Are we in free fall deflation?

[so.cal.fan]

I know, I know, gas and food are expensive.
How about everything else, especially residential and commercial real estate?
Lately, I've been hearing that D word from the talking heads and Bernacke himself has used the word.

So......are we going to save the United States or continue to try to save the global economy?

[HUSKER55]

HELL YES ...WE ARE INVINCEABLE!!

ever hear of a democrat yet who didn't sday "tax the rich", "spend more" and "print more money".

I think it is on a chip inside their head.

[boxcar]

HELL YES ...WE ARE INVINCEABLE!!

ever hear of a democrat yet who didn't sday "tax the rich", "spend more" and "print more money".

I think it is on a chip inside their head.

Do you know that if the government were to tax (confiscate) all millionaires' and billionaires' wealth 100% -- took everything from them -- it would barely make a dent in reducing the debt. This proves conclusively that every single lib only wants to tax the rich so as to have more money to spend and get us even further into debt. There's not one lib interested in reducing the debt. In fact, increasing the debt is their sure ticket to bringing this country to ruin, blaming capitalism for our miseries and forcing socialism down our throats.

Boxcar

[alytim]

Do you know that if the government were to tax (confiscate) all millionaires' and billionaires' wealth 100% -- took everything from them -- it would barely make a dent in reducing the debt. This proves conclusively that every single lib only wants to tax the rich so as to have more money to spend and get us even further into debt. There's not one lib interested in reducing the debt. In fact, increasing the debt is their sure ticket to bringing this country to ruin, blaming capitalism for our miseries and forcing socialism down our throats.

Boxcar

I can see Rick Perry using this paragraph of gibberish in his inaugural speech.

[bigmack]

I can see Rick Perry using this paragraph of gibberish in his inaugural speech.
(Ding)

That's three.

[boxcar]

I can see Rick Perry using this paragraph of gibberish in his inaugural speech.

And I can see that it's been a very long time since you have allowed reality to intrude upon your life.

Boxcar

[mostpost]

Do you know that if the government were to tax (confiscate) all millionaires' and billionaires' wealth 100% -- took everything from them -- it would barely make a dent in reducing the debt. This proves conclusively that every single lib only wants to tax the rich so as to have more money to spend and get us even further into debt. There's not one lib interested in reducing the debt. In fact, increasing the debt is their sure ticket to bringing this country to ruin, blaming capitalism for our miseries and forcing socialism down our throats.

Boxcar

I keep hearing this idea that even taxing the rich 100% would not eliminate the national debt. This is a red herring because no one is suggesting we do that. We are suggesting that we tax them more. It's a long way from more to 100%. The fact is the well to do are now paying an effective income tax rate of 17%. In 1992 they were paying 26%. There is no reason they could not pay as much now. There is no reason they could not pay more.

But, it is true that raising taxes on the well to do will not by itself pay off the national debt. (it will help.) So what else can we do. Where can we cut.

We can cut welfare. Welfare to corporate farmers. Welfare to oil companies.
Welfare to banks. Welfare should be for people. Corporations are not people no matter what the current Supreme Court says.

We can cut defense spending. I've read about too many super weapons systems that ended up being failures.
Another way we can cut defense spending is by reinstating the draft. Mandate that half the personnel in the armed forces be draftees. I just looked at the army pay scale. A private e-1 gets paid $1467.60 a month. (When I started in the army my pay was $78 a month) If we pay a drafted new recruit $700 a month we are saving $767.60 every month times the number of draftees. Continue to pay volunteers at the current rate.

Unfortunately, there is no way the draft will be reinstated, but it is what we should do. Pay rates are high now because they are an incentive to join. reinstating the draft means we don't have to persuade people.

[bks]

Do you know that if the government were to tax (confiscate) all millionaires' and billionaires' wealth 100% -- took everything from them -- it would barely make a dent in reducing the debt.

If the richest 225 hedge fund managers simply paid the same tax rate as the rest of those in the top bracket [that is, if they had the 15% tax loophole closed], virtually every single state budget deficit could be reduced to ZERO.

[JBmadera]

back to the OP's original question: the global economy is in a very peculiar position, extraordinarily loose monetary policy coupled with falling demand. I don't really know which way things will go. It seems that we will either end up with hyperinflation (a monetary phenomenon) or a deflationary death spiral. The original Keynesian's and The Austrian's would have a mega debate on this one.

Take a look at ZB, it hit 147 the other day!!! That is absolutely insane, so if we are to believe the bond market then we are in store for a nasty case of deflation.

Either way, hold on to your hat because it's going to be a wild ride.

