OK, we are down graded: AA+ (Still a long way from F+ guys)

[The-Shoveler]

Personally, I hope Gold hits 6 thousand per ounce, its a little known fact but the U.S.A. citizens own more gold then the rest of world.
Plus it will create employment opportunities galore.

I think I can make a pile of money selling dry dredges at that point.
Also
The United States holds the largest gold reserve in the world. With 8,133.5 tonnes, the US gold holdings are worth approximately $269.67 billion. This massive gold reserve represents about .9436 an ounce for ever person living in the country. The majority of the American gold is reported to be held in the world famous United States Bullion Depository in Fort Knox, Kentucky, although there is some controversy that suggests otherwise. The remainder of the US reserves are held at the Philadelphia Mint, the Denver Mint, the West Point Bullion Depository and the San Francisco Assay Office.

[The-Shoveler]

Also Do you really want to pay these people off in Gold ?

China July exports hit record high, surplus swells

I say give them paper.

[The-Shoveler]

Also Do you really want to pay these people off in Gold ?

China July exports hit record high, surplus swells

I say give them paper.

[The-Shoveler]

Also Do you really want to pay these people off in Gold ?

China July exports hit record high, surplus swells

I say give them paper.

[The-Shoveler]

Also Do you really want to pay these people off in Gold ?

China July exports hit record high, surplus swells

I say give them paper.

[The-Shoveler]

Also Do you really want to pay these people off in Gold ?

China July exports hit record high, surplus swells

I say give them paper.

[Anonymous]

[quote=ucodegen]Refinancing debt to lower existing debt costs is not the same as getting more debt, so this is not a good example.[/quote]
Good point, but refinancing also extends the term of the loan. Some people choose not to refinance because they don’t want to “reset” the clock and pay a mortgage for 30 more years. That’s the wrong reason.

Rich does say “refi” specifically, but I would go farther with the argument and recommend considering taking out a mortgage even if you don’t have one.

[quote]Good vs Bad debt is more dependent upon what the debt is used for and what is the return on the debt minus the cost of the debt (net proceeds of the indebtedness)[/quote]

Of course. But back to government debt: As Dave mentioned, the government (and the public critiquing the government) doesn’t distinguish between expenses and investments like other entities. The government uses debt for investments as well, it’s just not as easy to distinguish.

The largest debt the US ever incurred was during WWII. Was that a good investment or just reckless spending? (What was the net proceeds of the that indebtedness?)

That’s where most people don’t get it when it comes to stimulus “spending.” If the government could re-brand it as stimulus “investing” then maybe that would help. If borrowing and spending/investing ultimately results in just a few percentage points of economic growth, then the proceeds could easily exceed the cost of the indebtedness.

I have no idea if the stimulus is working because it’s incredibly hard to figure. Some Econ Phds can figure that out years from now (and argue about it I’m sure.) But I do know that stimulus spending is a more sound and actionable plan than “cut taxes and hope rich folks decide to do some hiring.”

[Anonymous]

[quote=ucodegen]Refinancing debt to lower existing debt costs is not the same as getting more debt, so this is not a good example.[/quote]
Good point, but refinancing also extends the term of the loan. Some people choose not to refinance because they don’t want to “reset” the clock and pay a mortgage for 30 more years. That’s the wrong reason.

Rich does say “refi” specifically, but I would go farther with the argument and recommend considering taking out a mortgage even if you don’t have one.

[quote]Good vs Bad debt is more dependent upon what the debt is used for and what is the return on the debt minus the cost of the debt (net proceeds of the indebtedness)[/quote]

Of course. But back to government debt: As Dave mentioned, the government (and the public critiquing the government) doesn’t distinguish between expenses and investments like other entities. The government uses debt for investments as well, it’s just not as easy to distinguish.

The largest debt the US ever incurred was during WWII. Was that a good investment or just reckless spending? (What was the net proceeds of the that indebtedness?)

That’s where most people don’t get it when it comes to stimulus “spending.” If the government could re-brand it as stimulus “investing” then maybe that would help. If borrowing and spending/investing ultimately results in just a few percentage points of economic growth, then the proceeds could easily exceed the cost of the indebtedness.

I have no idea if the stimulus is working because it’s incredibly hard to figure. Some Econ Phds can figure that out years from now (and argue about it I’m sure.) But I do know that stimulus spending is a more sound and actionable plan than “cut taxes and hope rich folks decide to do some hiring.”

[Anonymous]

[quote=ucodegen]Refinancing debt to lower existing debt costs is not the same as getting more debt, so this is not a good example.[/quote]
Good point, but refinancing also extends the term of the loan. Some people choose not to refinance because they don’t want to “reset” the clock and pay a mortgage for 30 more years. That’s the wrong reason.

Rich does say “refi” specifically, but I would go farther with the argument and recommend considering taking out a mortgage even if you don’t have one.

[quote]Good vs Bad debt is more dependent upon what the debt is used for and what is the return on the debt minus the cost of the debt (net proceeds of the indebtedness)[/quote]

Of course. But back to government debt: As Dave mentioned, the government (and the public critiquing the government) doesn’t distinguish between expenses and investments like other entities. The government uses debt for investments as well, it’s just not as easy to distinguish.

The largest debt the US ever incurred was during WWII. Was that a good investment or just reckless spending? (What was the net proceeds of the that indebtedness?)

