R.I.P. UK

[DWCAP]

ok, so we agree that this is a debt crisis that will take years to fix, right? This isnt a 2001 7 month bender.

And we further agree that once things are better, we will have to reduce public spending, and raise taxes, to fill the hole.

So, lets say we follow krugman and spend our way to prosperity, and in 2014 or so we have 7% unemployment, and alittle inflation to goose things along, and lower default rates on bank loans because people are working again…. etc etc. Things are now better economic times.

Then it would finally be time for the austerity parts right?

Gov spending would fall, firing all the people who had been hired to service that spending. And Taxes would rise, further agravating the situtation as private hiring and spending adjusts downwards. We would be met with a situtation where we have increasing unemployment, increasing taxation, decreasing economic activity, and higher debt loads as inflation will not allow interest rates to be this low again (we have been printing like mad remember).
Plus, with the added debt, tax revinues will be used to service debt, not spending, leaving us with less resources for the next recession. Plus, the private debt issues, which we have not really addressed in any meaningful way, come back when increasing unemployment meets the insane debt levels we still have. (what is the median backend modified debt to income in HAMP, 65% AFTER modification?)

Sound like a worse situtation than we are in now. More taxes, more debt, more unemployment, more inflation, and fewer public resources.

Sure, 2011-2013 were not so bad. But what is 2015 gonna look like? How does this improve our situtation?

Its like investing with $$ you got from a cash advance on your Credit Card. If you arnt making over 20% returns, you are actually loosing money. How many people can make 20% returns for years and years and years? How much are you willing to bet that our Federal Government is the one who can be money wise enough to pull it off?

[briansd1]

[quote=DWCAP]

Its like investing with $$ you got from a cash advance on your Credit Card. If you arnt making over 20% returns, you are actually loosing money. How many people can make 20% returns for years and years and years? How much are you willing to bet that our Federal Government is the one who can be money wise enough to pull it off?[/quote]

It’s not quite like that. The government is borrowing at about 3.75%.

For example let’s say the economy’s future growth capacity is 5%. At that time, we may increase taxes and trade off fiscal responsibility for a lower growth rate of 4%, over years to pay down debt.

If growth is 0% it would be illogical to implement austerity measures that trigger a recession and decrease tax receipts.

In the future, once out of the recession, government spending increase should capped to population growth plus productivity growth less a certain amount to pay down the national debt.

[briansd1]

[quote=DWCAP]

Its like investing with $$ you got from a cash advance on your Credit Card. If you arnt making over 20% returns, you are actually loosing money. How many people can make 20% returns for years and years and years? How much are you willing to bet that our Federal Government is the one who can be money wise enough to pull it off?[/quote]

It’s not quite like that. The government is borrowing at about 3.75%.

For example let’s say the economy’s future growth capacity is 5%. At that time, we may increase taxes and trade off fiscal responsibility for a lower growth rate of 4%, over years to pay down debt.

If growth is 0% it would be illogical to implement austerity measures that trigger a recession and decrease tax receipts.

In the future, once out of the recession, government spending increase should capped to population growth plus productivity growth less a certain amount to pay down the national debt.

[briansd1]

[quote=DWCAP]

Its like investing with $$ you got from a cash advance on your Credit Card. If you arnt making over 20% returns, you are actually loosing money. How many people can make 20% returns for years and years and years? How much are you willing to bet that our Federal Government is the one who can be money wise enough to pull it off?[/quote]

It’s not quite like that. The government is borrowing at about 3.75%.

For example let’s say the economy’s future growth capacity is 5%. At that time, we may increase taxes and trade off fiscal responsibility for a lower growth rate of 4%, over years to pay down debt.

If growth is 0% it would be illogical to implement austerity measures that trigger a recession and decrease tax receipts.

In the future, once out of the recession, government spending increase should capped to population growth plus productivity growth less a certain amount to pay down the national debt.

[briansd1]

[quote=DWCAP]

Its like investing with $$ you got from a cash advance on your Credit Card. If you arnt making over 20% returns, you are actually loosing money. How many people can make 20% returns for years and years and years? How much are you willing to bet that our Federal Government is the one who can be money wise enough to pull it off?[/quote]

It’s not quite like that. The government is borrowing at about 3.75%.

For example let’s say the economy’s future growth capacity is 5%. At that time, we may increase taxes and trade off fiscal responsibility for a lower growth rate of 4%, over years to pay down debt.

If growth is 0% it would be illogical to implement austerity measures that trigger a recession and decrease tax receipts.

In the future, once out of the recession, government spending increase should capped to population growth plus productivity growth less a certain amount to pay down the national debt.

