This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Consumer Credit Falls At Double Expected Rate, $70 Billion Decline YoY

Tyler Durden's picture


Consumer credit (revolving and non-revolving) dropped at a 4.9% annualized rate in June, double the expected pace, indicating consumers continue retrenching and saving, especially after May was expected to be an inflection month, declining by "just" -2.6%.Total outstanding consumer credit in June was $2,485 billion, $70 billion less than the $2,556 billion in June of 2008.

Bloomberg, in discussing this fact somehow managed to avoid the phrase "recession eases" for the first time in several thousand articles had this to say:

A jobless rate near the highest in 26 years, stagnant
wages and falling home values mean consumer spending, about 70
percent of the economy, will take time to recover even as the
recession eases. Incomes fell the most in four years in June as
one-time transfer payments from the Obama administration’s
stimulus plan dried up, and unemployment is forecast to exceed
10 percent next year before retreating.

Oh wait, did I say they avoided saying "recession eases" - stupid me. And this:

Economists had forecast consumer credit would drop $5
billion in June, according to the median of 33 estimates in a
Bloomberg News survey. Projections ranged from declines of
$11.9 billion to $1 billion. The Fed initially reported that
consumer credit decreased by $3.2 billion in May.

One assumes the green shoot in this one is that the $10.7 billion decline was better than the one economist who was at the bottom of the range.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Fri, 08/07/2009 - 15:52 | 29619 Hondo
Hondo's picture

What is that...about 5% of nominal GDP?


Bloomberg is getting pretty pathetic at financial reporting.  They just can’t report the number without some sort of editioral.



Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:09 | 29644 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

I hate to say it but their tv has become cnbcidified.

And the headlines on their website are written 18 yr old cheerleaders.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:11 | 29647 Cheeky Bastard
Cheeky Bastard's picture

0.5 % GDP=14 trillion ------->  70 000 000 000/14 000 000 000 000 = 0.5%

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:32 | 29682 assumptionblindness
assumptionblindness's picture

You're right. All you have to do is read the ticker at the bottom of the screen.  It is evident that every headline is followed by the "Bloomberg Interpretation."  This has been going on for a LONG time...tune in and see for yourself.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 18:46 | 29824 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Bloomie is the new CNBS. Changing of the guard, people.

Sat, 08/08/2009 - 16:25 | 30451 Icarus
Icarus's picture

The raw data is on the Fed's site if you don't like editorial.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 15:53 | 29628 TumblingDice
TumblingDice's picture

Didn't the new USA CEO say that credit is the lifeblood of the economy? Does this mean we're bleeding?

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:14 | 29652 Cheeky Bastard
Cheeky Bastard's picture

yes, from a jugular and every other major artery in your body, but they decided that a pinky band-aid called the stock market can fix you ...

Sat, 08/08/2009 - 00:22 | 30107 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Jugulars are veins. Carotids are arteries near the jugulars.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 15:56 | 29630 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

less bad is the new good

recession is over

L. Kudlow

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:19 | 29656 Fish Gone Bad
Fish Gone Bad's picture

Less bad is the new doing great.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:26 | 29666 FischerBlack
FischerBlack's picture

Not the end of Western Civilization as we know it is the new teh awesome pwnage.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:00 | 29637 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Anybody see a difference in the interview style of Hermann (red-headed hyper dude) at Bloomberg today as opposed to "new bull-market" CNBC yesterday?

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:01 | 29638 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Are there any measures of consumer credit demand?

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:06 | 29641 Commissionable
Commissionable's picture

TD, How come nobody is talking about the fact that as jobs are lost there are less and less jobs to FLIPPIN lose, therefor there pure (not really) numbers are not an accurate indication of what is taking place in the mktplace? Even if we take these fluffed numbers and use percentages lost vs percentages existing, the story told will be MUCH scarier. PLEASE REPLY TD.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:27 | 29669 D.O.D.
D.O.D.'s picture

I have been making this argument for a couple of months now, the deceleration of the collapse is not due to an acceleration in the other direction, it's US hitting the wall...of course somehow that translates to more efficient business, which translates to higher top end down the road, which translates to green shoots...But it seems the entire market expects US to return to mid '07 when everyone borrowed without a care in the world. But who needs everyone when you got the Fed, I guess is the rationale...

