Troublemane
Well-Known Member
here's a different view.
US faces same problems as Greece, says Bank of England – Telegraph Blogs
US faces same problems as Greece, says Bank of England – Telegraph Blogs
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Future of the US Economy?
- Thread starter Sunstone
- Start date
Darkness
Psychoanalyst/Marxist
I think we all see things from a certain point of view. It is no accident that business owners tend to be right-wing and low-income workers tend to be left-wing. I cannot really see myself starting my own business. I don't know, I just never pictured that when dreamed about growing up. I will probably ending working for a non-profit, teaching or working for the Government. I definitely have strong altruistic tendencies. One of the reasons I am so enthusiastic about economics lately, is that I see it as a vehicle to help the genuinely disadvantaged. To put it this way, I will probably end up doing something with politics/economics or working to help combat human trafficking.
Darkness
Psychoanalyst/Marxist
Even the most libertarian people in the administration at the time of the meltdown (2008), knew that we had to save the banks.
Aquitaine
Well-Known Member
How many more bailouts should the Public/Government give to the banks? Hasn't the US already bailed them out twice in the past 2 years?
Personally I think Wall Street should've have just collapsed, we should nationalize our Banks and have firm control over what they do.
Troublemane
Well-Known Member
That would be an even worse situation, IMO. Right now the government cannot print money at will, it has to borrow it. So at least right now we can know how much the debt is. If the government had direct ability to simply print as much as it needs each year, we would fall apart even faster.
But I otherwise agree with the sentiment. I think I have had a revelation over all this...YES! We should let the banks just collapse! So what if people's savings are lost! So what if people's 401k's are wiped out! The majority of the people in the world live in poverty, and would not notice one bit!
Plus...it would also erase people's mortgages. Student loans. Personal debt. I am starting to see the fall of the banks as a good thing. I mean, it is going to happen eventually, because thats what fiat currency does. The only reason it has lasted this long (barely 100 years, with the creation of the Fed in 1913), is because through the IMF they have pulled the entire world into debt with us.
But!...heres the cool thing....maybe the meek shall inherit the Earth.
When the banks fall, the only people hurt will be the ones heavily invested in the stock market. People with huge mansions. The working class, who live from check to check, will be fine, because when the big banks fall apart, there will then be an opening for private, smaller credit-union type banks to take up the slack. Maybe then we go back to a more localized economic model?...I can only hope so, as Congress didn't have the nads to break up the banks when they had the chance.
Aquitaine
Well-Known Member
But I otherwise agree with the sentiment. I think I have had a revelation over all this...YES! We should let the banks just collapse! So what if people's savings are lost! So what if people's 401k's are wiped out! The majority of the people in the world live in poverty, and would not notice one bit!
Plus...it would also erase people's mortgages. Student loans. Personal debt. I am starting to see the fall of the banks as a good thing. I mean, it is going to happen eventually, because thats what fiat currency does. The only reason it has lasted this long (barely 100 years, with the creation of the Fed in 1913), is because through the IMF they have pulled the entire world into debt with us.
But!...heres the cool thing....maybe the meek shall inherit the Earth.
When the banks fall, the only people hurt will be the ones heavily invested in the stock market. People with huge mansions. The working class, who live from check to check, will be fine, because when the big banks fall apart, there will then be an opening for private, smaller credit-union type banks to take up the slack. Maybe then we go back to a more localized economic model?...I can only hope so, as Congress didn't have the nads to break up the banks when they had the chance.
I understand what you're saying, and yes, what I said was a simplistic viewpoint, but by saying it I was mostly venting my distrust of the banking system and our current monetary policies, and how I wish for change.
Honestly I don't know what the "best" solution would be, and I agree with your stance that if a Government was aloud to just print it's own money, it'd go mad and hyperinflate faster than it will with our current system. Only thing is though, is still it doesn't stop governments and nations racking up colossal amounts of debt, and when the time comes for nations to cut back on vital services we will protest and wonder at how such strong and important institues and services (like healthcare etc) can be ruined just by numbers.......
I think really the purpose of a bank should be just to hold people's money in a safe place, that's all. However with a Central Bank it's a little more complicated 'cause y' know, you have to somehow strike the right balance between the Government having sufficient money to spend on needs and not so much money to spend on luxuries or wars.
But hey, what can we do? 
P.S I do agree that more local measures and structures should be implemented, however I think our Economies, populations and infrastructures have expanded too far
P.S I do agree that more local measures and structures should be implemented, however I think our Economies, populations and infrastructures have expanded too far
That's good advice too, but I just recognized in him some of myself at his age.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
This thread doesn't give me much hope for America's continued existence. The whole Reagan and Carter debate of spending and taxing is proof that apparently people either cannot read simply charts, statistics, and history pages and cannot do alittle research to find what really happened; or it proves that history was written twice, which is worse than it being written by the winners, because then we can't even estimate a prediction of the future.
The hardcore two party system is destroying America. Any real progress will be hindered by one of the parties, one set of policies will never satisfy everyone, and it's a waste of time and money to keep bringing the same issues up to reverse the decision of whoever was last (abortion for example), and people will keep fighting and insisting that their party was right, always, and the other party is always wrong.
But no, there is no real threat of inflation. Inflation takes a large increase in money to be triggered, which causes an imbalance in the economy. Having only taken Economics 101 means I do not know much about how an economy functions, but even I know what really causes inflation. It's not government spending or deficit (which our federal government has NEVER used black ink for their budget, that is American History 101), but how much money the government prints, a decrease in the demand for money (which isn't likely to happen in a consumer driven society), or a spike in the demand for goods or drop in the supply of goods. Now since the aspects of supply and demand revolve around the materials that are used to make a good, failed crops, bountiful harvests, etc., and are on a per item basis (a shortage in copper will make wires and electronics go up, a drought will raise the price for crops), and since those do not apply to our situation, then any fears of inflation are irrational.