[briansd1]

[quote=DWCAP]

Its like investing with $$ you got from a cash advance on your Credit Card. If you arnt making over 20% returns, you are actually loosing money. How many people can make 20% returns for years and years and years? How much are you willing to bet that our Federal Government is the one who can be money wise enough to pull it off?[/quote]

It’s not quite like that. The government is borrowing at about 3.75%.

For example let’s say the economy’s future growth capacity is 5%. At that time, we may increase taxes and trade off fiscal responsibility for a lower growth rate of 4%, over years to pay down debt.

If growth is 0% it would be illogical to implement austerity measures that trigger a recession and decrease tax receipts.

In the future, once out of the recession, government spending increase should capped to population growth plus productivity growth less a certain amount to pay down the national debt.

[CA renter]

[quote=briansd1][quote=DWCAP]

Its like investing with $$ you got from a cash advance on your Credit Card. If you arnt making over 20% returns, you are actually loosing money. How many people can make 20% returns for years and years and years? How much are you willing to bet that our Federal Government is the one who can be money wise enough to pull it off?[/quote]

It’s not quite like that. The government is borrowing at about 3.75%.

For example let’s say the economy’s future growth capacity is 5%. At that time, we may increase taxes and trade off fiscal responsibility for a lower growth rate of 4%, over years to pay down debt.

If growth is 0% it would be illogical to implement austerity measures that trigger a recession and decrease tax receipts.

In the future, once out of the recession, government spending increase should capped to population growth plus productivity growth less a certain amount to pay down the national debt.[/quote]

What makes you think 5% growth is possible with all the debt we have now (and we’d be amassing even more debt between now and then, according to your theory)?

I’m not opposed to some govt spending, but think that what we’re doing (focusing on asset prices instead of useful jobs) is a huge mistake. Perhaps, once deflation has really done its job, the govt can spend a bit in order to jump-start the economy. In doing this, we can be assured that we are printing *stronger* dollars that will have a greater effect per dollar printed, vs. printing when things are already so wildly inflated. The effects of our printing are muted if we try to prevent the deflation from happening in the first place, vs. printing once deflation has been allowed to fully wipe-out any excesses and misallocations. .

The longer we try to prevent deflation from happening in the first place, the bigger our problems will become down the road, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=briansd1][quote=DWCAP]

Its like investing with $$ you got from a cash advance on your Credit Card. If you arnt making over 20% returns, you are actually loosing money. How many people can make 20% returns for years and years and years? How much are you willing to bet that our Federal Government is the one who can be money wise enough to pull it off?[/quote]

It’s not quite like that. The government is borrowing at about 3.75%.

For example let’s say the economy’s future growth capacity is 5%. At that time, we may increase taxes and trade off fiscal responsibility for a lower growth rate of 4%, over years to pay down debt.

If growth is 0% it would be illogical to implement austerity measures that trigger a recession and decrease tax receipts.

In the future, once out of the recession, government spending increase should capped to population growth plus productivity growth less a certain amount to pay down the national debt.[/quote]

What makes you think 5% growth is possible with all the debt we have now (and we’d be amassing even more debt between now and then, according to your theory)?

I’m not opposed to some govt spending, but think that what we’re doing (focusing on asset prices instead of useful jobs) is a huge mistake. Perhaps, once deflation has really done its job, the govt can spend a bit in order to jump-start the economy. In doing this, we can be assured that we are printing *stronger* dollars that will have a greater effect per dollar printed, vs. printing when things are already so wildly inflated. The effects of our printing are muted if we try to prevent the deflation from happening in the first place, vs. printing once deflation has been allowed to fully wipe-out any excesses and misallocations. .

The longer we try to prevent deflation from happening in the first place, the bigger our problems will become down the road, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=briansd1][quote=DWCAP]

Its like investing with $$ you got from a cash advance on your Credit Card. If you arnt making over 20% returns, you are actually loosing money. How many people can make 20% returns for years and years and years? How much are you willing to bet that our Federal Government is the one who can be money wise enough to pull it off?[/quote]

It’s not quite like that. The government is borrowing at about 3.75%.

For example let’s say the economy’s future growth capacity is 5%. At that time, we may increase taxes and trade off fiscal responsibility for a lower growth rate of 4%, over years to pay down debt.

If growth is 0% it would be illogical to implement austerity measures that trigger a recession and decrease tax receipts.

In the future, once out of the recession, government spending increase should capped to population growth plus productivity growth less a certain amount to pay down the national debt.[/quote]

What makes you think 5% growth is possible with all the debt we have now (and we’d be amassing even more debt between now and then, according to your theory)?

