Ok, bit a low blow there since you clearly aren't understanding what I'm trying to explain.Varegg wrote:
Nah ... it's just getting to be a normal term that those of us that criticize your government is haters when you run out of good arguments!
And it will be very interesting to follow how this plays through but my opinion is still that most of you think this isn't as serious and that it prolly will be a short recession at worst - worst case is 1929 all over again and that took years, many years to get over ...
Hope i'm wrong of course ...
I fully understand what you are saying, i just state that the "thing" that worked during the 2001 recession doesn't necessarily work now seeing as there is a completely different situation ... the economy is failing in more than just a few areas, it is failing in all possible ways - it is to late to "pay as you go" ... that should have started 6 - 9 months ago, maybe even as far back as 1 year.Pug wrote:
Ok, bit a low blow there since you clearly aren't understanding what I'm trying to explain.Varegg wrote:
Nah ... it's just getting to be a normal term that those of us that criticize your government is haters when you run out of good arguments!
And it will be very interesting to follow how this plays through but my opinion is still that most of you think this isn't as serious and that it prolly will be a short recession at worst - worst case is 1929 all over again and that took years, many years to get over ...
Hope i'm wrong of course ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
A Republican and a Democrat were walking down the street when they came to a homeless person. The Republican gave the homeless person his business card and told him to come to his business for a job. He then took twenty dollars out of his pocket and gave it to the homeless person. The Democrat was very impressed, and when they came to another homeless person, he decided to help. He walked over to the homeless person and gave him directions to the welfare office. He then reached into the Republican’s pocket and got out twenty dollars. He kept $15 for administrative fees and gave the homeless person five. Now you understand the difference between Republicans & Democrats.
Charity is a temporary solution to a long term problem. If you raise taxes on business when they are struggling expect a dramatic increase in the unemployment rate.
Charity is a temporary solution to a long term problem. If you raise taxes on business when they are struggling expect a dramatic increase in the unemployment rate.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Why don't we cut taxes AND cut spending?
errrr Iraq?!Turquoise wrote:
Why don't we cut taxes AND cut spending?
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
We can certainly cut out all corporate welfare while remaining in Iraq. Granted, that doesn't mean Congress will do it....m3thod wrote:
errrr Iraq?!Turquoise wrote:
Why don't we cut taxes AND cut spending?
Ding Ding! The tax cuts have created record revenue. However, we've exported it to other nations and their economies. If Bush spent like a conservative we would be in better shape.Turquoise wrote:
Why don't we cut taxes AND cut spending?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Agreed... Neocons are the worst of both worlds... They budget like conservatives and spend like liberals. We need someone who budgets like a liberal and spends like a conservative.
I'll use mine to pay some on my back taxes.../wrist.
A Jew?Turquoise wrote:
Agreed... Neocons are the worst of both worlds... They budget like conservatives and spend like liberals. We need someone who budgets like a liberal and spends like a conservative.
/badjoke.
I've been looking at the budget though. Those damned entitlements and interest on the national debt chalk up about 70% of the budget. Personally, I'd like to start cannibalizing foreign aid. After all, the home front should be more important than those outside.
Oh, but then whenever we get tax incentives for businesses, then everyone piles on about "corporate welfare" even though most of the policies are directed at small business owners.Varegg wrote:
One project to boost economy could be incentives to avoid small businesses going out of business, small businesses are the backbone of any economy and should be a priority to keep alive. And not necessarily by taxcuts.
Which would be a hugely expensive prospect, increasing government debt and driving the economy further down.Varegg wrote:
What you guys need is to stop being so self centered, not caring about each other - a social reform is highly recommended.
The subprime mess is only a part of the problem. There are many more factors involved than just that.Varegg wrote:
I remember making a thread about about the subprime lending issue some time ago before the shit really hit the fan and the response was like "we don't care, it's their problem" and that attitude now have struck the lot of you or soon will.
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pi … 8#p1347138
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Idiot...
Who?Deadmonkiefart wrote:
Idiot...
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
No, it's not funny how the government isn't expected to sacrifice anything.jsnipy wrote:
It funny how the word "sacrifice" has never came up.
I guess in some months the "I told you so" threads will take over DST, i hope its not me being author of one of them
Many of your own experts states this recession will come and that it will make the ones from 1990/91 and 2001 look like a walk in the park, just as many says there is only a 40% chance of it happening if at all including the Fed (but he is kinda obligated to say so)
Many experts says the 140 billion dollar packet Bush want will make it worse, equally many says it will help.
Many of your own experts states this recession will come and that it will make the ones from 1990/91 and 2001 look like a walk in the park, just as many says there is only a 40% chance of it happening if at all including the Fed (but he is kinda obligated to say so)
Many experts says the 140 billion dollar packet Bush want will make it worse, equally many says it will help.
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
I don't think this will really help. Short term we might see a little progress but it doesn't solve our long term problems.
Varegg even if we were all socialized like the EU we would find ways to waste money and spend too much
Varegg even if we were all socialized like the EU we would find ways to waste money and spend too much
Ok, last comment from me, and I'll give an opinion too.Varegg wrote:
I fully understand what you are saying, i just state that the "thing" that worked during the 2001 recession doesn't necessarily work now seeing as there is a completely different situation ... the economy is failing in more than just a few areas, it is failing in all possible ways - it is to late to "pay as you go" ... that should have started 6 - 9 months ago, maybe even as far back as 1 year.
