The View From Inside a Depression

[Arraya]

[quote=Hobie]Brian, Brian, Brian. I’m amused at your attempt to get the real estate guys riled up. But you are flat wrong to think that more government support will help the economy.

Pick up a book on economics, Thomas Sowell has some good fast reads. You will learn that government spending is simply someone else deciding how to your money should be spent. Is the government so much smarter that the populace? If you agree with this premise that you wish for a socialist system, which incidentally, never flourish in the long run. Read that econ book.

Our nation was founded upon personal independence and drive to succeed. Let the free market prevail and everyone benifits.

Lets take a look at our upcoming Xmas shopping season and the early winter cold upon the midwest and east. You will have to agree that without jobs it’s going to be a hardship for those families to heat their homes and shop for gifts.

So if the government really wanted to help them, they could relax the government roadblocks to allowing cheaper energy. Drilling, nuclear, etc. That alone would put more money in everyone’s pocket that they would then spend thus growing the economy.

Just redistributing wealth through social programs is much akin to giving you kid an allowance. It doesn’t motivate him to find a way to earn more.

Enough for now.[/quote]

This post is not even relevant to the government/Fed stimulus. This one big right-wing radio talking point.

What specifically is wrong with what the Federal Reserve is doing, which is a privately controlled entity.

If you are going to talk about what is wrong with economic recovery plans, which is basically monetary policy. At least show that you understand what is being done.

The government spending outside of direct federal reserve money is <7% of stimulus money AND only 10% of that has been spent.

So your whole premise falls flat on it's face.

[briansd1]

[quote=ucodegen]
Personally, I would really like to see the RE speculators get ‘fried’. Unfortunately this economy is all tied together. One thing that would really reduce the speculation is for the Capital Gains exemption on Real Estate to be removed.
[/quote]

I agree. Crispy fried would be good.

[quote=ucodegen]
The second would be requiring down payments when buying a property. This would be similar to margin requirements that were phased in by the SEC after the Great Depression. I would also like to see broker licensing and regulation (for both RE and Mortgage) along the lines of regulations that the SEC added to stock broker dealers. Presently, I don’t think there is any regulation that prevents a re-agent from inserting an intermediary buyer between the real seller of a property and the real buyer the broker is supposed to represent. There is for stock and commodity investments and violating that rule can get you banned for life.[/quote]

I also agree.

The Republicans real estate folks will never admit that they are operating in a socialist market with countless subsidies that artificially prop up real estate prices and magnify inefficiencies.

I would love the estate estate Republicans to lobby for the removal of real estate support and for letting the “real” free market flourish.

I know that it will never happen.

[briansd1]

[quote=ucodegen]
Personally, I would really like to see the RE speculators get ‘fried’. Unfortunately this economy is all tied together. One thing that would really reduce the speculation is for the Capital Gains exemption on Real Estate to be removed.
[/quote]

I agree. Crispy fried would be good.

[quote=ucodegen]
The second would be requiring down payments when buying a property. This would be similar to margin requirements that were phased in by the SEC after the Great Depression. I would also like to see broker licensing and regulation (for both RE and Mortgage) along the lines of regulations that the SEC added to stock broker dealers. Presently, I don’t think there is any regulation that prevents a re-agent from inserting an intermediary buyer between the real seller of a property and the real buyer the broker is supposed to represent. There is for stock and commodity investments and violating that rule can get you banned for life.[/quote]

I also agree.

The Republicans real estate folks will never admit that they are operating in a socialist market with countless subsidies that artificially prop up real estate prices and magnify inefficiencies.

I would love the estate estate Republicans to lobby for the removal of real estate support and for letting the “real” free market flourish.

I know that it will never happen.

[briansd1]

[quote=ucodegen]
Personally, I would really like to see the RE speculators get ‘fried’. Unfortunately this economy is all tied together. One thing that would really reduce the speculation is for the Capital Gains exemption on Real Estate to be removed.
[/quote]

I agree. Crispy fried would be good.

[quote=ucodegen]
The second would be requiring down payments when buying a property. This would be similar to margin requirements that were phased in by the SEC after the Great Depression. I would also like to see broker licensing and regulation (for both RE and Mortgage) along the lines of regulations that the SEC added to stock broker dealers. Presently, I don’t think there is any regulation that prevents a re-agent from inserting an intermediary buyer between the real seller of a property and the real buyer the broker is supposed to represent. There is for stock and commodity investments and violating that rule can get you banned for life.[/quote]

I also agree.

