LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

Status
Not open for further replies.
mercury14 said:
Vette is going to have to get a job now. All it took to destroy his entire retirement portfolio was the slightest bit of paranoia about a tiny island in the Mediterranean.

But, but, but.... It's an opportunity to buy! Except in order to buy he has to sell his current gold at a loss. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

In another thread he claims its all supply and demand. Glad he does not handle my investments:rolleyes:
 
Adre said:
In another thread he claims its all supply and demand. Glad he does not handle my investments:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Might have to do a little shopping at Blue Nile and buy the wife a worthless pair of gold earrings.

Didn't Vette say he's also in silver? Because silver investors are wishin' they were gold investors right now.
 
Last edited:
VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: The War Against The Young.



It is popular wisdom that President Obama’s progressive social agenda is predicated on widespread support from the younger, hip generation. Certainly, concerns like gay marriage, marijuana legalization, abortion, the DREAM Act, gun control, women in combat, and blocking gas and oil exploration and pipeline transportation all get a lot of play on campuses and in popular culture. And these wedge issues supposedly represent the future direction of the country — a wise agenda for liberals eager to cement a majority constituency for decades to come.

But aside from the common-sense recognition that people become more conservative as they age and mature — and start paying taxes, and become financially responsible for their own children’s future — there is just as much likelihood that Barack Obama may inadvertently be building a conservative youth movement. Indeed, the new liberalism in all its economic manifestations is reactionary and anti-youth to the core. The administration seems aware of the potential paradoxes in this reverse “What’s the matter with Kansas?” syndrome of young people voting against their economic interests. Thus follows the constant courting of the hip and cool Beyoncé, Jay-Z, Lena Dunham, Occupy Wall Streeters, and others who blend pop culture, sex, youth, energy, and fad — almost anything to avoid the truth that today’s teenagers are starting out each owing a lifetime share of the national debt amounting to more than three-quarters of a million dollars. Those who ran up the debt enjoyed the borrowing, but won’t be around to pay back their proverbial fair share.

Plus: “University tuition has soared well beyond the rate of inflation, increases brought about by an inexcusable surge in administrative staffs, the reduction in teaching loads over the last few decades, the costs of subsidizing overly specialized and esoteric research, all sorts of costly new race/class/gender explorations, and a general expansion of non-teaching support staffs. Justification of such escalating costs was always based on the truism that college degrees represented a wise lifetime investment that ensured increased salary and better job security. That may still be true — in the long run — but bleak immediate employment prospects for those under 25, along with ballooning college loans, will eventually prompt a reexamination of such received wisdom. When academics at traditional universities trash private tech schools and on-line colleges, their criticism is not so much pedagogical as self-interested. . . . Apart from the elite of the Ivy League, most indebted students no longer look back at their professors and administrators as paragons of virtue or avatars of social change; instead, they see them as part of an establishment that sold them a bill of goods, one more interested in getting ever more customers than in finding jobs for those who bought their product on credit.”
 
So the fewer 1040s filed, the lower the tax rate?

Fucking dumbass posting figures he couldn't begin to understand much less analyze. :rolleyes:
 
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-14/fed-is-the-villain-in-krugman-stockman-brawl.html



Stockman KO’s Krugman in Big Fed Brawl
By William D. Cohan
April 14, 2013

Because I don’t have -- and have no prayer of ever having -- a Nobel Memorial Prize in economics, this statement is tantamount to blasphemy: Paul Krugman, the Nobel-winning economist and New York Times columnist, is wrong. At least when it comes to denigrating David Stockman’s cogent argument that the U.S. Federal Reserve is fomenting economic trouble.

Stockman, of course, is the former wunderkind congressman and budget director under Ronald Reagan, whose mammoth new book, “The Great Deformation: The Corruption of Capitalism in America,” is highly critical of the Fed’s role in managing our economy and has set Krugman off on a tear (and the book up the best-sellers’ list).

On the April 5 “Charlie Rose,” Stockman, who also was a partner at the Blackstone Group LP and had his own (unsuccessful) private equity firm, succinctly posited one aspect of his argument.

“The Federal Reserve has basically become a bubble machine,” he said. “There has been fabulous expansion of the Fed’s balance sheet since the crisis of 2008. And almost all of that new money created -- $1.7 trillion -- is simply circulated through the banking system, through the fingers of Wall Street, so to speak, and is back on the Fed’s balance sheet.”

Crushing Savers
Why is this so bad? “What it does is allow people to speculate and hit home runs,” he explained. “It doesn’t go to Main Street. It’s not helping the Main Street economy. And it’s crushing savers. Remember, if you are saving, if you saved your whole life and you have $100,000, you’re making $400 [a year] as a result of the Fed crushing short-term interest rates.”