That’s where most people don’t get it when it comes to stimulus “spending.” If the government could re-brand it as stimulus “investing” then maybe that would help. If borrowing and spending/investing ultimately results in just a few percentage points of economic growth, then the proceeds could easily exceed the cost of the indebtedness.

I have no idea if the stimulus is working because it’s incredibly hard to figure. Some Econ Phds can figure that out years from now (and argue about it I’m sure.) But I do know that stimulus spending is a more sound and actionable plan than “cut taxes and hope rich folks decide to do some hiring.”

[Anonymous]

[quote=ucodegen]Refinancing debt to lower existing debt costs is not the same as getting more debt, so this is not a good example.[/quote]
Good point, but refinancing also extends the term of the loan. Some people choose not to refinance because they don’t want to “reset” the clock and pay a mortgage for 30 more years. That’s the wrong reason.

Rich does say “refi” specifically, but I would go farther with the argument and recommend considering taking out a mortgage even if you don’t have one.

[quote]Good vs Bad debt is more dependent upon what the debt is used for and what is the return on the debt minus the cost of the debt (net proceeds of the indebtedness)[/quote]

Of course. But back to government debt: As Dave mentioned, the government (and the public critiquing the government) doesn’t distinguish between expenses and investments like other entities. The government uses debt for investments as well, it’s just not as easy to distinguish.

The largest debt the US ever incurred was during WWII. Was that a good investment or just reckless spending? (What was the net proceeds of the that indebtedness?)

That’s where most people don’t get it when it comes to stimulus “spending.” If the government could re-brand it as stimulus “investing” then maybe that would help. If borrowing and spending/investing ultimately results in just a few percentage points of economic growth, then the proceeds could easily exceed the cost of the indebtedness.

I have no idea if the stimulus is working because it’s incredibly hard to figure. Some Econ Phds can figure that out years from now (and argue about it I’m sure.) But I do know that stimulus spending is a more sound and actionable plan than “cut taxes and hope rich folks decide to do some hiring.”

[Anonymous]

[quote=ucodegen]Refinancing debt to lower existing debt costs is not the same as getting more debt, so this is not a good example.[/quote]
Good point, but refinancing also extends the term of the loan. Some people choose not to refinance because they don’t want to “reset” the clock and pay a mortgage for 30 more years. That’s the wrong reason.

Rich does say “refi” specifically, but I would go farther with the argument and recommend considering taking out a mortgage even if you don’t have one.

[quote]Good vs Bad debt is more dependent upon what the debt is used for and what is the return on the debt minus the cost of the debt (net proceeds of the indebtedness)[/quote]

Of course. But back to government debt: As Dave mentioned, the government (and the public critiquing the government) doesn’t distinguish between expenses and investments like other entities. The government uses debt for investments as well, it’s just not as easy to distinguish.

The largest debt the US ever incurred was during WWII. Was that a good investment or just reckless spending? (What was the net proceeds of the that indebtedness?)

That’s where most people don’t get it when it comes to stimulus “spending.” If the government could re-brand it as stimulus “investing” then maybe that would help. If borrowing and spending/investing ultimately results in just a few percentage points of economic growth, then the proceeds could easily exceed the cost of the indebtedness.

I have no idea if the stimulus is working because it’s incredibly hard to figure. Some Econ Phds can figure that out years from now (and argue about it I’m sure.) But I do know that stimulus spending is a more sound and actionable plan than “cut taxes and hope rich folks decide to do some hiring.”

[The-Shoveler]

It’s very funny , the Swiss franc is up because it’s gold based, now listen to this,

U.S.A. citizens personally own more gold than the rest of world.

The United States holds the largest gold reserve in the world. With 8,133.5 tonnes, the US gold holdings are worth approximately $269.67 billion.

OK now here is the real funny part,

Do the math

$269.67 billion is about 2% of our annual USA GDP .

There is no way in heck it could be used for money, it’s just for watches jewelry etc…

That’s it’s total value in life.

[The-Shoveler]

It’s very funny , the Swiss franc is up because it’s gold based, now listen to this,

U.S.A. citizens personally own more gold than the rest of world.

The United States holds the largest gold reserve in the world. With 8,133.5 tonnes, the US gold holdings are worth approximately $269.67 billion.

OK now here is the real funny part,

Do the math

$269.67 billion is about 2% of our annual USA GDP .

There is no way in heck it could be used for money, it’s just for watches jewelry etc…

That’s it’s total value in life.

[The-Shoveler]

It’s very funny , the Swiss franc is up because it’s gold based, now listen to this,

U.S.A. citizens personally own more gold than the rest of world.

The United States holds the largest gold reserve in the world. With 8,133.5 tonnes, the US gold holdings are worth approximately $269.67 billion.

OK now here is the real funny part,

Do the math

$269.67 billion is about 2% of our annual USA GDP .

There is no way in heck it could be used for money, it’s just for watches jewelry etc…

That’s it’s total value in life.

[The-Shoveler]

It’s very funny , the Swiss franc is up because it’s gold based, now listen to this,

U.S.A. citizens personally own more gold than the rest of world.

The United States holds the largest gold reserve in the world. With 8,133.5 tonnes, the US gold holdings are worth approximately $269.67 billion.

OK now here is the real funny part,

Do the math

$269.67 billion is about 2% of our annual USA GDP .

There is no way in heck it could be used for money, it’s just for watches jewelry etc…

That’s it’s total value in life.

[Author]

Posts