Yabby I was wrong about shares but gold's done well ... but not as well as billiton shares ...

Just shows I'm human, can err and I can accept my mistake.

The matters of little import.

But to suggest an error in financial judgement means I'm wrong on other matters is just plain idiotic!

Please explain to me with conditions today in the markets similar to those of two years ago, albiet the markets aren't at the same peaks, why you consider shares are safer than gold. Note all that money Obama threw at the banks hasn't reduced the toxic debt on their balance sheets? Why's unemployment still rising in the US. Explain why the housing market in the US isn't recovering. Explain why the Glass-Steggal act hasn't been re-instated and the Community Re-Investment Act hasn't been scrapped? Explain why Obama is still pouring money into Fannie and Freddie?
Explain why Obama had to outlaw government funding of abortion in the US? Explain why Obama used 'add ons' to buy the votes of Democrat Senators so as to obtain passage of his health plan? Explain why further legislation is required to implement Obama's health policy? Tell me, if Obama's health plan has been successfully legislated, why a vote was forced over parts of the plan in the Senate again last night ... and why still more legislation is required? Tell me, if Obama's plan is so successful, why there is almost universal opposition to his plan in the US population and why so many Democrat Senators are expected to be dumped at the next election? Tell me why 35 Democrat Senators voted against Obamas plan?

If Obama is a one term President, as is likely, will that mean he's a successful President? If at the next Senate elections the Republicans gain a majority and dump Obama's heath legislation will that mean he isn't a lame duck president and still successful?

Come on Yabby, show some thoughtfulness rather than a childish 'nah nah nah I'm right you're wrong' display. Come on man rise to the challenge ... like I have.

Keith, Obama's claim was that he has the ability to show good
judgement, something which is rare in US politics. He has been
shown to be correct. BTW, I make the same claim and I too have
been proven correct :)

Yes indeed, some Catholic democrats voted against the healthcare
plan, if it included abortion payments. What that shows is the
power of the religious lobby, still evident in US politics.

Obama at that moment had to look at the big picture, which was
to finally get a healthcare plan signed, even if conceding a point
to the religious fanatics. That shows good judgement.

Obama won office, healthcare was one of his key issues and people
voted for him. Given the huge amount of money for scare advertising
and lobbying by some in the healthcare industry trying to scare little
old ladies, its quite amazing that this baby still got through.

Of course unemployment and housing are still a problem. Are
you showing bad judgement by expecting magic wands to appear?
Economists will tell you that the damage done was so large, it
will take years to unwind the mess. Unemployment will be the
last thing to improve, first confidence and investment need to
be restored.

OTOH we have come a long way in just over a year. The GM saga
was finally sorted out, a global depression was avoided, banks
have repaid a good chunk of what they borrowed. Americans
are finally saving more. Markets are showing confidence once
again.

Its been made rather plain to the Israeli prez that the fanatical
end of Israeli politics has to learn to play fair, when it
comes to a ME solution. All good judgement, IMHO.

Can Obama still be considered a success, if he only serves one
term? Sure he can. The question will be, did he leave America
in better condition then when he took over?

wow vthere are quite a few surprise acceptances by you yabby. It's great to see you admit all religious fanatics aren't right wing.

But I don't think it's good judgement to commit to larger deficits, which Obama's healthcare will bring, when financially you are already up to your eyeballs in massive federal debt.

It wasn't only catholic democrats with an axe to grind over abortion funding who voted against the health plan. Quite a few dem senators worried about re-election voted against the plan as well

Unemployment and defaults on housing aren't just, 'still a problem'. They are an increasing problem and the only grace is that they are not increasing as fast as they once were.

Me magic wands? non non non, in De Gaulle fashion, it was you who said things have improved because the stock market has improved and because the US has introduced a health care system it's now equal to first world standards. Now there's got to be some sort of magic in that reasoning even if it only is relating to the effects of some mushrooms.

Oh why are you so sure you are correct, when the next wave of the financial crisis hasn't hit yet? And why haven't the derivatives markets been closed down?

By the time any realistic assessment of Obama's presidency occurs we'll all be long dead, socialism will have been rejected by the US, his spin merchants will no longer have influence in the media, his media groupies will be laughing stocks, and the US economy will have collapsed under the weight of a health care system it cannot afford.