The Republicans real estate folks will never admit that they are operating in a socialist market with countless subsidies that artificially prop up real estate prices and magnify inefficiencies.

I would love the estate estate Republicans to lobby for the removal of real estate support and for letting the “real” free market flourish.

I know that it will never happen.

[briansd1]

[quote=ucodegen]
Personally, I would really like to see the RE speculators get ‘fried’. Unfortunately this economy is all tied together. One thing that would really reduce the speculation is for the Capital Gains exemption on Real Estate to be removed.
[/quote]

I agree. Crispy fried would be good.

[quote=ucodegen]
The second would be requiring down payments when buying a property. This would be similar to margin requirements that were phased in by the SEC after the Great Depression. I would also like to see broker licensing and regulation (for both RE and Mortgage) along the lines of regulations that the SEC added to stock broker dealers. Presently, I don’t think there is any regulation that prevents a re-agent from inserting an intermediary buyer between the real seller of a property and the real buyer the broker is supposed to represent. There is for stock and commodity investments and violating that rule can get you banned for life.[/quote]

I also agree.

The Republicans real estate folks will never admit that they are operating in a socialist market with countless subsidies that artificially prop up real estate prices and magnify inefficiencies.

I would love the estate estate Republicans to lobby for the removal of real estate support and for letting the “real” free market flourish.

I know that it will never happen.

[briansd1]

[quote=ucodegen]
Personally, I would really like to see the RE speculators get ‘fried’. Unfortunately this economy is all tied together. One thing that would really reduce the speculation is for the Capital Gains exemption on Real Estate to be removed.
[/quote]

I agree. Crispy fried would be good.

[quote=ucodegen]
The second would be requiring down payments when buying a property. This would be similar to margin requirements that were phased in by the SEC after the Great Depression. I would also like to see broker licensing and regulation (for both RE and Mortgage) along the lines of regulations that the SEC added to stock broker dealers. Presently, I don’t think there is any regulation that prevents a re-agent from inserting an intermediary buyer between the real seller of a property and the real buyer the broker is supposed to represent. There is for stock and commodity investments and violating that rule can get you banned for life.[/quote]

I also agree.

The Republicans real estate folks will never admit that they are operating in a socialist market with countless subsidies that artificially prop up real estate prices and magnify inefficiencies.

I would love the estate estate Republicans to lobby for the removal of real estate support and for letting the “real” free market flourish.

I know that it will never happen.

[ucodegen]

Just redistributing wealth through social programs is much akin to giving you kid an allowance. It doesn’t motivate him to find a way to earn more.

Actually it is closer to taking money from the kid that decided to go out and get a summer job and giving it to the kid who decided to do a ‘beach bum summer’..

While ‘redistributing wealth’ has benefits, it also has some severe costs. The act of redistribution does not create value.. just ‘redistributes’ it. The act of redistribution is also a powerful dis-incentive to those that sacrificed their own time to create it. I bet that kid who decided to go for a summer job would have preferred to do a ‘beach bum summer’.

Redistribution of wealth can have a beneficial effect in offsetting the powers of scale when dealing with income. As a person earns successively more, the percentage of that income going to survival level necessities decreases. This leaves discretionary income for many purposes. Taking a small amount of this ‘excess’ is not that much a problem, but removing a large portion would disincentivize the person from putting out the effort to produce this income.

Pick up a book on economics, Thomas Sowell has some good fast reads. You will learn that government spending is simply someone else deciding how to your money should be spent.

There is one area that government spending is useful. Remember, not all spending comes from taxes.. some comes from ‘printing’ as well. One area that government spending is useful is in recovery from recessions or preventions of depressions. Generally, the government should be paying down its borrowed money when the economy is healthy or becoming ‘overheated’. The government needs to do the reverse (spending money) when times get tight. It controls the currency and needs to be a balancing force against the extremities of the market. Unfortunately, not many politicians seem to have the self control to ‘save for a rainy day’.

[ucodegen]

Just redistributing wealth through social programs is much akin to giving you kid an allowance. It doesn’t motivate him to find a way to earn more.

