OT: So the debt grows…

[briansd1]

[quote=Rich Toscano]Brian, if you haven’t read Jeremy Grantham’s “Night of the Living Fed” piece I highly recommend it. It is a fantastic, data-driven, level-headed overview of the huge (negative) impact that Fed policy has had. The link is here:

https://www.gmo.com/America/CMSAttachmentDownload.aspx?target=JUBRxi51IIBwJ2T4%2bJCs9d6CpQTAnExAfN1Kr3QacNEU63zfC%2beAioyY4cwFoHTOZfWJoon8L%2bFR2X0BkOwOpUGaQrdwWohBxtISQZ88ZcMrqKkFNhrF%2bOKsvlbaQOlz

You may have to sign up but it’s free and worth it. If you read that you’ll understand why I push back hard on the idea of calling financial markets “the free market.”

[/quote]

Thanks for the link. I’ll definitely read the article.

Your differentiation between the financial markets and the free market makes sense to me.

[briansd1]

[quote=EmilyHicks]Every body assumes that Obama is weak and buckled before Republicans’ pressure
[/quote]

Seems to me like Obama go exactly what he wanted. And Ben Bernanke also got what he wanted. That’s why he got on 60 Minutes calling for fiscal help in boosting the economy.

[quote=EmilyHicks]
I think he just want to spend so that the economy is good enough in the next two years that he will get reelected.[/quote]

Are you saying that this tax deal just might work in helping the economy in the next two years?

There was an interesting article in the NY Times calling the tax deal a backdoor stimulus, which IMO is needed in the face of weak growth.

Of course, the fiscally responsible thing to do would have been to let the Bush tax cuts expire.

The problem is that raising the deficit — be it through high-end tax cuts or a new stimulus program — is a lot easier than cutting it. Strange as it may sound, some of the only fiscal conservatives in Washington this week have been liberals who would be willing to let everyone’s taxes rise. And they seem unlikely to win on this issue.

[briansd1]

[quote=EmilyHicks]Every body assumes that Obama is weak and buckled before Republicans’ pressure
[/quote]

Seems to me like Obama go exactly what he wanted. And Ben Bernanke also got what he wanted. That’s why he got on 60 Minutes calling for fiscal help in boosting the economy.

[quote=EmilyHicks]
I think he just want to spend so that the economy is good enough in the next two years that he will get reelected.[/quote]

Are you saying that this tax deal just might work in helping the economy in the next two years?

There was an interesting article in the NY Times calling the tax deal a backdoor stimulus, which IMO is needed in the face of weak growth.

Of course, the fiscally responsible thing to do would have been to let the Bush tax cuts expire.

The problem is that raising the deficit — be it through high-end tax cuts or a new stimulus program — is a lot easier than cutting it. Strange as it may sound, some of the only fiscal conservatives in Washington this week have been liberals who would be willing to let everyone’s taxes rise. And they seem unlikely to win on this issue.

[briansd1]

[quote=EmilyHicks]Every body assumes that Obama is weak and buckled before Republicans’ pressure
[/quote]

Seems to me like Obama go exactly what he wanted. And Ben Bernanke also got what he wanted. That’s why he got on 60 Minutes calling for fiscal help in boosting the economy.

[quote=EmilyHicks]
I think he just want to spend so that the economy is good enough in the next two years that he will get reelected.[/quote]

Are you saying that this tax deal just might work in helping the economy in the next two years?

There was an interesting article in the NY Times calling the tax deal a backdoor stimulus, which IMO is needed in the face of weak growth.

Of course, the fiscally responsible thing to do would have been to let the Bush tax cuts expire.

The problem is that raising the deficit — be it through high-end tax cuts or a new stimulus program — is a lot easier than cutting it. Strange as it may sound, some of the only fiscal conservatives in Washington this week have been liberals who would be willing to let everyone’s taxes rise. And they seem unlikely to win on this issue.

[briansd1]

[quote=EmilyHicks]Every body assumes that Obama is weak and buckled before Republicans’ pressure
[/quote]

Seems to me like Obama go exactly what he wanted. And Ben Bernanke also got what he wanted. That’s why he got on 60 Minutes calling for fiscal help in boosting the economy.

[quote=EmilyHicks]
I think he just want to spend so that the economy is good enough in the next two years that he will get reelected.[/quote]

Are you saying that this tax deal just might work in helping the economy in the next two years?

There was an interesting article in the NY Times calling the tax deal a backdoor stimulus, which IMO is needed in the face of weak growth.

