114
   

Where is the US economy headed?

 
 
H2O MAN
 
  -3  
Reply Mon 11 Mar, 2013 02:27 pm


Rolling Eyes Obama took office over four years ago, and the so-called passage of
Obamacare represents one of Obama's and this countries historic lows.

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Mar, 2013 02:28 pm
@H2O MAN,
You're not too bright; even republican governors are implementing ObamaCare into their states.

If that's a low, where does that put you? Brain dead.
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 11 Mar, 2013 02:29 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicegirl, must you attack every time you are unable to grasp the truth?
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Mon 11 Mar, 2013 02:30 pm
@cicerone imposter,
The rise in the markets is due to a flight into tangible assets rather than paper. There is nowhere else to go for those who are losing faith in "securities".
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Mar, 2013 02:32 pm
@spendius,
spendi, Whatever the reasons for the US markets rise isn't based on what you say it is. When you talk about "tangible assets rather than paper" what are you talking about?
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Mon 11 Mar, 2013 02:42 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Buildings, plant, usufructs, permissions, land, trade secrets, expertise, patents, market shares, contracts. The direct ownership of them in partnership with others. They will always make money providing there is a constant demand for their output. Even a falling demand can be profitable.
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Mon 11 Mar, 2013 03:29 pm
@spendius,
You don't understand how those assets are held; they're held by contracts of title to prove ownership - and they're "all" on paper.

Where did you learn about property ownership? Your local pub? LOL
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Mar, 2013 04:29 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Well--only if you will allow that the ownership of your house is "on paper". Which it is.

We cannot discuss stock prices when it isn't. The paper granting title to a fraction of a corporation's assets is as real as your house title. When the titles are invalid there is no DOW.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  0  
Reply Mon 11 Mar, 2013 05:55 pm
The new Ryan budget is a stitch. First, he again deletes $700 B from Medicare, even though he made a big issue of Obama making the same deletion.

Then, the budget eliminates Obamacare, even though 35 laws passed by the house were intended to, but failed, to do this. But the reason he put it in the budget is that his numbers otherwise don't add up to enough to balance the budget in 10 years as promised.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Mar, 2013 06:53 pm
@Advocate,
They're all bums, and should be thrown out in the next election cycle.

Americans sure knows how to screw up our country! Vote in these crazy people to run our government.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  0  
Reply Mon 11 Mar, 2013 06:57 pm
@Advocate,
How do you like the first budget the Seanade has produced in almost four years ? It calls for major tax increases; makes few cost reductions and doesn't make any appreciabole progress towards eliminating ourt very large annual deficits.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Mar, 2013 09:20 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

How do you like the first budget the Seanade has produced in almost four years ? It calls for major tax increases; makes few cost reductions and doesn't make any appreciabole progress towards eliminating ourt very large annual deficits.


I for one like it just fine. It's at least reality-based. Ryan's plan relies on some extremely shaky math to actually achieve the goals he sets out. And turning Medicare into a voucher program is a political loser, that was just defeated in the last election, and will never happen - period. I don't know why he's more interested in putting forward political statements than budgets that have a chance of being passed (or even supported by the populace!).

What more, Ryan's budget only balances 'within ten years' based on the tax rates that currently exist. It's pretty much an admission that, without raising taxes, it is impossible to balance the budget in any sort of reasonable time frame.

The proposed Senate budget has a hundred billion each in tax raises and spending cuts over the next decade; that's a quarter of our deficit right there. So I don't think that it's fair to say that it makes 'no appreciable progress' towards eliminating our annual deficits.

Cycloptichorn
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Mar, 2013 03:39 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Is the "deficit" the $17 trillion one Cyclo? It's more 1/8th isn't it and that assumes no costs in the tax increases or for eliminating the spending.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Mar, 2013 04:21 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

Is the "deficit" the $17 trillion one Cyclo? It's more 1/8th isn't it and that assumes no costs in the tax increases or for eliminating the spending.


That's the Debt - the deficit is assessed yearly.

Cycloptichorn
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Mar, 2013 04:23 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
I was wondering what spendi was trying to say, but then, that's because he doesn't make his statements very clear - most of the time. He's still confused between deficit and debt; it's no surprise.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Mar, 2013 04:29 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Isn't the debt the deficits added up?
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Mar, 2013 04:47 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

Isn't the debt the deficits added up?


Not quite! It's actually more than the deficits added up, as we pay interest on the debt.

Cycloptichorn
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Mar, 2013 06:03 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
But interest is only an additional debt the sum of which is the deficit.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Mar, 2013 06:12 pm
@spendius,
That's true, but it's at very low interest rates.
That's the reason why government should be spending money on our infrastructure, because working at it later will cost more in interest.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Mar, 2013 06:19 pm
@cicerone imposter,
That's fortune telling old chap.
 

Related Topics

The States Need Help - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fiscal Cliff - Question by JPB
Let GM go Bankrupt - Discussion by Woiyo9
Sovereign debt - Question by JohnJD
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 2.54 seconds on 11/26/2024 at 07:47:57