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 17:06 | 29706 kote
kote's picture

Given that over 90% of job seekers are currently employed (using BLS numbers), switching from a total possible jobs basis to a total jobs remaining basis will change any given statistic by a maximum of 10%.  It makes a difference, but a maximum 10% (%, not pt) fudge under different accounting doesn't make it "MUCH scarier" in my opinion.

We would still be talking about 9.4% unemployment.  We would just talk about employment decreasing by another, say, 1.1% (jobs remaining basis) vs 1% (total jobs basis) by the end of this thing.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:10 | 29645 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Now we know why revenue numbers were lighter than expected in so many consumer oriented industries.

But I am pretty sure June numbers are imbedded in stock prices already. It being August and all...

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:14 | 29650 max2205
max2205's picture

More from the cuckoos nest:


Ethics Panel Clears Dodd in Countrywide Refinancing (Update2)


By Jonathan D. Salant

Aug. 7 (Bloomberg) -- The Senate Ethics Committee said Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd of Connecticut and fellow Democrat Kent Conrad of North Dakota didn’t violate ethics rules in refinancing their home mortgages with Countrywide Financial Corp.

The panel said today it found “no substantial credible evidence” that the mortgages violated Senate ethics rules.

Even so, the committee, which includes equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans, said both senators should have “exercised more vigilance” to “avoid the appearance” of preferential treatment.

Dodd, who faces re-election next year and whose committee oversees the mortgage industry, claimed vindication.

“There was no ‘sweetheart’ or special deal; the allegations are and have always been false,” Dodd said in a statement. “I hope that today’s dismissal will go a long way towards restoring the bond of trust and confidence that I’ve worked long and hard to build with the people of our state.”

Conrad called findings “welcome news” in a statement. “While I should have shown more vigilance in the appearance of these transactions, the committee has concluded I did nothing unethical, and that is the truth,” he said.

The complaint against the senators was brought by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a watchdog group. CREW executive director Melanie Sloan said Dodd and Conrad were cleared of wrongdoing “despite the fact that the senators participated in a program the committee found ‘offered quicker, more efficient loan processing and some discounts.’”

‘Friends’ of Mozilo

Both senators were put into Countrywide’s VIP program and were designated by the company as “friends” of former chief executive officer Angelo Mozilo, who founded the company and served as its head until last year. The committee found that neither Dodd nor Conrad received special treatment, that their mortgages were in line with offers from competing companies, and that they didn’t obtain any benefits by virtue of their elected offices.

Dodd, 65, said he assumed the VIP program was simply a courtesy for customers. Conrad, the Senate Budget Committee chairman, also denied receiving favorable treatment.

Dodd, first elected to his seat in 1980, is the only Democratic senator currently in danger of losing re-election next year, political analysts say. Three Washington-based organizations that rate congressional races -- Congressional Quarterly, the Rothenberg Political Report and the Cook Political Report -- say the race is a tossup.

Through June 30, Dodd had $1.8 million in his campaign bank account, more than double that reported by his leading Republican challenger, former Representative Rob Simmons.

Conrad, 61, faces re-election in 2012. He first won his Senate seat in 1986.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:28 | 29672 FischerBlack
FischerBlack's picture

Next Headline:

Serial Killer Says Homicidal Maniac Did Nothing Wrong

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:59 | 29710 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

“I hope that today’s dismissal will go a long way towards restoring the bond of trust and confidence that I’ve worked long and hard to build with the people of our state.”

No it didn't Senator Go Fuck Yourself
Hopefully the citizens of Connecticut recognize what an absolute disgrace you've been, and boot your sorry ass out on the street in 010

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 17:34 | 29745 Missing_Link
Missing_Link's picture

^^ This comment is full of win.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 17:45 | 29763 Rusty_Shackleford
Rusty_Shackleford's picture

Just the fact that he would try and pull the "Oh, I had no idea it was because I was a Congressman"-bullshit tells you what this douchebag is all about.

