Translation = the real culprit of our failing economy is the Feds loose money supply for over a decade now and neither candidate had any comprehension of that fact.
They therefore have no plan to fix the real problem, and after choosing between two Democrats and their pathetic "fixes" we're left with the one who simply had more ideas, but we have no idea which Version of Obama will take over.
Let's no fool ourselves that the candidates actually come up with these "fixes". They are both surrounded with engineers of this mess. Heck, we have one of the main criminals with dictatorial power over the US Treasury, Paulson. Contrary to MSM myth, I don't find financial fraud acceptable.
Obviously the politicians are spokesman for banking interests and they write what ever makeshift policy benefits them. It's not ideological it's straight criminal and it's in our face.
The swindle of American taxpayers is proceeding more or less in broad daylight, as the unwitting voters are preoccupied with the national election. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson agreed to invest $125 billion in the nine largest banks, including $10 billion for Goldman Sachs, his old firm. But, if you look more closely at Paulson's transaction, the taxpayers were taken for a ride--a very expensive ride. They paid $125 billion for bank stock that a private investor could purchase for $62.5 billion. That means half of the public's money was a straight-out gift to Wall Street, for which taxpayers got nothing in return.
Submitted by Carl Veritas on November 6, 2008 - 9:34pm.
Signaled by rising prices, the housing industry ramped up production to meet consumers demand, funded by rising home equity values and fueled by cheap bank credit---instigated by the Federal Reserve.
It didn't matter that the demand was not derived from consumers rising incomes, the industry followed the signal just the same. Once the same Federal Reserve tightens the money spigot, all the activities that sprung on the back of the boom is halted. This is what we are experiencing now.
Price aligns production with consumption in the free market. So that a rising price attracts capital to meet the demand. Manipulating the price of money (interest rates) instead of letting the supply of loanable funds dictate the price distorts the production process---via the business loan market.
The illusion of prosperity lasts as long as the money spigot is open. The worlds central bankers are again poised to mess with the price signal, they call it liquifying the system.
Coop I did think it was a well written article. I could not detect any bias either way.
Agreed. He equally distributed criticism for both McCain and Obama's "fixes", neither of which will be good for the US, because neither of them understand the problem.
Submitted by denverite on November 7, 2008 - 12:27pm.
The article is fairly comprehensive but misses a major point. The driving factor behind this whole mess is overstimulated consumption, made possible through inexpensive debt. The whole world bought into this paradigm, as promoted by Greenspan.
My point is that, in addition to the financial displacements typically mentioned, it is possible that a fundamental, secular change might be occuring in the form of responsible consumption (buy what we can afford). The entire consumptive model may have shifted. If this happens, then additional economic/financial disruptions are possible beyond what is currently predicted. This behavior is not assured, but I thought the analysis was worth presenting.
Good article.
Translation = the real culprit of our failing economy is the Feds loose money supply for over a decade now and neither candidate had any comprehension of that fact.
They therefore have no plan to fix the real problem, and after choosing between two Democrats and their pathetic "fixes" we're left with the one who simply had more ideas, but we have no idea which Version of Obama will take over.
Interesting.
Let's no fool ourselves that the candidates actually come up with these "fixes". They are both surrounded with engineers of this mess. Heck, we have one of the main criminals with dictatorial power over the US Treasury, Paulson. Contrary to MSM myth, I don't find financial fraud acceptable.
Obviously the politicians are spokesman for banking interests and they write what ever makeshift policy benefits them. It's not ideological it's straight criminal and it's in our face.
The swindle of American taxpayers is proceeding more or less in broad daylight, as the unwitting voters are preoccupied with the national election. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson agreed to invest $125 billion in the nine largest banks, including $10 billion for Goldman Sachs, his old firm. But, if you look more closely at Paulson's transaction, the taxpayers were taken for a ride--a very expensive ride. They paid $125 billion for bank stock that a private investor could purchase for $62.5 billion. That means half of the public's money was a straight-out gift to Wall Street, for which taxpayers got nothing in return.
Coop I did think it was a well written article. I could not detect any bias either way.
Signaled by rising prices, the housing industry ramped up production to meet consumers demand, funded by rising home equity values and fueled by cheap bank credit---instigated by the Federal Reserve.
It didn't matter that the demand was not derived from consumers rising incomes, the industry followed the signal just the same. Once the same Federal Reserve tightens the money spigot, all the activities that sprung on the back of the boom is halted. This is what we are experiencing now.
Price aligns production with consumption in the free market. So that a rising price attracts capital to meet the demand. Manipulating the price of money (interest rates) instead of letting the supply of loanable funds dictate the price distorts the production process---via the business loan market.
The illusion of prosperity lasts as long as the money spigot is open. The worlds central bankers are again poised to mess with the price signal, they call it liquifying the system.
Agreed. He equally distributed criticism for both McCain and Obama's "fixes", neither of which will be good for the US, because neither of them understand the problem.
The article is fairly comprehensive but misses a major point. The driving factor behind this whole mess is overstimulated consumption, made possible through inexpensive debt. The whole world bought into this paradigm, as promoted by Greenspan.
My point is that, in addition to the financial displacements typically mentioned, it is possible that a fundamental, secular change might be occuring in the form of responsible consumption (buy what we can afford). The entire consumptive model may have shifted. If this happens, then additional economic/financial disruptions are possible beyond what is currently predicted. This behavior is not assured, but I thought the analysis was worth presenting.