Funny to see the nut jobs like guito telling people since $44 that the lows were in.
I expect silver to drop along with markets like like 2008-2009. So $12 is possible.
The original post has to do with Silver and Gold.
Often enough posters here say the end of the word is coming and silver will rocket because of the massive US debt. The original post shows that Reagan was responsible for the rocketing of the US's debt. He raised the debt 300%!!! Something a Reagan worshippers ignore completely.
First off so you say dems promised spending cuts for tax raises?
So how then did the top tax rate of the wealthy go from 70% to 28% during Reagan's reign?
Guess you think everyone but a Reagan behind sniffer is ignorant.
IN another post I gave credit to House and senate also during clinton years.
ANd then we have W Bush who controlled PRESIDENCY. Repubs also controlled House and Senate for a large part of Bush's Reign. Some fiscal conservatives.
Guess democrats made Cheney say "deficits don't matter".
I think it is hilarious that this guy is calling for MORE COAL SUBSIDIES to spend money to magically try and convert coal ash sludge into something but he has been against solar subsidies.
"Now just think what a rare earth plant could do with this supply of coal ash . Talk about putting our people back to work. The US should be investing in coal not having a war on coal."
If coal ash sludge is so great then why doesn't HE invest to convert the krap into something useful?
Why don't coal companies?
Both bushs, reagan, clinton and obama were included. Reread. Get back to me.
Bush controlled presidency, House and senate and ran theh US into massive debt for non existant WMD - bush's vanity.
Why did anything need to be done with IRAQ? There were no 911 terrorists from IRAQ. Sure saddam was a bad guy, but the US simply does not have the money to be the world's policeman.
US could have gotten in volved in AFGHAN IMO and left IRAQ alone or maybe just fired a few warning shorts at Saddam to get him to behave.
US has been dealing with IRAQ/IRAQ for long time.
I read his posts in this thread.
He said "Now just think what a rare earth plant could do with this supply of coal ash . Talk about putting our people back to work. The US should be investing in coal not having a war on coal."
When someone says US has war on coal they mean the government, specifically Obama admin.
In that same senetence he clearly says here US should be investing in coal. He doesn't say US business or coal companies themselves.
On one hand you want the government to leave coal and its subsidies alone and kill solar power subsidies.
On the other hand, you want the government to meddle with(subsidize) coal plants toxic coal ash to perform magic and extract rare earth elements.
What happened to free enterprise?
If this is such a viable idea, then why don't coal companies themselves use their toxic coal ash sludge to produce the rare earth products?
No, no double standard here.
Given a choice I'd rather have the money go to rebuild US than IRAQ.
Bush/Cheney estimated cost of IRAQ to be $2 billion. Look it up.
CBO said the direct AND indirect costs of IRAQ and afghan were $3 trillion not the $2 billion estimated.
US defense budget was nearly $1000 billion in 2012. Defense budget was $354 billion in 2001.
Why does US need to spend more on defense than next top ten defense spending countries COMBINED?
Romney advocated INCREASING Defense spending by $100 billion. Sounded nuts to me.
I advocate more austerity than either party.
We should have balanced budget with some left over to pay debt each year unless someone is attacking Us at our borders.
well there you go. but you have to be honest and look at who is spending the money. Most repubs would say reagan was the best but in fact he started the mess.
Most people would say obama is the worst but in fact he is no worse than either of the bush's regarding debt.
I don't like it either. Not under Reagan, either bush or obama.
Trend looks like another double to $40 T by 2024.
Look at my response to pa31. The INTEREST ALONE on Bush's 10 trillion debt at 5% would amount to $4.7 trillion over 8 years.
Reagan started this mess and was the worst but repubs ignore that he tripled that national debt in 8 years.
Ummm pa31_350... maybe you should take a few math courses to understand this.
of course if you want to remain blindly biased then go ahead.
Percentage change is what matters which is why CLINTON Best, reagan worst.
With Bushes debt at 10 trillion, interest on that 10 trillion ALONE over 8 years at 5% is $4.7 trillion.
You are so misguided that you probably would say someone that made $1 million on $100 million capital had done better than someone that made $900,000 on $1 million capital.
Rich people. People that run big oil companies. People that like to give $3 trillion to IRAQI and AFGHANI muslims. People that like military states.
People that want to arm teachers and priests.