Why did not a single journalist ask, "Are you freaking kidding me?  No really, do you really expect people to actually believe that?  Do you think every single one of your constituents is a complete idiot?"


He and the rest of the bureaucrat class needs to ride the rail.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:14 | 29651 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

I read elsewhere that they appeared to held up the release of this report until just before the closing bell - later than usual. Was that the case?

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:22 | 29662 capitalisa
capitalisa's picture

No, it's always this time.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:20 | 29657 jedwards
jedwards's picture

If consumer credit increases, it means that means it's a debt bubble waiting to explode.


Or is it if consumer credit decreases, it means the economy is fucked because no one is buying stuff anymore.


That being said the 1982 recovery in the stock market was predicated by an increase in consumer credit in March, making people believe that they would spend money which would lead us out of the recession.  While this worked back in the 80s when we had a lot less debt, it won't work now because we're spending beyond our means.  It's funny how the Fed has adopted this exact same mentality, and they're running up into exactly the same problem, ie. debt.  Increasing spending with little debt is good, increasing spending with a lot of debt is bad.  Both the American consumer and the American government are afflicted with the same debt disease, and they are both fucked in the same way.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:24 | 29665 capitalisa
capitalisa's picture

The kick the can down the road mentality ends when there's no more road.  Hey, there's no more road, but they won't stop until they are stuck in the weeds or drive off the cliff.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:22 | 29660 Dixie Normous
Dixie Normous's picture

Finally Americans are saving.  Right?  Isn't that what this means?

And can anyone explain the Transports.

At least one of the components must be going out of business soon.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:27 | 29670 Cheeky Bastard
Cheeky Bastard's picture

no they are not saving, they are just using less credit and are repaying the debts they accumulated over the past 10 yrs ... BEA would like you to think that they actually put the money in the bank and save it which is not true, they cut spending and are de-leveraging themselves ....

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:38 | 29689 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

I know I am.
Everyone I know is cutting back on virtually every day to day expense. Why support all things government or made in China? My fellow Americans are either unemployed or broke or not paying their mortgage.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:55 | 29703 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Same here. I just closed a Chevron gas card that I had for over 10 years. They jacked my rate to 31% because I supposedly was late on three payments in the last eight months... pure BS, never happened. I called them to resolve the situation so they tried to sell me on "upgrading" to a Chevron VISA at a lower rate... I said fark you, cancelled it. Guess which gas station chain I wont be going to anymore? :)

My old-style big box TV died, so I had a fleeting moment of temptation, as in, "I'd really like to get a big flatscreen HD TV!", but said no. Don't want to spend any money on crap right now. Saving is the name of the game these days.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 17:03 | 29713 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

If you had taken teh friggin Chevron VISA you could be watching Larry Kudlow in hi-def right now!!!!!!!!!!

What kind of American are you anyway?

Sat, 08/08/2009 - 00:25 | 30111 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

No shit. This dude needs to move to North Korea. They have nationalized health care there I heard.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 20:08 | 29902 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

No. What you see is defaulted debts by consumers was counted as savings. The higher the writeoff by creditors, the more the savings by consumers.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:31 | 29677 FischerBlack
FischerBlack's picture

We live in a perverse alternate reality where people getting out of debt, paying off their credit cards and car loans with whatever money they can scrape together is a source of concern that it might 'delay the recovery'.

Fuck this bullshit. I'm moving to Afghanistan.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:31 | 29679 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Consumer credit is not falling because because of a new found sense of thrift- credit cards are maxed out and there are no more balance transfer offers in the mail. The only people who are getting credit now are the ones who typically do not live on credit. Consumer will be baack when the banks opens up the credit spigot.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:48 | 29695 Assetman
Assetman's picture

Our bank is retrenching... and will continue to retrench due to too much CRE exposure.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 20:35 | 29923 deadhead
deadhead's picture

what kind of bank, i.e. community, regional, TBTF?  perhaps share geo location? thanks.

