Shiller: US could likely to fall into deflationary spiral ala Japan

[Nor-LA-SD-guy]

“those budgets need to be rolled back to ~1998 levels”

Yes that would be the reasonable thing, but this way there be deflation dragons.

[Eugene]

[quote=Rich Toscano]
That’s got nothing to do with the point I was making, which was in response to your assertion that monetizing Treasuries couldn’t have a discernible effect on consumption. This isn’t a left vs right policy debate.

I was stating the FACT that monetizing Treasuries to finance a tax cut would get money into the hands of consumers (along with the FACT that Bernanke had pointed this out himself as a potential policy option). I didn’t endorse that policy as being a good idea.[/quote]

My original assertion was that monetizing Treasuries at constant deficit does not have an effect on consumption.

Monetizing Treasuries to finance tax cuts is better than buying them from investment banks, but only slightly.

[Eugene]

[quote=Rich Toscano]
That’s got nothing to do with the point I was making, which was in response to your assertion that monetizing Treasuries couldn’t have a discernible effect on consumption. This isn’t a left vs right policy debate.

I was stating the FACT that monetizing Treasuries to finance a tax cut would get money into the hands of consumers (along with the FACT that Bernanke had pointed this out himself as a potential policy option). I didn’t endorse that policy as being a good idea.[/quote]

My original assertion was that monetizing Treasuries at constant deficit does not have an effect on consumption.

Monetizing Treasuries to finance tax cuts is better than buying them from investment banks, but only slightly.

[Eugene]

[quote=Rich Toscano]
That’s got nothing to do with the point I was making, which was in response to your assertion that monetizing Treasuries couldn’t have a discernible effect on consumption. This isn’t a left vs right policy debate.

I was stating the FACT that monetizing Treasuries to finance a tax cut would get money into the hands of consumers (along with the FACT that Bernanke had pointed this out himself as a potential policy option). I didn’t endorse that policy as being a good idea.[/quote]

My original assertion was that monetizing Treasuries at constant deficit does not have an effect on consumption.

Monetizing Treasuries to finance tax cuts is better than buying them from investment banks, but only slightly.

[Eugene]

[quote=Rich Toscano]
That’s got nothing to do with the point I was making, which was in response to your assertion that monetizing Treasuries couldn’t have a discernible effect on consumption. This isn’t a left vs right policy debate.

I was stating the FACT that monetizing Treasuries to finance a tax cut would get money into the hands of consumers (along with the FACT that Bernanke had pointed this out himself as a potential policy option). I didn’t endorse that policy as being a good idea.[/quote]

My original assertion was that monetizing Treasuries at constant deficit does not have an effect on consumption.

Monetizing Treasuries to finance tax cuts is better than buying them from investment banks, but only slightly.

[Eugene]

[quote=Rich Toscano]
That’s got nothing to do with the point I was making, which was in response to your assertion that monetizing Treasuries couldn’t have a discernible effect on consumption. This isn’t a left vs right policy debate.

I was stating the FACT that monetizing Treasuries to finance a tax cut would get money into the hands of consumers (along with the FACT that Bernanke had pointed this out himself as a potential policy option). I didn’t endorse that policy as being a good idea.[/quote]

My original assertion was that monetizing Treasuries at constant deficit does not have an effect on consumption.

Monetizing Treasuries to finance tax cuts is better than buying them from investment banks, but only slightly.

[CA renter]

[quote=Nor-LA-SD-guy]”those budgets need to be rolled back to ~1998 levels”

Yes that would be the reasonable thing, but this way there be deflation dragons.[/quote]

Deflation dragons are a *good* thing. It keeps people in check. We need deflation like we need oxygen right now. It’s the only thing that can heal us from this systemic, inflationary disease that robs us of our purchasing power and grows the wealth divide ever larger.

[CA renter]

[quote=Nor-LA-SD-guy]”those budgets need to be rolled back to ~1998 levels”

Yes that would be the reasonable thing, but this way there be deflation dragons.[/quote]

Deflation dragons are a *good* thing. It keeps people in check. We need deflation like we need oxygen right now. It’s the only thing that can heal us from this systemic, inflationary disease that robs us of our purchasing power and grows the wealth divide ever larger.

[CA renter]

[quote=Nor-LA-SD-guy]”those budgets need to be rolled back to ~1998 levels”

Yes that would be the reasonable thing, but this way there be deflation dragons.[/quote]

Deflation dragons are a *good* thing. It keeps people in check. We need deflation like we need oxygen right now. It’s the only thing that can heal us from this systemic, inflationary disease that robs us of our purchasing power and grows the wealth divide ever larger.

[CA renter]

[quote=Nor-LA-SD-guy]”those budgets need to be rolled back to ~1998 levels”

Yes that would be the reasonable thing, but this way there be deflation dragons.[/quote]

Deflation dragons are a *good* thing. It keeps people in check. We need deflation like we need oxygen right now. It’s the only thing that can heal us from this systemic, inflationary disease that robs us of our purchasing power and grows the wealth divide ever larger.

[CA renter]

[quote=Nor-LA-SD-guy]”those budgets need to be rolled back to ~1998 levels”

Yes that would be the reasonable thing, but this way there be deflation dragons.[/quote]

Deflation dragons are a *good* thing. It keeps people in check. We need deflation like we need oxygen right now. It’s the only thing that can heal us from this systemic, inflationary disease that robs us of our purchasing power and grows the wealth divide ever larger.

[briansd1]

[quote=Nor-LA-SD-guy]Yea except that our cities and state budgets were set at peak housing tax intake levels,[/quote]

Good point.

CA renter wants lower housing prices and lower property taxes, but she wants to increase sales taxes to make up the shortfall so that the localities can keep on spending at peak levels.

Seems like a “keep the govmin’t hand out of my public pension” kind of argument.

Why should the localities be immune to sharing the pain?

Edit: CA renter, I just read that you believe local budgets should be rolled back to 1998. that would mean cutting government salaries that you were opposed to on the other thread.

[briansd1]

[quote=Nor-LA-SD-guy]Yea except that our cities and state budgets were set at peak housing tax intake levels,[/quote]

Good point.

CA renter wants lower housing prices and lower property taxes, but she wants to increase sales taxes to make up the shortfall so that the localities can keep on spending at peak levels.

Seems like a “keep the govmin’t hand out of my public pension” kind of argument.

Why should the localities be immune to sharing the pain?

Edit: CA renter, I just read that you believe local budgets should be rolled back to 1998. that would mean cutting government salaries that you were opposed to on the other thread.

[briansd1]

[quote=Nor-LA-SD-guy]Yea except that our cities and state budgets were set at peak housing tax intake levels,[/quote]

Good point.

CA renter wants lower housing prices and lower property taxes, but she wants to increase sales taxes to make up the shortfall so that the localities can keep on spending at peak levels.

Seems like a “keep the govmin’t hand out of my public pension” kind of argument.

Why should the localities be immune to sharing the pain?

Edit: CA renter, I just read that you believe local budgets should be rolled back to 1998. that would mean cutting government salaries that you were opposed to on the other thread.

[briansd1]

[quote=Nor-LA-SD-guy]Yea except that our cities and state budgets were set at peak housing tax intake levels,[/quote]

Good point.

CA renter wants lower housing prices and lower property taxes, but she wants to increase sales taxes to make up the shortfall so that the localities can keep on spending at peak levels.

Seems like a “keep the govmin’t hand out of my public pension” kind of argument.

Why should the localities be immune to sharing the pain?

Edit: CA renter, I just read that you believe local budgets should be rolled back to 1998. that would mean cutting government salaries that you were opposed to on the other thread.

[Author]

Posts