OT: So the debt grows…

[Anonymous]

[quote=Rich Toscano][quote=briansd1]The national debt is far from dire yet since the US government can borrow at 2.5%.[/quote]

That doesn’t prove anything except that people are still willing to pay a lot for our debt (the way they did for houses in 2005, etc etc).[/quote]

“A lot” is a relative amount.

The fact that there once was a bubble in the price of one type of asset doesn’t tell us anything about whether some another asset is in a bubble today.

Could we replace the words “our debt” in your sentence above with the word “gold?”

[ltokuda]

[quote=ocrenter][quote=nocommonsense]

Not trying to attack you–just using your comment to make a point. Whatever one does with his income (above $250K or not) is not the government’s damn business, and is no excuse to use to rob his money via unfair and excessive taxation.

It’s this same “thug” logic that the communist countries used to rob the “rich” to give to the “poor”.[/quote]

every issue in this country is now reduced to communist this or fascist that…

very sad[/quote]

ocrenter, that’s completely untrue. There are many issues which are reduced to Hitler and Nazi’s instead.

[ltokuda]

[quote=ocrenter][quote=nocommonsense]

Not trying to attack you–just using your comment to make a point. Whatever one does with his income (above $250K or not) is not the government’s damn business, and is no excuse to use to rob his money via unfair and excessive taxation.

It’s this same “thug” logic that the communist countries used to rob the “rich” to give to the “poor”.[/quote]

every issue in this country is now reduced to communist this or fascist that…

very sad[/quote]

ocrenter, that’s completely untrue. There are many issues which are reduced to Hitler and Nazi’s instead.

[ltokuda]

[quote=ocrenter][quote=nocommonsense]

Not trying to attack you–just using your comment to make a point. Whatever one does with his income (above $250K or not) is not the government’s damn business, and is no excuse to use to rob his money via unfair and excessive taxation.

It’s this same “thug” logic that the communist countries used to rob the “rich” to give to the “poor”.[/quote]

every issue in this country is now reduced to communist this or fascist that…

very sad[/quote]

ocrenter, that’s completely untrue. There are many issues which are reduced to Hitler and Nazi’s instead.

[ltokuda]

[quote=ocrenter][quote=nocommonsense]

Not trying to attack you–just using your comment to make a point. Whatever one does with his income (above $250K or not) is not the government’s damn business, and is no excuse to use to rob his money via unfair and excessive taxation.

It’s this same “thug” logic that the communist countries used to rob the “rich” to give to the “poor”.[/quote]

every issue in this country is now reduced to communist this or fascist that…

very sad[/quote]

ocrenter, that’s completely untrue. There are many issues which are reduced to Hitler and Nazi’s instead.

[ltokuda]

[quote=ocrenter][quote=nocommonsense]

Not trying to attack you–just using your comment to make a point. Whatever one does with his income (above $250K or not) is not the government’s damn business, and is no excuse to use to rob his money via unfair and excessive taxation.

It’s this same “thug” logic that the communist countries used to rob the “rich” to give to the “poor”.[/quote]

every issue in this country is now reduced to communist this or fascist that…

very sad[/quote]

ocrenter, that’s completely untrue. There are many issues which are reduced to Hitler and Nazi’s instead.

[ocrenter]

[quote=ltokuda]
ocrenter, that’s completely untrue. There are many issues which are reduced to Hitler and Nazi’s instead.[/quote]

yes, very true.

[ocrenter]

[quote=ltokuda]
ocrenter, that’s completely untrue. There are many issues which are reduced to Hitler and Nazi’s instead.[/quote]

yes, very true.

[ocrenter]

[quote=ltokuda]
ocrenter, that’s completely untrue. There are many issues which are reduced to Hitler and Nazi’s instead.[/quote]

yes, very true.

[ocrenter]

[quote=ltokuda]
ocrenter, that’s completely untrue. There are many issues which are reduced to Hitler and Nazi’s instead.[/quote]

yes, very true.

[ocrenter]

[quote=ltokuda]
ocrenter, that’s completely untrue. There are many issues which are reduced to Hitler and Nazi’s instead.[/quote]

yes, very true.

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=pri_dk]The fact that there once was a bubble in the price of one type of asset doesn’t tell us anything about whether some another asset is in a bubble today.
[/quote]

Nor did I suggest as such. My point was that financial market prices shouldn’t ever be used in an attempt to “prove” any macroeconomic statement, because financial markets are often wrong. I mentioned housing in 2005 because at the time, many people were citing rising home prices as proof of housing’s great fundamentals.

As for people paying “a lot” for government bonds: rates are at multi-generational lows, so it really isn’t debatable that people are, relatively speaking, paying a lot.

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=pri_dk]The fact that there once was a bubble in the price of one type of asset doesn’t tell us anything about whether some another asset is in a bubble today.
[/quote]

Nor did I suggest as such. My point was that financial market prices shouldn’t ever be used in an attempt to “prove” any macroeconomic statement, because financial markets are often wrong. I mentioned housing in 2005 because at the time, many people were citing rising home prices as proof of housing’s great fundamentals.

As for people paying “a lot” for government bonds: rates are at multi-generational lows, so it really isn’t debatable that people are, relatively speaking, paying a lot.

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=pri_dk]The fact that there once was a bubble in the price of one type of asset doesn’t tell us anything about whether some another asset is in a bubble today.
[/quote]

Nor did I suggest as such. My point was that financial market prices shouldn’t ever be used in an attempt to “prove” any macroeconomic statement, because financial markets are often wrong. I mentioned housing in 2005 because at the time, many people were citing rising home prices as proof of housing’s great fundamentals.

As for people paying “a lot” for government bonds: rates are at multi-generational lows, so it really isn’t debatable that people are, relatively speaking, paying a lot.

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=pri_dk]The fact that there once was a bubble in the price of one type of asset doesn’t tell us anything about whether some another asset is in a bubble today.
[/quote]

Nor did I suggest as such. My point was that financial market prices shouldn’t ever be used in an attempt to “prove” any macroeconomic statement, because financial markets are often wrong. I mentioned housing in 2005 because at the time, many people were citing rising home prices as proof of housing’s great fundamentals.

As for people paying “a lot” for government bonds: rates are at multi-generational lows, so it really isn’t debatable that people are, relatively speaking, paying a lot.

[Author]

Posts