In a few weeks we will make a choice that will decide our future.
I follow an economist named Bob Proctor. He has called the top and bottom of every market crash since the 70s correctly.
Also, he perfectly predicted the current real estate market meltdown and the picture he paints about what will happen in the next couple years
is terrifying.He thinks it will be worse then the great depression.
The banks in the U.S. are going under one after the other. Countrywide the largest morgage bank in the world,Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch which are 3 out of the top 5 wall street firms. Also, Fanny and Freddy Mae which hold 50 percent of the home loans in the United States.
The government took them over because they are essentially bankrupt.If they didn't the entire financially system would virtually shut down, the stock market would crash and we would suffer beyond what any of us have seen before.
McCain just like Bush " doesn't understand the economy".
That not just my opinion its his own words. Not only does he not understand how to fix it but he does not understand exactly what is broken.
It is no surprise that he doesn't. The people that make up these securities use complex mathematical models very few people understand.
Bush and McCain both can take the credit for this mess since they helped deregulate the laws that were protecting us.
Bush's economic advisor Phil Graham wrote the deregulation bill that allowed banks to take huge risks with all of our future.
Now, Phil Graham is the head of McCain's economic policy.He is also McCain's choice for the next secretary of the treasury.
No one in this country can afford for that to happen. The last time Bush met with his economic advisors was in March. He either didn't care or didn't realize that anything was wrong. Phil Graham had the guts to say that we are in a mental recession after he helped create the worst economy meltdown in our lifetime.
It will take the best and brightest minds in the world to get us out of this nightmare. As bad as Bush has done, McCain would be
even more destructive because things are in much worse shape. The next president will not inherit a surplus like Bush did but a tanking economy and a 11,600,000,000,000 (trillion) dollars deficit. Most of it Bush created and it will take decades to pay it back.
If you do what you have always done then you will get what you have always got.
When it comes to policy Bush and McCain are the same 90 percent of the time.
So why are the polls even close then ?
Mccains team just said they no longer want to talk about the economy.Instead they would like to spend time
running the biggest smear campaign in history.
They think they can just tell you lies and you wont be smart enough to see through it
Let's teach him we are smarter than that .
Elect Obama Biden 2008
Check out this video of sarah palins interview it will blow you away
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r36Xc0GG4iQ
How to Fuel the Country While Saving the World
Email To A Friend
Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.
Another factor warrants your attention. A quiet revolution is underway in the way the world gets its electricity. "Micropower"—the cheap and efficient "cogeneration" of electricity and useful heat together in industry and buildings, plus making energy from renewable sources like the wind, the sun, the earth and small hydropower—emits little or no carbon and is sweeping the market. Micropower, mostly from private power providers but also many utilities, now produces a sixth of the world's total electricity (just beating nuclear power) and a third of the world's annual increase in electricity. In 2005, micropower added four times the global electricity and 11 times the capacity that nuclear added. In 2006, nuclear capacity lost half a billion watts while micropower capacity gained about 34 billion watts; decentralized renewables alone got $56 billion of private risk capital while nuclear got zero (only central planners buy it). And micropower and "negawatts" (saved electricity) together provided more than half the world's new electrical services. All the supposedly indispensable central stations put together—fossil, nuclear and big hydro—are losing market share due to their high financial costs and risks.
In these ways, economics are driving the global oil and electricity marketplaces to benign, smaller, faster, cheaper, more-resilient and reliable choices. Those gloomy multiple choices your advisers threw at you are thus being eliminated because their high costs and financial risks repel investors. The risks of global warming will drop because these cheaper options save the most carbon per dollar and per year. (New nuclear plants would worsen the climate problem by saving two to 10 times less carbon per dollar, more slowly, than micropower and negawatts.) The risk of oil wars will also drop, since greater efficiency and the substitution of biofuels and saved natural gas for oil will eliminate petroleum's value as a strategic commodity. If we don't use oil, we won't need to fight over it, and we'll stop sending oil dollars to corrupt oligarchs, tyrants and terrorists. And nuclear pro-liferation will also become less of a threat. Dual-purpose nuclear technology—equipment, material and skills that can be used to make bombs or electricity—will become harder (and more detectable) to acquire once nuclear energy's failure to compete is recognized. You can smoke out proliferators even faster by helping all countries get access to nonviolent, abundant and cost-effective technologies—and by adopting them within the United States.
The main obstacles to improving efficiency still further and speeding this process along are cultural and regulatory. Removing those hurdles will require your leadership and patient engagement with dynamic business leaders, innovative communities and resourceful citizens. But it needn't depend on Congress: a stroke of your pen, or state-level action, can introduce all the policies (such as feebates or rewarding utilities for cutting customers' bills) you need.
That's not to suggest that taking action will be easy. But it'll be far easier and safer than the cramped and outmoded choices you're being offered, and the payoff will be huge. Almost all citizens will love it. Since the innovations will make money, they will cut across old political divides. If carbon- and plutonium-mongers try to stand in your way, just ask them a question: do they agree that all ways to save or produce energy should be allowed to compete fairly, at honest prices, regardless of their type, technology, location, ownership or size? If they say no, you can then out them as hypocritical corporate socialists in freemarketers' clothing. If they say yes, then you'll have won, because their favorite technologies (i.e., central power stations and oil) can't compete in free markets against efficiency, renewables and cogeneration. So with markets as your main tool, the people behind you and the smarter energy companies and much of the world cheering you on, you will be able to help the country lead the world to greater prosperity, safety and security.
Lovins is chairman and chief scientist of Rocky Mountain Institute and has advised major corporations and governments worldwide on energy strategy for more than three decades.
© 2007
Discuss