Depression. People starting to suggest it…

[cr]

[quote=peterb]The Fed is trying every trick in the book to get money moving, but it aint working….so if they cant get the private sector to spend, then they’ll have to start spending themselves.[/quote]

You’re right, but they’re spending already. In fact, I’d go as far to say they’re spent.

And I agree with RP’s statement that the Fed is a predatory lender.

I just don’t see how we can expect today’s rally to continue before they’ve even admitted we’re IN a recession. Then again, maybe they never will. Which brings to question any government numbers, like the ones today that reported a “surprise” jump in oil inventory.

[UCGal]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]peterb: I mentioned something similar to this on another thread when I said I thought we’d see a return to 1930s style WPA-type projects (i.e. infrastructure related goverment spending on a very large scale).

The US infrastructure is in a dire state, and it will probably take massive amounts of government spending (a la what occurred during FDR’s reconstruction programs, WWII, or the Japanese government programs of the 1990s) to turn things around.[/quote]

At least we’d see some tangible improvement to our infrastructure for the money spent… unlike the direct handouts along the lines of the Bear Stearns/JP Morgan deal. I’d rather see any “economic stimulus package” result in new roads and bridges and the jobs that would create. I’d rather see a WPA project than the ridiculous stimulus checks or a gas tax holiday.

[UCGal]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]peterb: I mentioned something similar to this on another thread when I said I thought we’d see a return to 1930s style WPA-type projects (i.e. infrastructure related goverment spending on a very large scale).

The US infrastructure is in a dire state, and it will probably take massive amounts of government spending (a la what occurred during FDR’s reconstruction programs, WWII, or the Japanese government programs of the 1990s) to turn things around.[/quote]

At least we’d see some tangible improvement to our infrastructure for the money spent… unlike the direct handouts along the lines of the Bear Stearns/JP Morgan deal. I’d rather see any “economic stimulus package” result in new roads and bridges and the jobs that would create. I’d rather see a WPA project than the ridiculous stimulus checks or a gas tax holiday.

[UCGal]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]peterb: I mentioned something similar to this on another thread when I said I thought we’d see a return to 1930s style WPA-type projects (i.e. infrastructure related goverment spending on a very large scale).

The US infrastructure is in a dire state, and it will probably take massive amounts of government spending (a la what occurred during FDR’s reconstruction programs, WWII, or the Japanese government programs of the 1990s) to turn things around.[/quote]

At least we’d see some tangible improvement to our infrastructure for the money spent… unlike the direct handouts along the lines of the Bear Stearns/JP Morgan deal. I’d rather see any “economic stimulus package” result in new roads and bridges and the jobs that would create. I’d rather see a WPA project than the ridiculous stimulus checks or a gas tax holiday.

[UCGal]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]peterb: I mentioned something similar to this on another thread when I said I thought we’d see a return to 1930s style WPA-type projects (i.e. infrastructure related goverment spending on a very large scale).

The US infrastructure is in a dire state, and it will probably take massive amounts of government spending (a la what occurred during FDR’s reconstruction programs, WWII, or the Japanese government programs of the 1990s) to turn things around.[/quote]

At least we’d see some tangible improvement to our infrastructure for the money spent… unlike the direct handouts along the lines of the Bear Stearns/JP Morgan deal. I’d rather see any “economic stimulus package” result in new roads and bridges and the jobs that would create. I’d rather see a WPA project than the ridiculous stimulus checks or a gas tax holiday.

[UCGal]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]peterb: I mentioned something similar to this on another thread when I said I thought we’d see a return to 1930s style WPA-type projects (i.e. infrastructure related goverment spending on a very large scale).

The US infrastructure is in a dire state, and it will probably take massive amounts of government spending (a la what occurred during FDR’s reconstruction programs, WWII, or the Japanese government programs of the 1990s) to turn things around.[/quote]

At least we’d see some tangible improvement to our infrastructure for the money spent… unlike the direct handouts along the lines of the Bear Stearns/JP Morgan deal. I’d rather see any “economic stimulus package” result in new roads and bridges and the jobs that would create. I’d rather see a WPA project than the ridiculous stimulus checks or a gas tax holiday.

[no_such_reality]

“By the end of WWII the USA had a debt greater than 50% of it’s GDP. ”

US Debt = $9.5 Trillion.
US GDP = $13 Trillion.

That’s roughly 75%.

There is no more debt to spend. The nation, like many home squatters, is financially insolvent.

[no_such_reality]

“By the end of WWII the USA had a debt greater than 50% of it’s GDP. ”

US Debt = $9.5 Trillion.
US GDP = $13 Trillion.

That’s roughly 75%.

There is no more debt to spend. The nation, like many home squatters, is financially insolvent.

[no_such_reality]

“By the end of WWII the USA had a debt greater than 50% of it’s GDP. ”

US Debt = $9.5 Trillion.
US GDP = $13 Trillion.

That’s roughly 75%.

There is no more debt to spend. The nation, like many home squatters, is financially insolvent.

[no_such_reality]

“By the end of WWII the USA had a debt greater than 50% of it’s GDP. ”

US Debt = $9.5 Trillion.
US GDP = $13 Trillion.

That’s roughly 75%.

There is no more debt to spend. The nation, like many home squatters, is financially insolvent.

[no_such_reality]

“By the end of WWII the USA had a debt greater than 50% of it’s GDP. ”

US Debt = $9.5 Trillion.
US GDP = $13 Trillion.

That’s roughly 75%.

There is no more debt to spend. The nation, like many home squatters, is financially insolvent.

[LostCat]

We’re already there. The minute you can’t afford what you have been able to afford, you’re in a depression.

I live in a 1950’s home. The closet space is small, and small for a reason. Look at a home built in 2007. The closet is bigger than my master bedroom.

Well, chances are, I’ll be able to keep my closet filled and most won’t be able to keep their post 1990 closet filled. That’s depression to many.

[LostCat]

We’re already there. The minute you can’t afford what you have been able to afford, you’re in a depression.

I live in a 1950’s home. The closet space is small, and small for a reason. Look at a home built in 2007. The closet is bigger than my master bedroom.

Well, chances are, I’ll be able to keep my closet filled and most won’t be able to keep their post 1990 closet filled. That’s depression to many.

[LostCat]

We’re already there. The minute you can’t afford what you have been able to afford, you’re in a depression.

I live in a 1950’s home. The closet space is small, and small for a reason. Look at a home built in 2007. The closet is bigger than my master bedroom.

Well, chances are, I’ll be able to keep my closet filled and most won’t be able to keep their post 1990 closet filled. That’s depression to many.

[LostCat]

We’re already there. The minute you can’t afford what you have been able to afford, you’re in a depression.

I live in a 1950’s home. The closet space is small, and small for a reason. Look at a home built in 2007. The closet is bigger than my master bedroom.

Well, chances are, I’ll be able to keep my closet filled and most won’t be able to keep their post 1990 closet filled. That’s depression to many.

[Author]

Posts