Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › Paying Attention?
- This topic has 315 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 4 months ago by
CA renter.
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 8, 2011 at 8:35 AM #717115August 8, 2011 at 4:13 PM #716240
aldante
ParticipantSorry Brian! I am not buying the : “Things would have been so much worse if we did not do the bailout” argument. As far as can see that side tried to convince us that unemployment would be below 8% and it never happened. Why were they wrong? What is their process? What is their logic?
Nope dude your side has not data to support that argument that can be verified. What prediction did they make that you can actually point to as being correct that has had any lasting effect?
Nope. The debt must be paid. By keeping the money supply cheap and plentiful ie. interest rates and federal reserve lending – malinvestment has taken place. The type of investment that does not produce. The type like buying stocks, or commodities that are liquid or can be sold.
I think that if you take a page for the depression of 1920 you see that when the government gets smaller real investment takes place at the proper price point. We have not had that happen. All the POTUS did was put off the inevitable.August 8, 2011 at 4:13 PM #716331ParticipantSorry Brian! I am not buying the : “Things would have been so much worse if we did not do the bailout” argument. As far as can see that side tried to convince us that unemployment would be below 8% and it never happened. Why were they wrong? What is their process? What is their logic?
Nope dude your side has not data to support that argument that can be verified. What prediction did they make that you can actually point to as being correct that has had any lasting effect?
Nope. The debt must be paid. By keeping the money supply cheap and plentiful ie. interest rates and federal reserve lending – malinvestment has taken place. The type of investment that does not produce. The type like buying stocks, or commodities that are liquid or can be sold.
I think that if you take a page for the depression of 1920 you see that when the government gets smaller real investment takes place at the proper price point. We have not had that happen. All the POTUS did was put off the inevitable.August 8, 2011 at 4:13 PM #716929ParticipantSorry Brian! I am not buying the : “Things would have been so much worse if we did not do the bailout” argument. As far as can see that side tried to convince us that unemployment would be below 8% and it never happened. Why were they wrong? What is their process? What is their logic?
Nope dude your side has not data to support that argument that can be verified. What prediction did they make that you can actually point to as being correct that has had any lasting effect?
Nope. The debt must be paid. By keeping the money supply cheap and plentiful ie. interest rates and federal reserve lending – malinvestment has taken place. The type of investment that does not produce. The type like buying stocks, or commodities that are liquid or can be sold.
I think that if you take a page for the depression of 1920 you see that when the government gets smaller real investment takes place at the proper price point. We have not had that happen. All the POTUS did was put off the inevitable.August 8, 2011 at 4:13 PM #717081ParticipantSorry Brian! I am not buying the : “Things would have been so much worse if we did not do the bailout” argument. As far as can see that side tried to convince us that unemployment would be below 8% and it never happened. Why were they wrong? What is their process? What is their logic?
Nope dude your side has not data to support that argument that can be verified. What prediction did they make that you can actually point to as being correct that has had any lasting effect?
Nope. The debt must be paid. By keeping the money supply cheap and plentiful ie. interest rates and federal reserve lending – malinvestment has taken place. The type of investment that does not produce. The type like buying stocks, or commodities that are liquid or can be sold.
I think that if you take a page for the depression of 1920 you see that when the government gets smaller real investment takes place at the proper price point. We have not had that happen. All the POTUS did was put off the inevitable.August 8, 2011 at 4:13 PM #717438ParticipantSorry Brian! I am not buying the : “Things would have been so much worse if we did not do the bailout” argument. As far as can see that side tried to convince us that unemployment would be below 8% and it never happened. Why were they wrong? What is their process? What is their logic?
Nope dude your side has not data to support that argument that can be verified. What prediction did they make that you can actually point to as being correct that has had any lasting effect?
Nope. The debt must be paid. By keeping the money supply cheap and plentiful ie. interest rates and federal reserve lending – malinvestment has taken place. The type of investment that does not produce. The type like buying stocks, or commodities that are liquid or can be sold.
I think that if you take a page for the depression of 1920 you see that when the government gets smaller real investment takes place at the proper price point. We have not had that happen. All the POTUS did was put off the inevitable.August 8, 2011 at 4:25 PM #716245briansd1
Guest[quote=aldante]
Nope dude your side has not data to support that argument that can be verified.
[/quote]Put up first.
Edit: I would point to lower interest rates as a success of Quantitative Easing. It’s helped millions homeowners refinance to lower rates mortgages. That has helped the economy.
Low interest rates have also allowed business to record historical profits.
[quote=aldante]
By keeping the money supply cheap and plentiful ie. interest rates and federal reserve lending – malinvestment has taken place.
[/quote][quote=aldante]
All the POTUS did was put off the inevitable.[/quote]Aldante, monetary policy is not within the domain of the POTUS.
August 8, 2011 at 4:25 PM #716336Guest[quote=aldante]
Nope dude your side has not data to support that argument that can be verified.
[/quote]Put up first.
Edit: I would point to lower interest rates as a success of Quantitative Easing. It’s helped millions homeowners refinance to lower rates mortgages. That has helped the economy.
Low interest rates have also allowed business to record historical profits.
[quote=aldante]
By keeping the money supply cheap and plentiful ie. interest rates and federal reserve lending – malinvestment has taken place.
[/quote][quote=aldante]
All the POTUS did was put off the inevitable.[/quote]Aldante, monetary policy is not within the domain of the POTUS.
August 8, 2011 at 4:25 PM #716934Guest[quote=aldante]
Nope dude your side has not data to support that argument that can be verified.
[/quote]Put up first.
Edit: I would point to lower interest rates as a success of Quantitative Easing. It’s helped millions homeowners refinance to lower rates mortgages. That has helped the economy.
Low interest rates have also allowed business to record historical profits.