Similarily it is far to soon to assess the effectiveness of George W. Bush's Presidency.

You are welcome to represent yourself as a modern day oracle but please why don't you address the issues I raised? It'd help with your credibility issues.

*Similarily it is far to soon to assess the effectiveness of George W. Bush's Presidency.*

Perhaps for you Keith :). For the rest of us its pretty straight
forward. Bush jun. inherited an economy in pretty good condition
and left behind him, a total train wreck.

*It's great to see you admit all religious fanatics aren't right wing*.

Err, I have never claimed that.

*Me magic wands? non non non*

Absolutaly Keith, or you would understand why economists fully accept
that housing and employment are at the end of the queue for improvement.
This stuff is regularly discussed on business TV such
as Bloomberg, the business community accepts the reasoning. IMHO
you must be watching far too much Fox TV. Rupert knows how to work
over the trailer park trash and other gullibles, to get his ratings.

*And why haven't the derivatives markets been closed down?*

Because derivatives are important financial instruments Keith. If
I as a farmer want to hedge the price of wheat, or an Australian
bank wants to hedge its interest cover on loans, derivatives is what
is used.

Yabby

Here is the problem I have whenever I attempt to rationally discuss your statements.

I find you never ever discuss those issues I confront you with that undermine your positions or opinions.

You only ever jump onto things that are of minor import and ignore the ramifications to your argument.

Your latest post is a classic example of this behaviour.

Initially you argued Obama's success and that things were improving, presumably because things have changed. When I said the derivatives market hasn't been outlawed, and it was the one thing that magnified the initial corruption in the US, I used that as an example of how Obama had failled.

You've responded by saying the derivatives are good for an Australian farmer and and, well a fairly reasonable, bank. But it's obvious trading vast billions of dollars of dubious derivatives are demonstrably stupid when they've been taken to the extremes, they've reached, by the world banking systems.

You just defended the indefensible because it's good for you and fits your reasoning ... ie that Obama's improved things.

That takes care of the issue of derivatives markets ... now what about those other issues I raised that shows Obama's lack of success.

I suggest you discuss rationally the issues I raise. Doing otherwise, as is your habit, only makes you look like you are willing to hold on to irrational views.

The economists I put most weight on don't agree with the economists you listen to and of many of the economists of today on many many fundamental things ... Mises and von Hayek ... mate try reading them. You'd soon come to agree there wouldn't have been a worldwide derivatives markets nor periodic economic crises if more store was placed on the opinion of those blokes.

But they aren't trendy lefties so ... oh well ... you know. And they would have recognised the abolition of the Glass-Steggall Act and the introduction of the Community Re-investment Act, were the initial basis of the current on-going crisis.

Keith, what your reasoning seems to come down to, is that because
Obama hasn't rushed out to do what you think should be done
immediately, he must be a failure.

Are you even aware of what is going on in the US right now?
Derivatives do in fact play an important part in finance and trade.
Banning them would be downright foolish. The problem with various
financial instruments is that investment banks invent new ones,
far quicker then you could ever regulate for them. Money trades
globally, ban something in NY and people will trade from Iceland
or the Bahamas.

So your shoot from the hip kind of dream prez would be a dismal failure.
What is happening right now and it takes time, is a whole
lot of soul searching and investigating about what actually happenend,
who knew what, who was corrupt and how could it be changed.

Some really knowledgable people are involved in these many debates.
Bloomberg TV carries alot of the Senate and Congress hearings too.

What regulations to change and how best to change them so they arn't
just another loophole, is in for really heavy discussion.

Obama is working on 25 fronts, each one with complex issues involved.
I can't think of a prez who was ever as active and who drew in as
many knowledgable experts in each field, to come up with an informed
judgement and opinion.

Once again, there is no magic wand. 5 years after NO was destroyed,
the place is still not rebuilt. Nobody can run the world's largest
economy into the dirt, like never before, then expect overnight
solutions.

The real danger here is people like yourself, who think that they
know all the answers and have closed their minds to the fact that
they could be wrong and that there are far better answers. That
is why Obama makes for a good prez, he stays open minded and is
prepared to listen and think through all sides of a debate.
Informed opinion makes far more sense then shooting from the hip