06:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
Well, one could argue about all the things that went into impacting the unemployment rate during that time period, but the point remains that this was a very long period of sustained low unemployment in the country's history that is being ignored or is in fact unknown to many people in this forum.
To summarize this post:

"We could talk about why it happened, but that might mean that I'm not entirely correct, so let's go back to what I said so that I'm right."
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2010, 06:02 AM   #68
ONE
love, blood, life
 
mad1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Angie Jolie lover from Belfast Norn Ireland. I LOVE YOU ANGIE! Im a Bono fan!
Posts: 13,153
Local Time: 12:39 AM
wow, many of those photos (with respect!) capture so much emotion - 'the moment in time' really.

Im so glad they have given the option of viewing a photo that could offend or be disturbing, better than finding it thrust in your face.

thank you for posting that link. quite something.
__________________
mad1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2010, 01:36 PM   #69
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 11:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post




we have an extensive piece of analysis by one of the biggest magazines in the world on one hand, and we have our most slavishly agenda-oriented poster on the other.

Wonderful. More pointless labling of forum members.


Anyways, lets take a look at some of the points this so called extensive piece of analysis brought out, and what it left out:




Quote:
To paraphrase the question Ronald Reagan posed years ago, Are you better off today than you were at the beginning of the decade? For most of us, the answer is a resounding no. Let us count the ways. For one thing, the stock market is down 26% since 2000, making this the worst decade for stocks. (Inflation-adjusted, it's even worse.) I remember Warren Buffett telling me at the beginning of the decade that there was no way the go-go returns of the 1990s were going to continue and that we had better get used to meager returns going forward. Buffett saw it coming.
Stocks are down 26%, meaning this is the worst decade from hell? The vast majority of people in this world don't even own stock.


Quote:
For the average working stiff, it was a pretty lousy 10 years. The median household income in 2000 was $52,500. Last year (the most recent year available) it was $50,303.
Only $50,303 dollars in 2008. What a nightmare.

Its only after that that they actually start to deal with some truely relevant statistics like Poverty Rate and Unemployment Rate, but again, its only based on a snap shot of a point in time in 2000, and one in 2009. To the people at TIME MAGAZINE, the fact that the unemployment rate was below 5% for 27 consecutive months in Bush's second administration never happened! But of course, they will include pictures of people being killed and maimed from those months.

This is a laughably poor analysis of the past decade and is something that is cherry picked to promote an agenda.

An objective analysis would look at all the data from every month of the decade, not just the first month and the last month!

An objective look at loss of life figures, military casualties figures, Unemployment rates, inflation rates, GDP Growth rates, Debt as a percentage of GDP, the poverty rate are the types of things that need to be examined throughout each decade in order to assess which decade was better or worse.

The pictures won't show this was the worst one since the 1930s or even the so called "decade from hell". There are pictures from every decade showing the same type of hardship, pain, and loss of life.
__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2010, 02:56 PM   #70
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,646
Local Time: 06:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
The vast majority of people in this world don't even own stock.
If thats not setting yourself up to be shot down, I dont know what is
__________________
Jive Turkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2010, 03:09 PM   #71
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 06:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
Stocks are down 26%, meaning this is the worst decade from hell? The vast majority of people in this world don't even own stock.
Perhaps a better response to this point is that this is a flawed metric, in general. Sure, if you invested on January 1, 2000 and never bought or sold anything up to December 31, 2009, you'd have lost 26% on average.

If one was more active, and, say, sold riding a high or bought during a low--and "buying" can be as simple as maintaining a recurring 401K investment and "selling" as simple as doing periodic portfolio re-balancing, as suggested--then, certainly, I'd say it is more than possible to have profited during this decade. Having been a more serious investor over the last few years, I did hold during the market downturn, losing about 2/3 of my investments; but, due to maintaining my automatic monthly investments throughout this period and up to today, I've pretty much already recovered all of my losses in one year. And if I had sold before the market went sour in 2008 and bought again near the bottom, I'd have at least doubled my investment.

All in all, I'd say that the most bullish and bearish aspects of the last decade have been overstated, at least from a stock performance scenario.
__________________
melon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2010, 03:44 PM   #72
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 12:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by melon View Post
Perhaps a better response to this point is that this is a flawed metric, in general. Sure, if you invested on January 1, 2000 and never bought or sold anything up to December 31, 2009, you'd have lost 26% on average.

If one was more active, and, say, sold riding a high or bought during a low--and "buying" can be as simple as maintaining a recurring 401K investment and "selling" as simple as doing periodic portfolio re-balancing, as suggested--then, certainly, I'd say it is more than possible to have profited during this decade. Having been a more serious investor over the last few years, I did hold during the market downturn, losing about 2/3 of my investments; but, due to maintaining my automatic monthly investments throughout this period and up to today, I've pretty much already recovered all of my losses in one year. And if I had sold before the market went sour in 2008 and bought again near the bottom, I'd have at least doubled my investment.

All in all, I'd say that the most bullish and bearish aspects of the last decade have been overstated, at least from a stock performance scenario.
It occurs to me that during our threads on here on the economy and the downturn back in 2007 and 2008, every single call I made on here was right - and yet as of now, I'm actually down on my initial stake owing to a combination of poor timing and bad risk management. The markets can be cruel! Still, I'm down by less than the average fund manager, I'd wager.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2010, 05:16 PM   #73
Refugee
 
Bluer White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 1,886
Local Time: 06:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
It occurs to me that during our threads on here on the economy and the downturn back in 2007 and 2008, every single call I made on here was right - and yet as of now, I'm actually down on my initial stake owing to a combination of poor timing and bad risk management. The markets can be cruel! Still, I'm down by less than the average fund manager, I'd wager.
What do you think about 2010?
__________________
Bluer White is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2010, 05:56 PM   #74
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,238
Local Time: 05:39 PM
I agree!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
Wonderful. More pointless labling of forum members.
Little San Francisco.
__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2010, 08:14 PM   #75
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 11:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post
Little San Francisco.
The difference is, that is not directed at anyone in particular. Just the entire forum including myself.
__________________

__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best Album of the Decade? Lancemc Lemonade Stand Archive 117 02-02-2007 02:38 AM
what the hell has gone wrong? blueyedpoet Dream Out Loud (and in Colour!) 4 02-25-2005 05:41 PM
I'm going to hell because I like Interference doctorwho Lemonade Stand Archive 53 03-01-2003 03:54 AM
Hell and Back karmariff PLEBA Archive 7 10-22-2002 06:28 PM
Why I Would Follow Bono Into Hell...... U2Soar The Goal Is Soul 10 10-10-2002 03:41 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com