Actually it is closer to taking money from the kid that decided to go out and get a summer job and giving it to the kid who decided to do a ‘beach bum summer’..

While ‘redistributing wealth’ has benefits, it also has some severe costs. The act of redistribution does not create value.. just ‘redistributes’ it. The act of redistribution is also a powerful dis-incentive to those that sacrificed their own time to create it. I bet that kid who decided to go for a summer job would have preferred to do a ‘beach bum summer’.

Redistribution of wealth can have a beneficial effect in offsetting the powers of scale when dealing with income. As a person earns successively more, the percentage of that income going to survival level necessities decreases. This leaves discretionary income for many purposes. Taking a small amount of this ‘excess’ is not that much a problem, but removing a large portion would disincentivize the person from putting out the effort to produce this income.

Pick up a book on economics, Thomas Sowell has some good fast reads. You will learn that government spending is simply someone else deciding how to your money should be spent.

There is one area that government spending is useful. Remember, not all spending comes from taxes.. some comes from ‘printing’ as well. One area that government spending is useful is in recovery from recessions or preventions of depressions. Generally, the government should be paying down its borrowed money when the economy is healthy or becoming ‘overheated’. The government needs to do the reverse (spending money) when times get tight. It controls the currency and needs to be a balancing force against the extremities of the market. Unfortunately, not many politicians seem to have the self control to ‘save for a rainy day’.

[ucodegen]

Just redistributing wealth through social programs is much akin to giving you kid an allowance. It doesn’t motivate him to find a way to earn more.

Actually it is closer to taking money from the kid that decided to go out and get a summer job and giving it to the kid who decided to do a ‘beach bum summer’..

While ‘redistributing wealth’ has benefits, it also has some severe costs. The act of redistribution does not create value.. just ‘redistributes’ it. The act of redistribution is also a powerful dis-incentive to those that sacrificed their own time to create it. I bet that kid who decided to go for a summer job would have preferred to do a ‘beach bum summer’.

Redistribution of wealth can have a beneficial effect in offsetting the powers of scale when dealing with income. As a person earns successively more, the percentage of that income going to survival level necessities decreases. This leaves discretionary income for many purposes. Taking a small amount of this ‘excess’ is not that much a problem, but removing a large portion would disincentivize the person from putting out the effort to produce this income.

Pick up a book on economics, Thomas Sowell has some good fast reads. You will learn that government spending is simply someone else deciding how to your money should be spent.

There is one area that government spending is useful. Remember, not all spending comes from taxes.. some comes from ‘printing’ as well. One area that government spending is useful is in recovery from recessions or preventions of depressions. Generally, the government should be paying down its borrowed money when the economy is healthy or becoming ‘overheated’. The government needs to do the reverse (spending money) when times get tight. It controls the currency and needs to be a balancing force against the extremities of the market. Unfortunately, not many politicians seem to have the self control to ‘save for a rainy day’.

[ucodegen]

Just redistributing wealth through social programs is much akin to giving you kid an allowance. It doesn’t motivate him to find a way to earn more.

Actually it is closer to taking money from the kid that decided to go out and get a summer job and giving it to the kid who decided to do a ‘beach bum summer’..

While ‘redistributing wealth’ has benefits, it also has some severe costs. The act of redistribution does not create value.. just ‘redistributes’ it. The act of redistribution is also a powerful dis-incentive to those that sacrificed their own time to create it. I bet that kid who decided to go for a summer job would have preferred to do a ‘beach bum summer’.

Redistribution of wealth can have a beneficial effect in offsetting the powers of scale when dealing with income. As a person earns successively more, the percentage of that income going to survival level necessities decreases. This leaves discretionary income for many purposes. Taking a small amount of this ‘excess’ is not that much a problem, but removing a large portion would disincentivize the person from putting out the effort to produce this income.

Pick up a book on economics, Thomas Sowell has some good fast reads. You will learn that government spending is simply someone else deciding how to your money should be spent.

There is one area that government spending is useful. Remember, not all spending comes from taxes.. some comes from ‘printing’ as well. One area that government spending is useful is in recovery from recessions or preventions of depressions. Generally, the government should be paying down its borrowed money when the economy is healthy or becoming ‘overheated’. The government needs to do the reverse (spending money) when times get tight. It controls the currency and needs to be a balancing force against the extremities of the market. Unfortunately, not many politicians seem to have the self control to ‘save for a rainy day’.

