Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
underdose
Participant[quote=execute]
The thing many people seem to forget is that the market is much much larger then the government. [/quote]In a word, “werd”.
The government is indeed subject to market forces, just like everyone else. Like, for example, if you borrow more money than you can ever pay back, then you get yourself into trouble. Our treasury openly admits it has a net worth of about $70 trillion in the red. Um. That’s bad. They think they are all powerful, but they can not make their creditors go away when the day of reckoning comes. Any attempt the government makes at manipulating home prices will come at the price of digging their own grave deeper.
Participant[quote=execute]
The thing many people seem to forget is that the market is much much larger then the government. [/quote]In a word, “werd”.
The government is indeed subject to market forces, just like everyone else. Like, for example, if you borrow more money than you can ever pay back, then you get yourself into trouble. Our treasury openly admits it has a net worth of about $70 trillion in the red. Um. That’s bad. They think they are all powerful, but they can not make their creditors go away when the day of reckoning comes. Any attempt the government makes at manipulating home prices will come at the price of digging their own grave deeper.
Participant[quote=execute]
The thing many people seem to forget is that the market is much much larger then the government. [/quote]In a word, “werd”.
The government is indeed subject to market forces, just like everyone else. Like, for example, if you borrow more money than you can ever pay back, then you get yourself into trouble. Our treasury openly admits it has a net worth of about $70 trillion in the red. Um. That’s bad. They think they are all powerful, but they can not make their creditors go away when the day of reckoning comes. Any attempt the government makes at manipulating home prices will come at the price of digging their own grave deeper.
Participant[quote=execute]
The thing many people seem to forget is that the market is much much larger then the government. [/quote]In a word, “werd”.
The government is indeed subject to market forces, just like everyone else. Like, for example, if you borrow more money than you can ever pay back, then you get yourself into trouble. Our treasury openly admits it has a net worth of about $70 trillion in the red. Um. That’s bad. They think they are all powerful, but they can not make their creditors go away when the day of reckoning comes. Any attempt the government makes at manipulating home prices will come at the price of digging their own grave deeper.
Participant“The economy suffers from a severe lack of aggregate demand,…”
Oh really? That’s it, huh? That’s the root cause. And what, pray tell, is causing the lack of aggregate demand? If Geithner doesn’t think to ask that question and doesn’t have an answer to it, he is completely discredited as an idiot right from the start.
I would argue that aggregate demand is probably still too high. It’s much higher than people’s legitimate means. The real problem is that the country as a whole has been living beyond its means and is now facing the bankruptcy that must occur from these excesses. If he won’t acknowledge that he’s out of touch.
Participant“The economy suffers from a severe lack of aggregate demand,…”
Oh really? That’s it, huh? That’s the root cause. And what, pray tell, is causing the lack of aggregate demand? If Geithner doesn’t think to ask that question and doesn’t have an answer to it, he is completely discredited as an idiot right from the start.
I would argue that aggregate demand is probably still too high. It’s much higher than people’s legitimate means. The real problem is that the country as a whole has been living beyond its means and is now facing the bankruptcy that must occur from these excesses. If he won’t acknowledge that he’s out of touch.
Participant“The economy suffers from a severe lack of aggregate demand,…”
Oh really? That’s it, huh? That’s the root cause. And what, pray tell, is causing the lack of aggregate demand? If Geithner doesn’t think to ask that question and doesn’t have an answer to it, he is completely discredited as an idiot right from the start.
I would argue that aggregate demand is probably still too high. It’s much higher than people’s legitimate means. The real problem is that the country as a whole has been living beyond its means and is now facing the bankruptcy that must occur from these excesses. If he won’t acknowledge that he’s out of touch.
Participant“The economy suffers from a severe lack of aggregate demand,…”
Oh really? That’s it, huh? That’s the root cause. And what, pray tell, is causing the lack of aggregate demand? If Geithner doesn’t think to ask that question and doesn’t have an answer to it, he is completely discredited as an idiot right from the start.
I would argue that aggregate demand is probably still too high. It’s much higher than people’s legitimate means. The real problem is that the country as a whole has been living beyond its means and is now facing the bankruptcy that must occur from these excesses. If he won’t acknowledge that he’s out of touch.
Participant“The economy suffers from a severe lack of aggregate demand,…”
Oh really? That’s it, huh? That’s the root cause. And what, pray tell, is causing the lack of aggregate demand? If Geithner doesn’t think to ask that question and doesn’t have an answer to it, he is completely discredited as an idiot right from the start.
I would argue that aggregate demand is probably still too high. It’s much higher than people’s legitimate means. The real problem is that the country as a whole has been living beyond its means and is now facing the bankruptcy that must occur from these excesses. If he won’t acknowledge that he’s out of touch.
ParticipantI agree with the Jim Jon scenario. The declines in stock and real estate prices do not mean money/wealth disappeared. It merely changed hands. Who’s hands is it going into? The US’s creditors. Many of them are suffering some write downs as the US private sector defaults, but with all the bailouts, most of the private defaults are being socialized and absorbed by the government and replaced with new government issues (treasuries and greenbacks). Who’s lending the US all this money to provide these bailouts? China, Saudi Arabia, Russia. You know, our friends. So as our “friends” continue to sit on the sidelines and suck more wealth out of America, the day will eventually come when they get off the sidelines and start divesting themselves of that sideline money. Will it go into our stock market? Doubtful. Our real estate? Only if they want to be our landlords. Into raw materials for building up their own countries’ infrastructures and looking after their own people. I think this is very very likely. China would be much better served keeping their people making TV sets but distributing them throughout China instead of sending them here so we can give them worthless IOU’s as compensation. I can not think of (and I have never heard offered) a realistic scenario in which China extends us an infinite amount of seller financing, nor can I think of (or heard offered) a realistic scenario for the US government to ever make good on its debt. So most likely, the sideline money will cause shortages and severe inflation at home when it finally, inevitably starts to move.