[quote=aldante]
By keeping the money supply cheap and plentiful ie. interest rates and federal reserve lending – malinvestment has taken place.
[/quote][quote=aldante]
All the POTUS did was put off the inevitable.[/quote]Aldante, monetary policy is not within the domain of the POTUS.
August 8, 2011 at 4:25 PM #717086Guest[quote=aldante]
Nope dude your side has not data to support that argument that can be verified.
[/quote]Put up first.
Edit: I would point to lower interest rates as a success of Quantitative Easing. It’s helped millions homeowners refinance to lower rates mortgages. That has helped the economy.
Low interest rates have also allowed business to record historical profits.
[quote=aldante]
By keeping the money supply cheap and plentiful ie. interest rates and federal reserve lending – malinvestment has taken place.
[/quote][quote=aldante]
All the POTUS did was put off the inevitable.[/quote]Aldante, monetary policy is not within the domain of the POTUS.
August 8, 2011 at 4:25 PM #717443Guest[quote=aldante]
Nope dude your side has not data to support that argument that can be verified.
[/quote]Put up first.
Edit: I would point to lower interest rates as a success of Quantitative Easing. It’s helped millions homeowners refinance to lower rates mortgages. That has helped the economy.
Low interest rates have also allowed business to record historical profits.
[quote=aldante]
By keeping the money supply cheap and plentiful ie. interest rates and federal reserve lending – malinvestment has taken place.
[/quote][quote=aldante]
All the POTUS did was put off the inevitable.[/quote]Aldante, monetary policy is not within the domain of the POTUS.
August 8, 2011 at 6:28 PM #716295CA renter
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=CA renter]
It’s not a matter of whether or not I want deflation, or if I think deflation will be the outcome. Deflation IS the outcome, and has been since the bursting of the stock market bubble in 2000/2001. Some would say that deflation has been the undercurrent for most of the past 30 years, or so.[/quote]
Time will tell who is right.
But in the mean time, if we have deflation as you claim we do, don’t complaint about rising prices (because are not rising, they are deflating).
[quote=CA renter]
How many trillions will they burn up, in an effort to create a false bottom for our economy? For as long as they are directing it at the top of the economic pyramid, it will not only fail, but it will make the ensuing deflation even worse than it would have been if they had done nothing.[/quote]
As I’ve said before, the Fed has nto burned-up trillions. They have made money on their investments. Remember that they have unlimited wherewithal and they can sit on assets long enough for the prices to come back.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/11/AR2010011103892.html
That’s the funny part…they are “waiting for asset prices to come back.” That isn’t going to happen in a sustainable fashion with the way they’ve been intervening.
August 8, 2011 at 6:28 PM #716386Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=CA renter]
It’s not a matter of whether or not I want deflation, or if I think deflation will be the outcome. Deflation IS the outcome, and has been since the bursting of the stock market bubble in 2000/2001. Some would say that deflation has been the undercurrent for most of the past 30 years, or so.[/quote]
Time will tell who is right.
But in the mean time, if we have deflation as you claim we do, don’t complaint about rising prices (because are not rising, they are deflating).
[quote=CA renter]
How many trillions will they burn up, in an effort to create a false bottom for our economy? For as long as they are directing it at the top of the economic pyramid, it will not only fail, but it will make the ensuing deflation even worse than it would have been if they had done nothing.[/quote]
As I’ve said before, the Fed has nto burned-up trillions. They have made money on their investments. Remember that they have unlimited wherewithal and they can sit on assets long enough for the prices to come back.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/11/AR2010011103892.html
That’s the funny part…they are “waiting for asset prices to come back.” That isn’t going to happen in a sustainable fashion with the way they’ve been intervening.
August 8, 2011 at 6:28 PM #716984Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=CA renter]
It’s not a matter of whether or not I want deflation, or if I think deflation will be the outcome. Deflation IS the outcome, and has been since the bursting of the stock market bubble in 2000/2001. Some would say that deflation has been the undercurrent for most of the past 30 years, or so.[/quote]
Time will tell who is right.
But in the mean time, if we have deflation as you claim we do, don’t complaint about rising prices (because are not rising, they are deflating).
[quote=CA renter]
How many trillions will they burn up, in an effort to create a false bottom for our economy? For as long as they are directing it at the top of the economic pyramid, it will not only fail, but it will make the ensuing deflation even worse than it would have been if they had done nothing.[/quote]
As I’ve said before, the Fed has nto burned-up trillions. They have made money on their investments. Remember that they have unlimited wherewithal and they can sit on assets long enough for the prices to come back.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/11/AR2010011103892.html
That’s the funny part…they are “waiting for asset prices to come back.” That isn’t going to happen in a sustainable fashion with the way they’ve been intervening.
August 8, 2011 at 6:28 PM #717136Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=CA renter]
It’s not a matter of whether or not I want deflation, or if I think deflation will be the outcome. Deflation IS the outcome, and has been since the bursting of the stock market bubble in 2000/2001. Some would say that deflation has been the undercurrent for most of the past 30 years, or so.[/quote]
Time will tell who is right.
But in the mean time, if we have deflation as you claim we do, don’t complaint about rising prices (because are not rising, they are deflating).
[quote=CA renter]
How many trillions will they burn up, in an effort to create a false bottom for our economy? For as long as they are directing it at the top of the economic pyramid, it will not only fail, but it will make the ensuing deflation even worse than it would have been if they had done nothing.[/quote]
As I’ve said before, the Fed has nto burned-up trillions. They have made money on their investments. Remember that they have unlimited wherewithal and they can sit on assets long enough for the prices to come back.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/11/AR2010011103892.html
That’s the funny part…they are “waiting for asset prices to come back.” That isn’t going to happen in a sustainable fashion with the way they’ve been intervening.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.