I’m not opposed to some govt spending, but think that what we’re doing (focusing on asset prices instead of useful jobs) is a huge mistake. Perhaps, once deflation has really done its job, the govt can spend a bit in order to jump-start the economy. In doing this, we can be assured that we are printing *stronger* dollars that will have a greater effect per dollar printed, vs. printing when things are already so wildly inflated. The effects of our printing are muted if we try to prevent the deflation from happening in the first place, vs. printing once deflation has been allowed to fully wipe-out any excesses and misallocations. .

The longer we try to prevent deflation from happening in the first place, the bigger our problems will become down the road, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=briansd1][quote=DWCAP]

Its like investing with $$ you got from a cash advance on your Credit Card. If you arnt making over 20% returns, you are actually loosing money. How many people can make 20% returns for years and years and years? How much are you willing to bet that our Federal Government is the one who can be money wise enough to pull it off?[/quote]

It’s not quite like that. The government is borrowing at about 3.75%.

For example let’s say the economy’s future growth capacity is 5%. At that time, we may increase taxes and trade off fiscal responsibility for a lower growth rate of 4%, over years to pay down debt.

If growth is 0% it would be illogical to implement austerity measures that trigger a recession and decrease tax receipts.

In the future, once out of the recession, government spending increase should capped to population growth plus productivity growth less a certain amount to pay down the national debt.[/quote]

What makes you think 5% growth is possible with all the debt we have now (and we’d be amassing even more debt between now and then, according to your theory)?

I’m not opposed to some govt spending, but think that what we’re doing (focusing on asset prices instead of useful jobs) is a huge mistake. Perhaps, once deflation has really done its job, the govt can spend a bit in order to jump-start the economy. In doing this, we can be assured that we are printing *stronger* dollars that will have a greater effect per dollar printed, vs. printing when things are already so wildly inflated. The effects of our printing are muted if we try to prevent the deflation from happening in the first place, vs. printing once deflation has been allowed to fully wipe-out any excesses and misallocations. .

The longer we try to prevent deflation from happening in the first place, the bigger our problems will become down the road, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=briansd1][quote=DWCAP]

Its like investing with $$ you got from a cash advance on your Credit Card. If you arnt making over 20% returns, you are actually loosing money. How many people can make 20% returns for years and years and years? How much are you willing to bet that our Federal Government is the one who can be money wise enough to pull it off?[/quote]

It’s not quite like that. The government is borrowing at about 3.75%.

For example let’s say the economy’s future growth capacity is 5%. At that time, we may increase taxes and trade off fiscal responsibility for a lower growth rate of 4%, over years to pay down debt.

If growth is 0% it would be illogical to implement austerity measures that trigger a recession and decrease tax receipts.

In the future, once out of the recession, government spending increase should capped to population growth plus productivity growth less a certain amount to pay down the national debt.[/quote]

What makes you think 5% growth is possible with all the debt we have now (and we’d be amassing even more debt between now and then, according to your theory)?

I’m not opposed to some govt spending, but think that what we’re doing (focusing on asset prices instead of useful jobs) is a huge mistake. Perhaps, once deflation has really done its job, the govt can spend a bit in order to jump-start the economy. In doing this, we can be assured that we are printing *stronger* dollars that will have a greater effect per dollar printed, vs. printing when things are already so wildly inflated. The effects of our printing are muted if we try to prevent the deflation from happening in the first place, vs. printing once deflation has been allowed to fully wipe-out any excesses and misallocations. .

The longer we try to prevent deflation from happening in the first place, the bigger our problems will become down the road, IMHO.

[Aecetia]

We are already in a recession and so is Europe, who came out of the ashes of war because of American monetary assistance. Furthermore, the steps we take now are either going to cure it or kill it. That is why the Germans are reducing their deficit, not growing it. That’s what we should be doing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan

[Aecetia]

We are already in a recession and so is Europe, who came out of the ashes of war because of American monetary assistance. Furthermore, the steps we take now are either going to cure it or kill it. That is why the Germans are reducing their deficit, not growing it. That’s what we should be doing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan

[Aecetia]

We are already in a recession and so is Europe, who came out of the ashes of war because of American monetary assistance. Furthermore, the steps we take now are either going to cure it or kill it. That is why the Germans are reducing their deficit, not growing it. That’s what we should be doing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan

[Aecetia]

We are already in a recession and so is Europe, who came out of the ashes of war because of American monetary assistance. Furthermore, the steps we take now are either going to cure it or kill it. That is why the Germans are reducing their deficit, not growing it. That’s what we should be doing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan

[Author]

Posts