Stockman is exactly right. The Fed’s “quantitative easing” policies -- which some Fed governors have begun to question, according to the minutes of the mid-March Fed meeting -- have been an unqualified boon to Wall Street. Not only has QE been a gift to traders -- they can trade freely on the Fed’s promise to keep interest rates low for the foreseeable future, and who have found a willing buyer in the Fed, at market prices, for squirrelly mortgage-backed and other complex debt securities -- but the Fed’s low short-term interest rate policy has allowed the money-center banks with access to the Fed’s discount window to back up the truck and get as much short-term funding as they need at virtually no cost.

Then, as Stockman notes correctly, banks pay virtually nothing to depositors for the use of their money, and they turn around and lend out those deposits at wide spreads. It all adds up to an industry that pays close to nothing for its raw material -- cash -- and has the Fed’s blessing to rake in the profits. In 2012, despite losing $6.2 billion in the London Whale debacle, JPMorgan Chase and Co. still earned $21.3 billion in profits, its best year ever.

Stockman blames Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke for the state of things. “Bernanke is the single most dangerous man ever to occupy high office in U.S. history,” Stockman told Rose. “It is terrible what the Fed is doing.”

It’s hard to know for sure why Krugman has it out for Stockman, but he took out his dagger after Stockman’s dystopic essay, “Sundown in America,” appeared in the Times on March 31, warning against the Fed’s dangerous policies.

“I was disappointed in Stockman’s piece,” Krugman wrote later that day on his Times blog. “I thought there would be some kind of real argument, some presentation, however tendentious, of evidence. Instead it’s just a series of gee-whiz, context- and model-free numbers embedded in a rant -- and not even an interesting rant. It’s cranky old man stuff, the kind of thing you get from people who read Investors Business Daily, listen to Rush Limbaugh, and maybe, if they’re unusually teched up, get investment advice from Zero Hedge. Sad.”

Facing Off
On Rose’s show, Stockman said he knew Krugman when he was a young man working on Reagan’s White House staff. “He seemed to be like a pretty pleasant, astute guy,” Stockman said. “Something went wrong over the last 30 years. Maybe it is that aging doesn’t suit some people well.”

The two men faced off live April 7 on ABC’s “This Week.” “Zero interest rates are basically crucifying the savers of America on a cross of ZIRP as I call it,” Stockman said, referring to zero-interest-rate policy. “All this money is not getting out of the canyons of Wall Street. It’s going into Wall Street [and then] right back to the, as excess reserves on the balance sheet of the Fed. It allows speculators to borrow money for nothing overnight. And we get bubble, after bubble, after bubble.”

Krugman’s weak-kneed response was to ask Stockman, rhetorically, “You really think we should be raising interest rates with high unemployment?” He then went on to lecture: “We have this overly complex financial system which is why we need financial regulation to bring it back to simplicity. But it has nothing to do with excess. It has nothing to do with zero interest rates.”

I don’t know which is sadder: That the Fed’s low interest- rate, easy-money policies are literally creating the next financial bubble right in front of our eyes, or that Krugman, supposedly one of our greatest economic minds, can’t see it, even though the very same thing happened just eight years ago and led to the Great Recession of 2008. Either way, I agree with Stockman. We’re in for trouble, and sooner than we care to admit.




http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-14/fed-is-the-villain-in-krugman-stockman-brawl.html
Click to expand...
 
Vettebigot said:
Krugman has a glass jaw.:D
Click to expand...

Interesting. The Word That Dares Not Speak Its Name in that opinion piece is INFLATION. It's basically saying the Fed needs to adjust monetary policy so that INFLATION is a bit higher, so that savers can realize more gains.

It's interesting that given a choice between demonizing liberals and lower inflation, you chose the former.

How much inflation SHOULD we have?
 
lets face it, if we take the obama supporters (that's the government worker, union fucktard, and lazy mother fuckers) and that = 51%

these people only want a check and could care less if we were a communist nation.

people go into government for all the "right" reasons. first they need to avoid the real world. two, they do not want to be responsible or accountable. three, they just want to put in the bare min collect a fact check then get on the pension ponzi
 
jeninflorida said:
lets face it, if we take the obama supporters (that's the government worker, union fucktard, and lazy mother fuckers) and that = 51%

these people only want a check and could care less if we were a communist nation.

people go into government for all the "right" reasons. first they need to avoid the real world. two, they do not want to be responsible or accountable. three, they just want to put in the bare min collect a fact check then get on the pension ponzi
Click to expand...

How much longer until you start blathering about the marathon bomber being a democrat?
 
It probably was OBama. Now that he's nearly gotten our guns he's coming after our trashcans next. Then our backpacks. Soon a time will come when honest folk can't walk around with anything more than four inches of yarn. That's right. Obama is coming for your pants.
 