Of course, the fiscally responsible thing to do would have been to let the Bush tax cuts expire.

The problem is that raising the deficit — be it through high-end tax cuts or a new stimulus program — is a lot easier than cutting it. Strange as it may sound, some of the only fiscal conservatives in Washington this week have been liberals who would be willing to let everyone’s taxes rise. And they seem unlikely to win on this issue.

[briansd1]

[quote=EmilyHicks]Every body assumes that Obama is weak and buckled before Republicans’ pressure
[/quote]

Seems to me like Obama go exactly what he wanted. And Ben Bernanke also got what he wanted. That’s why he got on 60 Minutes calling for fiscal help in boosting the economy.

[quote=EmilyHicks]
I think he just want to spend so that the economy is good enough in the next two years that he will get reelected.[/quote]

Are you saying that this tax deal just might work in helping the economy in the next two years?

There was an interesting article in the NY Times calling the tax deal a backdoor stimulus, which IMO is needed in the face of weak growth.

Of course, the fiscally responsible thing to do would have been to let the Bush tax cuts expire.

The problem is that raising the deficit — be it through high-end tax cuts or a new stimulus program — is a lot easier than cutting it. Strange as it may sound, some of the only fiscal conservatives in Washington this week have been liberals who would be willing to let everyone’s taxes rise. And they seem unlikely to win on this issue.

[joec]

Just to clarify, the unemployment provision only extends whether you can file for extended benefits into 2011, not the length of the unemployment benefits so the max is still maxed at 99 weeks, not 3 years. The old filing extension expired Nov 30th.

Without this provision, someone who had his 26 weeks of UI benefits expire on Nov. 2010 could not get any additional weeks of UI pay if this was not passed.

Does anyone have details on what the business capital equipment write off provision is about? Can’t businesses write that off anyways with Section 179?

[joec]

Just to clarify, the unemployment provision only extends whether you can file for extended benefits into 2011, not the length of the unemployment benefits so the max is still maxed at 99 weeks, not 3 years. The old filing extension expired Nov 30th.

Without this provision, someone who had his 26 weeks of UI benefits expire on Nov. 2010 could not get any additional weeks of UI pay if this was not passed.

Does anyone have details on what the business capital equipment write off provision is about? Can’t businesses write that off anyways with Section 179?

[joec]

Just to clarify, the unemployment provision only extends whether you can file for extended benefits into 2011, not the length of the unemployment benefits so the max is still maxed at 99 weeks, not 3 years. The old filing extension expired Nov 30th.

Without this provision, someone who had his 26 weeks of UI benefits expire on Nov. 2010 could not get any additional weeks of UI pay if this was not passed.

Does anyone have details on what the business capital equipment write off provision is about? Can’t businesses write that off anyways with Section 179?

[joec]

Just to clarify, the unemployment provision only extends whether you can file for extended benefits into 2011, not the length of the unemployment benefits so the max is still maxed at 99 weeks, not 3 years. The old filing extension expired Nov 30th.

Without this provision, someone who had his 26 weeks of UI benefits expire on Nov. 2010 could not get any additional weeks of UI pay if this was not passed.

Does anyone have details on what the business capital equipment write off provision is about? Can’t businesses write that off anyways with Section 179?

[joec]

Just to clarify, the unemployment provision only extends whether you can file for extended benefits into 2011, not the length of the unemployment benefits so the max is still maxed at 99 weeks, not 3 years. The old filing extension expired Nov 30th.

Without this provision, someone who had his 26 weeks of UI benefits expire on Nov. 2010 could not get any additional weeks of UI pay if this was not passed.

Does anyone have details on what the business capital equipment write off provision is about? Can’t businesses write that off anyways with Section 179?

[SD Transplant]

This ought to cover most of the data points w/ plenty of supporting evidence 🙂

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/america-laughs-jon-stewart-explains-how-ben-bernanke-robbing-it-blind

[SD Transplant]

This ought to cover most of the data points w/ plenty of supporting evidence 🙂

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/america-laughs-jon-stewart-explains-how-ben-bernanke-robbing-it-blind

[SD Transplant]

This ought to cover most of the data points w/ plenty of supporting evidence 🙂

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/america-laughs-jon-stewart-explains-how-ben-bernanke-robbing-it-blind

[SD Transplant]

This ought to cover most of the data points w/ plenty of supporting evidence 🙂

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/america-laughs-jon-stewart-explains-how-ben-bernanke-robbing-it-blind

[Author]

Posts