The hardcore two party system is destroying America. Any real progress will be hindered by one of the parties, one set of policies will never satisfy everyone, and it's a waste of time and money to keep bringing the same issues up to reverse the decision of whoever was last (abortion for example), and people will keep fighting and insisting that their party was right, always, and the other party is always wrong.
But no, there is no real threat of inflation. Inflation takes a large increase in money to be triggered, which causes an imbalance in the economy. Having only taken Economics 101 means I do not know much about how an economy functions, but even I know what really causes inflation. It's not government spending or deficit (which our federal government has NEVER used black ink for their budget, that is American History 101), but how much money the government prints, a decrease in the demand for money (which isn't likely to happen in a consumer driven society), or a spike in the demand for goods or drop in the supply of goods. Now since the aspects of supply and demand revolve around the materials that are used to make a good, failed crops, bountiful harvests, etc., and are on a per item basis (a shortage in copper will make wires and electronics go up, a drought will raise the price for crops), and since those do not apply to our situation, then any fears of inflation are irrational.
Very understandable.
Troublemane
Well-Known Member
Was listening to a radio program (on NPR) this morning, they mentioned that in the new bill set to pay for the war in Afghanistan there is a provision to cancel 200 million of Haiti's debt.
Some would say, thats good. We need to do that. I mean, poor Haiti, right? Of course it's not right to try and hold them to their debts, when the country is wrecked.
But what is that 200 million really about? Is it saving Haiti? Or is it another bailout, of a bank that has loaned money and wants it back now, with interest? I mean, there is no way Haiti could repay it. So....without the bailout money, the bank would have to write the loan off their books, and then what?
Hmmmmm,....maybe if governments stopped bailing out these banks, they might some day start being more RESPONSIBLE with their money? I mean, what if they had to carry insurance? That was privately held insurance, not government backed. You know, if there was an insurance agency which insured banks, and was not government supported. Then the banks would be scrutinized, and held to a much higher standard, because they would not be insured if they didn't follow the rules precisely.
However, the way the game is played right now, the media says "We have to save GREECE"...when it isnt really Greece we are saving, but the BANKS they owe money too. I don't imagine that would generate much sympathy, though. :angel2:
Some would say, thats good. We need to do that. I mean, poor Haiti, right? Of course it's not right to try and hold them to their debts, when the country is wrecked.
But what is that 200 million really about? Is it saving Haiti? Or is it another bailout, of a bank that has loaned money and wants it back now, with interest? I mean, there is no way Haiti could repay it. So....without the bailout money, the bank would have to write the loan off their books, and then what?
Hmmmmm,....maybe if governments stopped bailing out these banks, they might some day start being more RESPONSIBLE with their money? I mean, what if they had to carry insurance? That was privately held insurance, not government backed. You know, if there was an insurance agency which insured banks, and was not government supported. Then the banks would be scrutinized, and held to a much higher standard, because they would not be insured if they didn't follow the rules precisely.
However, the way the game is played right now, the media says "We have to save GREECE"...when it isnt really Greece we are saving, but the BANKS they owe money too. I don't imagine that would generate much sympathy, though. :angel2:
One thing that points out is that if a country (or anyone) is loaned money, & they can't use it productively enuf to ever pay it back, then the money really isn't of much use to them.
Sure they spend it, but not on anything which yields lasting lasting value such as increased productivity. This loan should have never been thought of as a loan in the first place.
Darkness
Psychoanalyst/Marxist
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
America has pardoned less deserving nations in the past. Haiti can't afford a pot to pee in. We might as well since they never will be able to pay us back, and if we expect them to pay us back, even in small increments, it will just be sucking up money that they can use more than we can. But America pardoned Germany of it's war debts, even though they had alot to do with WWI and II.
That's what the financial reform bill is for. It isn't the "bail out" bill Republicans are claiming it is.
Darkness
Psychoanalyst/Marxist
I believe it is Venezuela that is cancelling the 200 million USD debt. Other countries have also pledged to cancel Haiti's debt.
You are confusing the New Deal legislation, which only affects traditional banks, for something it is not.
You do realise that it is not only banks that can buy government securities, right? :sarcastic
Cosmos
Member
[youtube]lcb0hMPG5S0[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcb0hMPG5S0
PLEASE WATCH!!!
:shout
(watch all chapters)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcb0hMPG5S0
PLEASE WATCH!!!
:shout
(watch all chapters)
Darkness
Psychoanalyst/Marxist
The 53 trillion USD debt number is so dishonest. Counting unfunded liabilities as part of the debt is like saying I have 3 million USD in debt at 20, because when I grow up and have children that is how much it will cost me to buy a house and take care of my family. I guess without the scare tactics, they have no documentary. Never mind that Japan is still functioning fine with a debt to GDP ration of 190 percent or that the British Empire built up a debt of over 250 percent around 1825 and then over 200 percent after World War II. Be afraid, be very afraid and if you do not listen to the inflation haws and cut all fiscal stimulus we will all die.
Maybe I will watch the whole thing tomorrow, though I cannot guarantee I will not quit half-way if it purports such gross deceit.
Cosmos
Member
Actually, my friend the $50 trillion mark I've read from untold numerous journalists. IF you really truly believe that Japan is "fine"... well, I can't really say much in describing red to a blind person. And if the collapse of the British Empire does not strike fear into you for the fact it caused revolutionary bloodshed everywhere oppressed peoples attempted to achieve liberation--then you are just... well, your pic says everything.
Darkness
Psychoanalyst/Marxist
Wait. You are actually saying that high debt leads to revolutionary bloodshed?
And which picture? Gordon Brown or t.A.T.u?