[ucodegen]

Just redistributing wealth through social programs is much akin to giving you kid an allowance. It doesn’t motivate him to find a way to earn more.

Actually it is closer to taking money from the kid that decided to go out and get a summer job and giving it to the kid who decided to do a ‘beach bum summer’..

While ‘redistributing wealth’ has benefits, it also has some severe costs. The act of redistribution does not create value.. just ‘redistributes’ it. The act of redistribution is also a powerful dis-incentive to those that sacrificed their own time to create it. I bet that kid who decided to go for a summer job would have preferred to do a ‘beach bum summer’.

Redistribution of wealth can have a beneficial effect in offsetting the powers of scale when dealing with income. As a person earns successively more, the percentage of that income going to survival level necessities decreases. This leaves discretionary income for many purposes. Taking a small amount of this ‘excess’ is not that much a problem, but removing a large portion would disincentivize the person from putting out the effort to produce this income.

Pick up a book on economics, Thomas Sowell has some good fast reads. You will learn that government spending is simply someone else deciding how to your money should be spent.

There is one area that government spending is useful. Remember, not all spending comes from taxes.. some comes from ‘printing’ as well. One area that government spending is useful is in recovery from recessions or preventions of depressions. Generally, the government should be paying down its borrowed money when the economy is healthy or becoming ‘overheated’. The government needs to do the reverse (spending money) when times get tight. It controls the currency and needs to be a balancing force against the extremities of the market. Unfortunately, not many politicians seem to have the self control to ‘save for a rainy day’.

[briansd1]

[quote=ucodegen]
There is one area that government spending is useful. Remember, not all spending comes from taxes.. some comes from ‘printing’ as well. One area that government spending is useful is in recovery from recessions or preventions of depressions. Generally, the government should be paying down its borrowed money when the economy is healthy or becoming ‘overheated’. The government needs to do the reverse (spending money) when times get tight. It controls the currency and needs to be a balancing force against the extremities of the market. Unfortunately, not many politicians seem to have the self control to ‘save for a rainy day’.[/quote]

That was my point.

The bailout money is not coming from redistribution at this point. It’s coming from printing.

Look at Norway. They are doing an excellent job at saving for the rainy days.

[briansd1]

[quote=ucodegen]
There is one area that government spending is useful. Remember, not all spending comes from taxes.. some comes from ‘printing’ as well. One area that government spending is useful is in recovery from recessions or preventions of depressions. Generally, the government should be paying down its borrowed money when the economy is healthy or becoming ‘overheated’. The government needs to do the reverse (spending money) when times get tight. It controls the currency and needs to be a balancing force against the extremities of the market. Unfortunately, not many politicians seem to have the self control to ‘save for a rainy day’.[/quote]

That was my point.

The bailout money is not coming from redistribution at this point. It’s coming from printing.

Look at Norway. They are doing an excellent job at saving for the rainy days.

[briansd1]

[quote=ucodegen]
There is one area that government spending is useful. Remember, not all spending comes from taxes.. some comes from ‘printing’ as well. One area that government spending is useful is in recovery from recessions or preventions of depressions. Generally, the government should be paying down its borrowed money when the economy is healthy or becoming ‘overheated’. The government needs to do the reverse (spending money) when times get tight. It controls the currency and needs to be a balancing force against the extremities of the market. Unfortunately, not many politicians seem to have the self control to ‘save for a rainy day’.[/quote]

That was my point.

The bailout money is not coming from redistribution at this point. It’s coming from printing.

Look at Norway. They are doing an excellent job at saving for the rainy days.

[briansd1]

[quote=ucodegen]
There is one area that government spending is useful. Remember, not all spending comes from taxes.. some comes from ‘printing’ as well. One area that government spending is useful is in recovery from recessions or preventions of depressions. Generally, the government should be paying down its borrowed money when the economy is healthy or becoming ‘overheated’. The government needs to do the reverse (spending money) when times get tight. It controls the currency and needs to be a balancing force against the extremities of the market. Unfortunately, not many politicians seem to have the self control to ‘save for a rainy day’.[/quote]

That was my point.

The bailout money is not coming from redistribution at this point. It’s coming from printing.

Look at Norway. They are doing an excellent job at saving for the rainy days.

[Author]

Posts