LIFE IN THE OBAMA ECONOMY: ‘Panel Crasher’ Trying to Eat for Free at D.C. Think Tanks. “After losing his job, the Panel Crasher says he started joking with his friends about how to fill his time between now and the fall, when he enters grad school. Finding a full-time job for just a few months seemed unlikely. But with the loss of income, he needed to figure out how to feed himself, and remembered all the lunch events he attended.”
 
HOW’S THAT HOPEY-CHANGEY STUFF WORKIN’ OUT FOR YA? (CONT’D): Mort Zuckerman: Enduring an economic ‘Long Misery,’ American hope has turned into despair.
 


Cali taxpayers:
bend over and grab your ankles.​
​
​
​




http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-16/california-pension-may-ask-for-50-boost-to-close-gap.html




California Pension May Ask for 50% Boost to Close Gap
By Michael B. Marois
April 16, 2013

California taxpayers may see the municipal pension contributions they fund for the California Public Employees’ Retirement System rise as much as 50 percent under a plan to fill $87 billion in unfunded obligations.

Alan Milligan, the fund’s chief actuary, recommends that the biggest U.S. pension stop spreading out losses and gains over 15 years and instead set rates based on how much is needed to reach 100 percent funding within 30 years.

The Sacramento-based pension, known as Calpers, is about 26 percent short of meeting its long-term commitments. The state and cities contributed $7.8 billion in the last fiscal year, almost four times more than a decade earlier.

In a version of pay-me-now-or-pay-me-later, Milligan said the plan “will result in a lower probability of large increases in employer contribution rates” in the future, according to a report to a Calpers committee. If approved, the plan could be presented to the full board as soon as tomorrow.

Smoothing out gains and losses over 15 years, rather than accounting for them in one year, helps to ease potential spikes in the annual contribution rates. The rates are calculated as a percentage of the payroll of the state, cities and other local governments, financed by taxes.

Under Milligan’s proposal, the fund would shrink its 15- year rolling period for asset smoothing to five years and amortize gains and losses over a fixed 30-year period rather than the current rolling 30-year period. A fixed period means that all obligations will be fully funded by a specific date.

Increase Spread
If approved, the rates charged to governments would increase by as much as 50 percent. The boost would be spread over six years, beginning as early as next year for some.

Government contributions were already set to increase under the current smoothing and amortization policy. Half of the increase for the state, for example, would occur even under the existing policy.

The pension fund currently has about 74 percent of the money it needs to pay benefits over 30 years, after dropping to 61 percent in 2009 amid the global financial crisis that wiped out more than a third of the fund’s market value. Under the current rates and smoothing policy, the fund would reach an 80 percent funded status within 30 years.

The median funded status of state pensions, meaning how much money a system has in order to pay its obligations, fell to 72 percent in 2011 from 83 percent in 2007, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.




http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-16/california-pension-may-ask-for-50-boost-to-close-gap.html
Click to expand...
 
busybody said:
HOW’S THAT HOPEY-CHANGEY STUFF WORKIN’ OUT FOR YA? (CONT’D): Study: Long-term deficits are linked to 24 percent lower growth.

What’s the real harm of a massive government deficit? Carmen Reinhart, Vincent Reinhart, and Kenneth Rogoff find that high public debt is associated with a significantly lower level of GDP in the long run.

In a new paper for the National Bureau of Economic Research, the researchers examined the historical incidence of high government debt levels in advanced economies since 1800, examining 26 different “debt overhang episodes” when public debt levels were above 90 percent for at least five years.


Yeah, the pie’s smaller. But the folks with “juice” get a bigger piece, and that’s what’s important.



I know

READ BOOKS, NOT BLOGS......:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

UPON FURTHER REVIEW

Researchers Finally Replicated Reinhart-Rogoff, and There Are Serious Problems.

It seems a ONE character coding error in the spreadsheet calculations of the Reinhart-Rogoff study resulted in all economic growth from 5 countries (Canada, Austria, Australia, Denmark and Belgium) to be dropped from calculations, which in turn lowered the average economic growth rate of high-debt countries from a respectable 2.2% a year to a horrible 0.1% a year.

LINK here, contains screenprint of spreadsheet error.

Why is this important? Because Paul Ryan used the 0.1% horrible growth rate to justify his "Screw The Poor" austerity program throughout 2012.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

RobDownSouth
Remember those dire predictions of a "Recession in 2023-2024"? The White House does!
Replies
0
Views
323
RobDownSouth
RobDownSouth
Counselor706
Joe Biden and the powerless presidency
Replies
5
Views
448
John_von_Neumann
John_von_Neumann
Ulaven_Demorte
New and Improved "Doom and Gloom™" Thread
2 3
Replies
51
Views
4K
IrezumiKiss
IrezumiKiss
K
Paul Krugman: "In Defense of Obama"
5 6 7
Replies
155
Views
9K
IrezumiKiss
IrezumiKiss
Ulaven_Demorte
About all of the minimum wage "Doom and Gloom"
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
bronzeage
bronzeage
Back
Top