Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, [5] ]

Subject: Actually..... Author: sci guy [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: 07:50:50 11/22/06 Wed In reply to: Duncan7 's message, "Re: unfortunately...." on 08:04:33 11/20/06 Mon the destruction of the WTC didn't really have that big an effect. The point loss from the peak to Sept7th 01 was 2117, while the loss in the 2 weeks following 9/11 was only 1370. There ws a further loss up to july 02 of another 533 points, bringing the total post 9/11 loss to 1903 points. HOwever, not all the losses after Sept 21st are the fault of 9/11 jitters. A lot of them were because of continued lack of fiscal care by the administration: continued broken promises, out of control costs, tax cuts, as well as a bumbling US pResident who was clearly unable to deal with crisis. http://www.mdleasing.com/djia.htm BTW, do you know the reason for the loss of 1425 points from July 2002 to Oct 2002? >Apparently your ignoeing the fact that the world trade >center was erased from existance. Plug that into your >long term trend. You expected an 18 month recovery >from that? Glad I wasn't educated in canada. > >>the economy should have grown much more. Long term >>trends show that the economy recovers from downturns >>such as occurred when Bush was elected much faster >>than it has. Your vaunted DJIA should have re-reached >>the peak within 18 months, not 6 years. >> >>Ooops! >> >> >> >>>Bush tax cuts, our economy has grown by an amount >>>equal to the entire economy of China, demonstrating >>>once again the wisdom of what most of us learned in >>>Taxes 101: Reducing tax rates increases economic >>>activity (and increases tax revenues -- an added >>>benefit). >>> >>>Go Bush!!! Go tax cuts!!! >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>China just needs to let a couple billion of their >>>>people die. Considering that there are only just >>over >>>>one billion, that means that either you don't know >>>>what yo uare talking about (yet again) or you want >to >>>>eliminate teh Chinese from the planet. Either way, >>>>your ignorance seems to know no bounds. >>>> >>>>>that Mainland China is not exactly forthcommming >>with >>>>>AIDS numbers. For a long time they did not even >>>>>officially admit that they had AIDS in their >>>country. >>>>>We just do not truly know the extent that AIDS has >>>>>infected population of Mainland China. And the >>>>>numbers that I was reading a few years back are >>>>>extremely large and they were growing. >>>>> >>>>>This presents two sub problems. >>>>> >>>>>First off IF there is a major AIDS problem then >>>>>Mainland China just might do absolutely nothing at >>>all >>>>>and in the process eliminate a bunch of hungry >>mouths >>>>>to feed. IF IF IF mainland China were to let a >>>couple >>>>>of billion people just die a natural death via AIDS >>>>>then the government would be much better off >>>>>financially (fewer mouths to feed, etc) >>>>> >>>>>Second problem being the state of medicine in >>>Mainland >>>>>China. While probably adequate for general medical >>>>>problems, the AIDS Epidemic means a major problem >>>that >>>>>requires a geared up state of the art medical care >>>>>system. And I just do not see the state of >medicine >>>>>in Mainland China being capable of handling the >>>>>ultimate massive amount of AIDS victims that will >>>come >>>>>weither they want to admit the numbers or not. >>>>> >>>>>I guess that I just cannot see any outcome on a >>>global >>>>>scale for the AIDS Pandemic having any other >outcome >>>>>other than massively huge amounts of death. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject Author Date Re: Actually..... Duncan7 22:24:40 11/22/06 Wed