114
   

Where is the US economy headed?

 
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Mar, 2010 04:30 pm
@ican711nm,
Quote:
Banks and other businesses are cutting back or failing, because the Obama-Dinos have successfully discourage increased investment by and in the private sector.


right, because it cant be that the corporate class fucked up the gravy train by getting greedy now could it?
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Mar, 2010 04:44 pm
One other small set of numbers...
In the 4th Quarter, 2008, the banking industry reported losses of $37.8 Billion.
In the 4th Quarter, 2009, they earned $915 Million.
Go figure.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Mar, 2010 03:25 pm
Quote:
Washington is patting itself on the back for having orchestrated an amazing economic recovery. But Washington lawmakers are a delusional bunch of boneheads, say Marc Faber and Mike "Mish" Shedlock, editor of the Gloom, Boom, and Doom Report and investment advisor at SitkaPacific Capital Management, respectively.

The economy is NOT recovering, they say, and the U.S. faces a depressing "eventuality" of either crushing deflation (Shedlock) or runaway inflation (Faber). The timing and type of this eventuality is uncertain, say the gurus, but they are certain it's too late for America to change course.

"It's beyond repair -- it's too late," to avert fiscal disaster, Faber declares.

"The day of reckoning has arrived. The question is how long it takes to play out."
This grim outlook doesn't mean you're helpless. Faber recommends individuals prepare for doomsday by buying gold, owning assets abroad and buying property outside of major cities.

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/faber-and-mish-we're-doomed-and-washington-can't-do-anything-about-it-441381.html?tickers=%5Edji,%5Egspc,%5Eixic,gld,spy,dia,qqqq&sec=topStories&pos=9&asset=&ccode=
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Mar, 2010 11:03 am
@okie,
Michael Brenner, who seems to a professor and writer on matters political, wrote in The Huffington Post that Obama is what used to be called a 'moderate Republican.'
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Mar, 2010 11:04 am
@okie,
Did you catch on to the fact that the "bottom four quintiles" represents 80% of the working population?
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 04:53 pm
@hawkeye10,
Banks and other businesses are cutting back or failing,

because the Obama-Dinos have successfully discourage increased investment by and in the private sector,

AND

because some of "the corporate class fucked up the gravy train by getting greedy."
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 05:00 pm
Boy, hawkeye those are some great economic prophets you've got there--one says "crushing deflation" the other says completely oppositely "runaway inflation"--I say they're both right, put 'em together and we've got a steady-as-she-goes economy in the country's future, no boom, no bust. Good news,
parados
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 05:24 pm
@ican711nm,
So did the stock market suddenly stop being "in the private sector" ican?
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 06:51 pm
@MontereyJack,
Quote:
Boy, hawkeye those are some great economic prophets you've got there--one says "crushing deflation" the other says completely oppositely "runaway inflation"--I say they're both right, put 'em together and we've got a steady-as-she-goes economy in the country's future, no boom, no bust. Good news


Take them together and I get that the economy is very unstable, and the potential down side is catastrophic....not exactly good news.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 08:06 pm
For years, I compared the state of economic affairs to those that existed in the late 1920s. Same situation . . . just different aspects and different names.

I wonder whether the government failure to control the baser impulses of Wall Street was by design? If the economy went into a tailspin and if those 4 lower quintiles stagnated, then more and more kids would be forced to enlist in the armed forces. Good way to keep the enemies . . . real and manufactured . . . at bay . . . but without the draft that so many found heinous during Vietnam.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 08:12 pm
@plainoldme,
Quote:
I wonder whether the government failure to control the baser impulses of Wall Street was by design? If the economy went into a tailspin and if those 4 lower quintiles stagnated, then more and more kids would be forced to enlist in the armed forces. Good way to keep the enemies . . . real and manufactured . . . at bay . . . but without the draft that so many found heinous during Vietnam.


it is not as overtly conspiratorial as that. The best interests of the elites no longer align with the best interests of the rest of us. This is about social break-down, not conspiracy.
0 Replies
 
MASSAGAT
 
  0  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 12:41 am
@plainoldme,
If you are truly interested in the History of the late twenties and the depression of the thirties,plainolme, I would suggest you read a fine book by Amity Shlaes--"The Forgotten Man'. Her thesis is that FDR 's New Deal was an attempt to beat the Depression with massive government outlays--an attempt that failed--just as the pitiful attempt of Barack Hussein Obama's to stimulate the economy through massive expenditures which we cannot afford has failed--We still have 9.7 % of workers unemployed--actually, according to the U6 section of the BLS, our true unemployment has risen to a stunning 16%!
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 08:09 am
Actually FDR because of rabid political opposition could not spend enough. Had he been able to spend enough to stimulate the economy more, the Depression would have been shorter. What finally brought it to an end? The consensus is WWII, and what was the economic effect of WWII but the world's most massive stimulus package. The US government in effect socialized the economy and spent huge amounts of money on what it wanted--what it needed for defense, and told industry what it could produce and how much it could charge,. It worked. Full employment (actualler fuller than full. People went to work who'd never been in the workforce before). The economy grew enormously.The Depression ended. And I might add, Obama economics has worked too. It's rather telling that the only thing nay-sayers seem to quote these days is unemployment figures, since it's well-known that's a trailing indicator and usually takes up to several years to recover.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 08:15 am
@MASSAGAT,
Quote:
an attempt to beat the Depression with massive government outlays--an attempt that failed

Wait.. you mean when the government was spending 45% of GDP it wasn't a massive government outlay? huh.. who knew?
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 08:45 am
@hawkeye10,
Of course, we all know that the banks are in trouble because they created a bad situation for themselves and there was no government authority to keep their lies from igniting the greed of the public.

Then, these 'conservative' 'Capitalists' bankers said to the government . . . who they never wanted to keep them in check . . . please save us! Reminds me of toddlers. . . the bankers that is. Hypocrites.
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 08:46 am
The second paragraph of this editorial says it all:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/business/24leonhardt.html?th&emc=th
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 09:05 am
@plainoldme,
They sure are...the bank bailouts should have never happened; those banks should all have been allowed to die.
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 10:20 am
@maporsche,
Hey, we agree on something.

For many years, my home bank was the Winchester (MA) Co-operative Bank, known locally as the "George Bailey Bank" for its attitude toward its customers: small town, homey and comforting. Its building was constructed in the middle of Depression 1 and, at the time of the S&L crisis, it was one of the strongest savings and loans in the state.

Now, I use another local bank where I now live. It is not as homey as WCB but it is fine. It distributes bumper stickers that read: Don't Blame Me; I Bank Locally.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 03:29 pm
@parados,
The stock market is gradually decreasing its participation "in the private sector."
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 08:24 pm
@MASSAGAT,
I've been researching the flaccid wages of the past 30 years and thought that the maturing of the Baby Boom and the entrance of women into the job market en mass had something to do with the flatness of income . . . which the pundits seem to be noticing.

However, I am now reading A Concise Companion to Postwar Amer Lit and Culture where I found this: during the '50s, the blue collar workforce declined and the service work force increased, meaning that there were fewer jobs that earned a family a living. In general, unemployment rose, meaning that there were also fewer poverty level jobs.

This was during the era of prosperity. Right.
0 Replies
 
 

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 0.12 seconds on 12/26/2024 at 10:15:33