Paygo has to do with the budget. Any changes must conform to it. So it has a minimal impact on current activity - which includes any "plan" raised by our leaders. To have any impact the real change is in the next budget. However, the economic results will lag the budget - my guess at least a year or possibly two before the impact is felt. So yes, you are correct that they should have started earlier to prevent a recession - but I believe they should have started at least two years ago. The other factor is overspending isn't an issue as long as there's growth...so slow growth = time for a change.
I do not believe things are bad as people say. If there's a problem, it will be relatively temporary and slight. In the coming years the world isn't going to see a huge growth as in the past.
At least, not until the next breakthru. For examples - computers & the internet. What's next? We probably are at the point where those technologies are not being leveraged as fast as they were, and there's been a corresponding decline in economic growth. The world's economic growth will occur within a few lessor developed countries (China & India) and the other more developed economies will have slower growth.
The challenges of a more developed economy will have to do with restrictions on labor - not finding the right people for the job. Because of a tighter labor market, an artificial ceiling will be in place to limit growth potential.
As far as the current economic situation, I'm not overtly worried. I'm looking at long term. First, the US has put a lot of resources towards it's "bet" on what the next economic breakthru will be. People are worried about social security and the boomers retiring. The result? Social security may not be a strong option for the younger generations - but then again the boomers didn't have the personal savings vehicles we have now. 401k plans came towards the latter half of their careers. So more young people are saving for retirement compared to their parents.
Ahh, what about the social security debt? Well, we pay it for our parents. But...realize that in the next 20 years, the largest transfer in wealth will occur when the boomers pass their wealth to their kids. So in a sense, they are going to help us pay the debt.
Then there's the deficit. Well, at some point both the president and congress agree on a budget that pays some of it back. The standard of living isn't going to fall to dismal levels when this happens. No economist in their right mind is going to say that the US will implode because of a defaulted debt. Why? Because the US isn't going to default on the debt.
Last, the internet. The creation of the internet allows for an easier economic model than the past. It's impact is to allow more competition and price sensitivity for consumers. What does that mean exactly? It means inflation will not get out of control. It means inflation will not be the only reason why the economy gets screwed up - because the peaks and valleys will be flattened. However, it does mean competition will be more fierce.
Do I agree with tax cuts? Depends. Do I agree with decreased spending? Depends. I'm pretty sure that when Bush throws out a tax cut for consideration, he's looking for a temporary fix. But given what I've said above - there is little he CAN do to change what's actually going to happen.
Last edited by Pug (2008-01-19 08:19:05)
Hmmm.. what economic credentials do you have that justify you calling someone an idiot mr varegg?
Last edited by usmarine2005 (2008-01-19 08:21:57)
Deadmonkiefart wrote:
Idiot...
huh. lol wut?usmarine2005 wrote:
Hmmm.. what economic credentials do you have that justify you calling someone an idiot mr varegg?
I have the backing of most senior analysts operating on global economy both from your own country and abroad, on my own behalf i have balanced budgets the last 20 years and know the importance of control in economic matters.usmarine2005 wrote:
Hmmm.. what economic credentials do you have that justify you calling someone an idiot mr varegg?
Putting flammables on an already overheated fire only have one reaction UMS - i call Bush an idiot because he and his advisors was stupid enough to let this spiral totally out of control, you don't have control when you let your debt reach levels of astronomical proportions.
@Pug: I agree fully on your estimates for the exspansion of the economy globally, we have definately seen the top of the mountain for some time to come, Asia will continue to have additional growth over the next years.
The discussion is clearly just about the package Bush now have proposed to the senate and firstly if it will have any effect on the short term cause it will beyond doubt do nothing on a larger scale and secondly if the measures stated is to small to have any effect but make it worse.
Last edited by Varegg (2008-01-19 09:20:46)
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
No such thing as an expert. One expert will always counter another expert. Therefore the only expert people accept in an argument is the one that supports their argument.
Good time for this:usmarine2005 wrote:
No such thing as an expert. One expert will always counter another expert. Therefore the only expert people accept in an argument is the one that supports their argument.
Three economists go hunting.
The first takes aim at a deer and misses three feet to the right.
The second takes aim at the same deer and misses three feet to the left.
The third economist yells "we got it"!!!
Best thing would definately be to get rid of economists in general seing as their statements alone is enough to bring uncertainty into any market.
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Nanny states, gotta love em...
On a serious note, I think the problem with America is that it is shit scared of taking a long overdue hit. Their economy cannot perpetually perform well with the amount of spending of other peoples money they're doing. They've been building a house of cards for years now. Eventually it has to catch up with you and by putting the crash off longer your just making the eventual inevitable groundslam a hundred times worse. I think the US needs to learn that books have to be balanced and you can't fake economic growth by spending other peoples money continuously and implementing 'hotfixes' that just put off required market corrections.
On a serious note, I think the problem with America is that it is shit scared of taking a long overdue hit. Their economy cannot perpetually perform well with the amount of spending of other peoples money they're doing. They've been building a house of cards for years now. Eventually it has to catch up with you and by putting the crash off longer your just making the eventual inevitable groundslam a hundred times worse. I think the US needs to learn that books have to be balanced and you can't fake economic growth by spending other peoples money continuously and implementing 'hotfixes' that just put off required market corrections.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-01-20 07:19:09)
Pr date 9,2 Trillion dollars, when Bush took office in 2000 it was at 5,6 Trillion and all efforts of paying off the debt was cancelled.
Last edited by Varegg (2008-01-20 07:54:20)
Wait behind the line ..............................................................