quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444



So which do ya all think its gonna be? mass inflation or the greatest depression? [8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444



So which do ya all think its gonna be? mass inflation or the greatest depression? [8|]

A distinction without a difference.

quote:

Again. The public debt is not the total debt. Again. Why do you continually ignore the contingency liabilities? http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-06-06-us-owes-62-trillion-in-debt_n.htm

quote:

Raise rates and enter recession/depression or stimulate more and get more inflation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Ive got my doubts about the USA Today figures and their appropriateness. ... to include benefits that will only be earned through future service or participation in SS or FRS goes too far.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Because you've yet to master basic English.

Your link shows what you're actually on about, promises for the future, unfunded. That's an old problem, and yes, it's business as usual, pursuing short term goals while ignoring long term obligations. That's different than "debt," because it hasn't happened yet, but if you'd said that in the first place, instead of the rest of this bullshit, the entire thread would have taken a different tack. The rest of it I'm "ignoring" (after repeatedly explaining it) because your focus is on your idiocy. Good job.

quote:


What does one even say about such an absurd false dilemma. Stay exactly here or disaster in either direction? No continuum, no degrees of effect, just a massive unavoidable mess? OK then. Have fun diggin' the shelter.

quote:

You think you can raise rates without bankrupting the financial institutions again? I'm not saying that raising rates is the wrong thing to do. I wholeheartedly endorse raising rates because it's the only way out of this mess, but it's going to cause pain once it happens. Remember Volcker had to raise rates above 20% to combat the inflation in the early 80's; it's likely that, to fix this mess, they'd have to be around that level. There's absolutely no way that the economy could avoid recession if rates were even half that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
These aren't even remotely comparable. Volcker was facing stagflation. Today, rates are rock bottom and banks are sitting on cash. So absolutely, of course rates can be raised without bankrupting financial institutions again. Rates had NOTHING to do with the financial crisis in the first place. In fact, raising rates would increase the opportunity cost of sitting on cash, and getting lending going again would melt the credit crunch and get business back to investing and growing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

You think you can raise rates without bankrupting the financial institutions again? I'm not saying that raising rates is the wrong thing to do. I wholeheartedly endorse raising rates because it's the only way out of this mess, but it's going to cause pain once it happens. Remember Volcker had to raise rates above 20% to combat the inflation in the early 80's; it's likely that, to fix this mess, they'd have to be around that level. There's absolutely no way that the economy could avoid recession if rates were even half that.

These aren't even remotely comparable. Volcker was facing stagflation. Today, rates are rock bottom and banks are sitting on cash. So absolutely, of course rates can be raised without bankrupting financial institutions again. Rates had NOTHING to do with the financial crisis in the first place. In fact, raising rates would increase the opportunity cost of sitting on cash, and getting lending going again would melt the credit crunch and get business back to investing and growing.

quote:

The real estate mess is a perfect illustration of this.

quote:


Why would raising rates increase the oc of sitting on cash? If anything, raising rates would encourage saving. You have it backwards.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

The real estate mess is a perfect illustration of this.

Bundled derivatives are the mess.

quote:


Why would raising rates increase the oc of sitting on cash? If anything, raising rates would encourage saving. You have it backwards.

We're talking about banks here. Banks make more money when they loan at higher rates. When cash is cheap, the cost of holding it is low.

The same is true of businesses sitting on cash. Investing becomes more attractive when the cost of holding increases.

quote:

So we're not facing high inflation and low growth right now?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Sigh.

Since data means nothing to you, I guess reality is whatever you make it out to be.

Enjoy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

So we're not facing high inflation and low growth right now?

Sigh.

Since data means nothing to you, I guess reality is whatever you make it out to be.

Enjoy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: defiantbadgirl

The economy isn't getting better because Republicans in the House and Senate don't want it to. They got elected by promising jobs, then became the party of no jobs when they voted against all the jobs bills.

That's right the repubs are the party of no. Now we need a good one for the left. How about the party of "it's all their fault" or the party of "they did it first"

That seems to be all I keep hearing from the left. If they spent more time working on a balanced budget and less time pointing fingers at the right and following sarah around like a puppy dog, they might actually get something accomplished.

That is not all that you hear on the left....

That is what you hear from democrat voters,... big difference

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

Prov, you are correct.   Thank you for this thread.  

quote:

ORIGINAL: imperatrixx

quote:

ORIGINAL: lockedaway

I'm sorry...but that is SUCH  a stupid post.  You know why the rich get richer?  Because they earn money, the don't get addicted to drugs, they don't impregnate women out of wedlock, the don't go to Atlantic City and gamble away the mortgage.  I am richer than I have ever been....but then....I'm older than I have ever been too.  Understand?  People tend to make more money the longer they are in the game.  I don't make money at YOUR expense.  Who does?  What rich person do you know that got rich because they held YOU PERSONALLY back. 

Me personally? None. I'm fairly financially comfortable, in the sense that I could go a few months without income and not worry about being homeless.

But in general? How about every single corporation that pays its workers the bare minimum wage to increase the profit of the executives and shareholders? Every company that cut benefits and laid off workers then gave its CEO a bonus. Every company that outsources labor to raise profits, laying off American workers to pay foreign labor pennies on the dollar. Every company that hires undocumented workers to get around American minimum wage laws.Not to mention every lobbyist sent by a company to fight against minimum wage increases...to keep profits higher.

YES! YES 1000 times YES!

It's funny...in 2005, the average CEO earned more in one workday than the average worker earned in a year. In 1950, top executives only made 24 times the average worker's pay...and back then they weren't even asking for bailouts.

Also, you'd be surprised at the number of wealthy people who have done drugs, gambled, and fathered out of wedlock children. Cocaine wasn't known as the Wall Street drug for nothing. Adderall abuse is more common in the ivies than in the ghettos. And I can make quite a list of wealthy men who fathered out of wedlock children...usually while they were married to someone else.

Perhaps you'd also be surprised at the number of working class people who haven't done any of that...take a look at the Bible Belt to start with.

quote:

It is a palpably stupid statement to say that the divide between the rich and poor keeps getting wider.  A rich man doesn't get rich by holding someone back.  He gets rich by being good at what he does....whatever that is.

No, a rich person gets rich by being good at something that makes a lot of money. Who do you think makes more - an average corporate attorney or an exceptional hotel housekeeper?

quote:

Are there fewer job opportunities for people in the socialist U.S. that you are craving so dearly?  Sure.  But why?  Don't you think it could be that we have driven our manufacturing and other corporations out of the country with punitive taxation?  Unions? Regulations?  High state taxes?  C'mon..give it your best thinking.  If you were going to start a manufacturing plant, would you do it where the taxes were excessive or in another place where the taxes are nominal. 

I'd say that a stronger contributing factor is the ease of globalization - transoceanic transportation costs less than it ever did, making it cheaper to manufacture elsewhere and ship overseas than to pay American workers. Especially when you can offer foreign workers less in a week than American workers make in an hour.

quote:


[sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif]

Like Michael Jackson said "THIS IS IT!"[/b

It is clear to me that your kind of foolish, liberal, utopia premised thinking is a large contributing factor to why we are in this mess and why I can say without equivocation that there IS NO TURNING IT AROUND.

Yet you advised people to vote conservative in the next election. Why, if it's hopeless? I mean, I don't want to vote the same way as someone who's already written our country off as a failure. I want to vote in a way that will help solve the problem, not give up on it.