Sat, 08/08/2009 - 03:12 | 30241 Assetman
Assetman's picture

Community bank.  Colorado.

And there are competitor institutions in A LOT worse shape.

The OCC has been very active here, if you catch my drift.

Sat, 08/08/2009 - 11:01 | 30320 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Different story here in Northern New England.

Many community banks here operate in such archaic ways that they didn't even know how to participate in highly leveraged, 'toxic' programs. I've seen detailed reports on 12 institutions in MA, ME and NH who have very limited CRE exposure and typically are able to manage simple workouts or mods for RES loans before they impact the bottom line.

Keep in mind that these organizations are very small (i.e. 1-20 branches).

Another effect over the past 10-12 months has been the influx of cash into the smaller community banks. As the news became more an more obvious to the general populus that the big banks weren't so solvent, money began flowing into the small banks in a big way. Many here are so flush with cash that large depositors looking for even slightly premium rates on standard bank products are turned away because a profitable spread just isn't there. Kind of a catch-22

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:31 | 29681 stedanrac
stedanrac's picture

  How are these consumer credit numbers affected by consumer defaults in either housing or credit cards? 



Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:37 | 29688 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

YAYYY!! And the market ROARS! Green Shewtz! ZOMG!

/what the FUCK

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:50 | 29698 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

The White House strategy of turning supporters into snitches when they see "fishy" information about the health care debate may run afoul of the law, legal experts say.

"The White House is in bit of a conundrum because of this privacy statute that prohibits the White House from collecting data and storing it on people who disagree with it," Judge Andrew Napolitano, a FOX News analyst, said Friday.

"There's also a statute that requires the White House to retain all communications that it receives. It can't try to rewrite history by pretending it didn't receive anything," he said.

"If the White House deletes anything, it violates one statute. If the White House collects data on the free speech, it violates another statute."

Of course our rulers up in DC are going to be exempt from the laws that apply to the peasant's.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:51 | 29700 casey
casey's picture

Where is Marla?  I want more music please.  The perfect tonic for this madness.


#29650 writes about the senate ethics committee:  an oxymoron classic.

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:59 | 29704 Sancho Ponzi
Sancho Ponzi's picture

This just in from Reuters:

'Freddie Mac reports that it managed an actual net income gain in second quarter of $768 billion - a big turnaround from the $9.9 billion loss in the prior quarter. That means Treasury is off the hook, at least in this quarter, in terms of giving Freddie more money through its $200 bln equity line.'


Billions - The New Millions

Trillions - The New Billions

Quadrillions - The New Trillions

Fri, 08/07/2009 - 17:11 | 29721 Sancho Ponzi
Sancho Ponzi's picture


'The second quarter 2009 results were primarily driven by:

    • Net interest income of $4.3 billion;
    • Gains on the company's derivative portfolio and guarantee asset of $4.2 billion, mainly related to net mark-to-market gains due to increases in long-term interest rates;
    • Net impairment of available-for-sale securities recognized in earnings of $2.2 billion, also reflecting the adoption of FSP FAS 115-2 and FAS 124-2; and
    • Provision for credit losses of $5.2 billion.
  • Mark-to-market GAINS??? What are they smoking?

    Fri, 08/07/2009 - 17:26 | 29740 max2205
    max2205's picture

    Cooking the books, this is so totally BS.  AIG makes a Billion then wants to pay 1B to retain key

    Fri, 08/07/2009 - 20:25 | 29916 Anonymous
    Anonymous's picture

    Man, the numbers are so large that journalists are confused all the time. Billions? Sound like millions. So, simon property will raise 500 billion new fund. Trillions? Wow, three japanese-look-like-would-be-smugglers found to have trillions us bond in the Italy border.Quadrillions, that if I am not mistaken, is equal to one thousand trillion. It seems that I need to learn what comes after the quadrillions, which shall be equal to one thousand quadrillions. Anyone knows the word which means one thousand quadrillion? Terarillion!