ParticipantI agree with the Jim Jon scenario. The declines in stock and real estate prices do not mean money/wealth disappeared. It merely changed hands. Who’s hands is it going into? The US’s creditors. Many of them are suffering some write downs as the US private sector defaults, but with all the bailouts, most of the private defaults are being socialized and absorbed by the government and replaced with new government issues (treasuries and greenbacks). Who’s lending the US all this money to provide these bailouts? China, Saudi Arabia, Russia. You know, our friends. So as our “friends” continue to sit on the sidelines and suck more wealth out of America, the day will eventually come when they get off the sidelines and start divesting themselves of that sideline money. Will it go into our stock market? Doubtful. Our real estate? Only if they want to be our landlords. Into raw materials for building up their own countries’ infrastructures and looking after their own people. I think this is very very likely. China would be much better served keeping their people making TV sets but distributing them throughout China instead of sending them here so we can give them worthless IOU’s as compensation. I can not think of (and I have never heard offered) a realistic scenario in which China extends us an infinite amount of seller financing, nor can I think of (or heard offered) a realistic scenario for the US government to ever make good on its debt. So most likely, the sideline money will cause shortages and severe inflation at home when it finally, inevitably starts to move.
ParticipantI agree with the Jim Jon scenario. The declines in stock and real estate prices do not mean money/wealth disappeared. It merely changed hands. Who’s hands is it going into? The US’s creditors. Many of them are suffering some write downs as the US private sector defaults, but with all the bailouts, most of the private defaults are being socialized and absorbed by the government and replaced with new government issues (treasuries and greenbacks). Who’s lending the US all this money to provide these bailouts? China, Saudi Arabia, Russia. You know, our friends. So as our “friends” continue to sit on the sidelines and suck more wealth out of America, the day will eventually come when they get off the sidelines and start divesting themselves of that sideline money. Will it go into our stock market? Doubtful. Our real estate? Only if they want to be our landlords. Into raw materials for building up their own countries’ infrastructures and looking after their own people. I think this is very very likely. China would be much better served keeping their people making TV sets but distributing them throughout China instead of sending them here so we can give them worthless IOU’s as compensation. I can not think of (and I have never heard offered) a realistic scenario in which China extends us an infinite amount of seller financing, nor can I think of (or heard offered) a realistic scenario for the US government to ever make good on its debt. So most likely, the sideline money will cause shortages and severe inflation at home when it finally, inevitably starts to move.
ParticipantI agree with the Jim Jon scenario. The declines in stock and real estate prices do not mean money/wealth disappeared. It merely changed hands. Who’s hands is it going into? The US’s creditors. Many of them are suffering some write downs as the US private sector defaults, but with all the bailouts, most of the private defaults are being socialized and absorbed by the government and replaced with new government issues (treasuries and greenbacks). Who’s lending the US all this money to provide these bailouts? China, Saudi Arabia, Russia. You know, our friends. So as our “friends” continue to sit on the sidelines and suck more wealth out of America, the day will eventually come when they get off the sidelines and start divesting themselves of that sideline money. Will it go into our stock market? Doubtful. Our real estate? Only if they want to be our landlords. Into raw materials for building up their own countries’ infrastructures and looking after their own people. I think this is very very likely. China would be much better served keeping their people making TV sets but distributing them throughout China instead of sending them here so we can give them worthless IOU’s as compensation. I can not think of (and I have never heard offered) a realistic scenario in which China extends us an infinite amount of seller financing, nor can I think of (or heard offered) a realistic scenario for the US government to ever make good on its debt. So most likely, the sideline money will cause shortages and severe inflation at home when it finally, inevitably starts to move.
ParticipantI agree with the Jim Jon scenario. The declines in stock and real estate prices do not mean money/wealth disappeared. It merely changed hands. Who’s hands is it going into? The US’s creditors. Many of them are suffering some write downs as the US private sector defaults, but with all the bailouts, most of the private defaults are being socialized and absorbed by the government and replaced with new government issues (treasuries and greenbacks). Who’s lending the US all this money to provide these bailouts? China, Saudi Arabia, Russia. You know, our friends. So as our “friends” continue to sit on the sidelines and suck more wealth out of America, the day will eventually come when they get off the sidelines and start divesting themselves of that sideline money. Will it go into our stock market? Doubtful. Our real estate? Only if they want to be our landlords. Into raw materials for building up their own countries’ infrastructures and looking after their own people. I think this is very very likely. China would be much better served keeping their people making TV sets but distributing them throughout China instead of sending them here so we can give them worthless IOU’s as compensation. I can not think of (and I have never heard offered) a realistic scenario in which China extends us an infinite amount of seller financing, nor can I think of (or heard offered) a realistic scenario for the US government to ever make good on its debt. So most likely, the sideline money will cause shortages and severe inflation at home when it finally, inevitably starts to move.
-
AuthorPosts