    Fri, 08/07/2009 - 16:55 | 29705 Anonymous
    Anonymous's picture

    What do you guys think of the Markit NA AAA CMBX chart?

    It looks like a blow off top to me.

    Fri, 08/07/2009 - 17:03 | 29712 Anonymous
    Anonymous's picture

    the CRE bomb - isn't that supposed to detonate soonish?

    Fri, 08/07/2009 - 17:06 | 29717 Anonymous
    Anonymous's picture

    You really don't believe that do you? The government will find a way to cover these mortgages so that the "banks remain strong."

    Have you been watching the action on the REITs lately. These things have climbed 50% in the last 2 weeks

    Fri, 08/07/2009 - 20:38 | 29926 deadhead
    deadhead's picture

    lots of that debt comes due later as i recall.

    you'll see "amend and extend", some more debt for equity, and a hell of a lot of praying.

    Fri, 08/07/2009 - 17:06 | 29716 Anonymous
    Anonymous's picture

    if they wanted to turn the economy around damn the torpedos, if they REALLY wanted to do that, they could just take 2 trillion and pay off everyones credit card...of course a good portion would run it up again...

    thats if they REALLY wanted to kick start the economy

    Fri, 08/07/2009 - 17:15 | 29729 Pizza Delivery Man
    Pizza Delivery Man's picture

    Monetizing the debt is inflationary right?

    It would appear to me that the Zerohedgeosphere as well as many other analysts  are bearish in terms of where the market has priced equities.

    I'm not the smartest guy in the world but when you print money/monetize debt isn't that inflationary?

    I don't think we are going to lead the world out of this recession, nor do I think there will be meaningful growth in the U.S. But with commodities priced in dollars, and a weakening dollar doesn't that mean prices will go up?

    What does this mean for the stock market? Does it go up because with an increased money supply it makes it cheaper to buy stocks? Or does it go down due to stagnant/slow U.S growth.

    An inguiring mind would like to know some opinions.


    Fri, 08/07/2009 - 17:39 | 29750 Anonymous
    Anonymous's picture

    Inflation is a function of money supply and velocity of money. Velocity dropped, so the Fed increased the money supply. They're walking a tightrope, and so far they haven't fallen. Lost in the discussion of consumers "killing the economy" by saving is the fact that if the savings rate is 5%, and banks balance that against purchases of T-Bills, it's enough to fund deficits equivalent to a 5% tax increase, across the board. That's a lot...and it's probably enough to keep the t-bill sales rolling fitfully along.

    Fri, 08/07/2009 - 18:16 | 29793 Sam Clemons
    Sam Clemons's picture

    Yes, that is inflationary.  However, it is never that simple.  There are many other factors to contribute to great bull markets like the one that started in 1982.  Things such as rule of law, political landscape, innovations, pent-up savings or demand also have an impact.  If it were so simple to just turn on the money spout and an economy would get better and equities would perform well, Zimbabwe would be a utopia.

    When money is created, it gets dumped into whatever trough people decide is the most logical place to get a profit.  This includes going to overseas markets, commodities, bonds, equities.  Commodities and equities typically are inverse eachother on a timeline.  As commodity prices fall, companies (that use such commodities:  ex, Kelloggs Cereal uses sugar) can get better profits which is reflected in their share price.  The opposite is also true.  There is no telling what exactly an increased money supply will do to an economy at a given fragment of time.  It depends if you are in an inflationary or deflationary period which is probably determined by how far the rod is bent out of place (prices rising) before the collapse.  We recently had arguably the largest bubble in modern day history - one would assume that the rod must be bent (prices falling) equally far the opposite direction to straighten it out which could mean that no amount of money creation could fill the black hole of debt sucking everything into it. 


    Are taxes being relaxed?  Is the government getting smaller and allowing businesses to spring up?  Are regulations being relaxed?


    Fri, 08/07/2009 - 17:16 | 29730 Anonymous
    Anonymous's picture

    decline in revolving credit has been slowing down since Mar. so that's a green shoot for sure!

    Sat, 08/08/2009 - 10:59 | 30318 Anonymous
    Anonymous's picture

    green chute

    Fri, 08/07/2009 - 17:18 | 29732 Anonymous
    Anonymous's picture

    Consumer credit isn't falling because people are saving more.

    It is falling because of defaults and write offs.

    Minus defaults, consumer credit is still rising.... which means people are still depending on their credit cards.

    Fri, 08/07/2009 - 17:41 | 29755 Anonymous
    Anonymous's picture

    I was wondering if that was the you have some sources?

    Fri, 08/07/2009 - 17:27 | 29736 gohp
    gohp's picture

    Maybe the next bubble to burst will be the consumer bubble that has been in place for 30 years. What if the economy must rely on the output of industry instead of consumer's credit cards? What if 70% of the economy is not the consumer? How can it be good that the government pays people with money (generated by issuing and assuming debt) to destroy already manufactured running automobiles? They could be rebuilt or sold for spare parts. Anybody in Washington ever turn a wrench? The government is continuing the wealth destruction.

    Fri, 08/07/2009 - 17:27 | 29741 Anonymous
    Fri, 08/07/2009 - 18:54 | 29832 Anonymous
    Anonymous's picture

    Many of these people are not coming back and we are not going to replace them. This is a new business cycle.
    I seen this for over 30 years and you can see the effects.
    It was never about you and it did not matter who they have in the white house. it never has been about the taxpayer.
    there is more than one black box. GD

    Fri, 08/07/2009 - 22:06 | 29987 Anonymous
    Anonymous's picture

    Cash 4 clunkers. What a con. Go trade in your paid off vehicle for a brand new one with a $25K loan. More debt on the balance sheet of the consumer and the government. Where did most of the new cars come guessed it...the Asians. Just a little more wealth transfer out of this country. What a joke!

    Sat, 08/08/2009 - 00:30 | 30113 Anonymous
    Anonymous's picture

    Not much, if at all. Honda and Toyota cars made in American factories by American workers paying American taxes. Loans made by American banks. Sales taxes paid to American government. Personal property taxes paid to American assessors. Repairs made at American shops. Etc.

    If you want to complain, complain about the stupidity of encouraging car ownership or spending our money on shit. Dildos or flat screen TV rebates would make as much sense. But they don't have a dildo maker union, so who would support that.

    Your argument is nonsense.

    Sat, 08/08/2009 - 03:49 | 30252 gohp
    gohp's picture

    Destroying the clunkers also destroys the original work used to make them. 

    The clunkers could be used to support repairs and now, the work expended to build them is gone.  Destroying the clunkers is like burning money to keep warm.  Humanity needs to reduce entropy, not increase its workload.  Cash for clunkers undoes work and is a step backwards.

    Sat, 08/08/2009 - 11:01 | 30319 Anonymous
    Anonymous's picture

    Isn't it ironic, progressives are so fucking regressive.

    Sat, 08/08/2009 - 19:31 | 30535 TraderX
    TraderX's picture

    Too bad.  I had hopes that Bloomie would bring some critical journalistic excellence to the discussion and resist "drinking from the well".

    Sat, 09/05/2009 - 01:00 | 59663 Anonymous
    Anonymous's picture

    the banks are bs balence sheets mark to whateverthey want, consumer debt, credit cards, comml real estate car loans no jobs 10% is bs all the people who ran ouit of benifits, self employed making little budget defisit ballowning china mite call some loans and intrest rates mite have to rise befor we want it to oh yeh things are less bad so lets bid the stock market up for a real recovery obummer does not nnnnnnnnnnno which end it up cant tell the diference between a mail box and an elephants ass . all is well arifissilly obummer hopes this will produce a nother term for him so we all can feed on the government tit welfair state just ask argentine's of zam bog way we will 3rd world just like bush and obummer want so they can have more power

    Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!