[bigmack]

I keep hearing this idea that even taxing the rich 100% would not eliminate the national debt. This is a red herring because no one is suggesting we do that. We are suggesting that we tax them more. It's a long way from more to 100%. The fact is the well to do are now paying an effective income tax rate of 17%. In 1992 they were paying 26%. There is no reason they could not pay as much now. There is no reason they could not pay more.

But, it is true that raising taxes on the well to do will not by itself pay off the national debt. (it will help.) So what else can we do. Where can we cut.

We can cut welfare. Welfare to corporate farmers. Welfare to oil companies.
Welfare to banks. Welfare should be for people. Corporations are not people no matter what the current Supreme Court says.

We can cut defense spending. I've read about too many super weapons systems that ended up being failures.
Another way we can cut defense spending is by reinstating the draft. Mandate that half the personnel in the armed forces be draftees. I just looked at the army pay scale. A private e-1 gets paid $1467.60 a month. (When I started in the army my pay was $78 a month) If we pay a drafted new recruit $700 a month we are saving $767.60 every month times the number of draftees. Continue to pay volunteers at the current rate.

Unfortunately, there is no way the draft will be reinstated, but it is what we should do. Pay rates are high now because they are an incentive to join. reinstating the draft means we don't have to persuade people.
Big Ed, is that you?

[ArlJim78]

If the richest 225 hedge fund managers simply paid the same tax rate as the rest of those in the top bracket [that is, if they had the 15% tax loophole closed], virtually every single state budget deficit could be reduced to ZERO.
this is complete nonsense. it wouldn't even balance if you conficated every penny from those guys. the latest numbers I find show states had a combined deficit of $108 billion. you're not going to close that deficit by tweaking the tax rates of 225 people.

[JustRalph]

Nothing in Maryland is in decline......price wise

[DJofSD]

I keep hearing this idea that even taxing the rich 100% would not eliminate the national debt. This is a red herring because no one is suggesting we do that.

My BS detector is going crazy.

You guys would take a sucker out of a baby's mouth.

Come on, admit it, just like Jimmy lusting in his heart, all liberals would take every single penny out of any one else's pocket and especially those lucky million and billionaries.

[Tom]

And then suspend elections for two years.

Libs...you can't live with them, you can't live with them.

[bks]

this is complete nonsense. it wouldn't even balance if you conficated every penny from those guys. the latest numbers I find show states had a combined deficit of $108 billion. you're not going to close that deficit by tweaking the tax rates of 225 people.

You're flat wrong. The top 225 hedge fund managers have assets in excess of $200 billion easily.

Funny what you call "tweaking"? The bankster loophole rate is 15%, instead of 35%. The top 25 hedge fund managers average more that $1 billion PER YEAR, with several making multiple billions. Last year alone, taxing the top hedge find managers at the proper rate would have generated more than $20 billion in tax revenue.

Roll back the loophole to its origins just for the top 225, and you have your $108 billion to clear the states [certainly if you leave out CA].

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Robert-Reich-s-Blog/2010/0526/Will-Congress-close-tax-loopholes-for-billionaires

This article from 2007 has much lower personal wealth figures than are current:

http://nymag.com/news/features/2007/hedgefunds/30342/

see also:

http://www.marketfolly.com/2010/03/forbes-billionaire-list-hedge-fund.html

[bks]

A short history of recent times, and times to come:

1. Banksters let loose post-Glass-Steagall, securitize every crappy mortgage in sight, commit fraud on millions of mortgage applications so they have fuel for their securitization craze, conspire with corrupt ratings agencies to make dogcrap as AAA, bilk investors [some of whom should have known better, but not nearly all] and extract hundreds of billions in fees passing the trash around;

2. Once toxic MBS assets HTF, banksters run crying like spoiled children to the HATED US government, the HATED public sector, DEMANDING $750 billion in TARP funds and, subsequently, trillions more in loan and asset guarantees. BOTH PARTIES give it to them [this happens first on Bush's watch in October 2008, then accelerates under Obama]. The HATED public sector keeps these criminals from going under, when what they deserve is to be HELD under water.

3. Big banks, knowing what they did to the economy has mortally weakened it, play carry-trade games and take 0% fed loans from the discount window, rather than making "risky" investments to actual people and small businesses. They horde the cash that was "supposed" to be for restarting the economy, paying down their debt with money they took from the public sector and pocketing the rest. Concoct ridiculous narrative with big businesses to the effect that "Obama is anti-business and we are too anxious to invest in our companies in this climate".

4. Economy stagnates, unemployment becomes and stays high, no good jobs are created anywhere for years, tax revenues for the states go way down [this after they had their employees' retirement accounts crushed and were enticed into the bond markets by the same banksters who were lying about the afety of said investments], and state governments are up a creek. Foreclosures go through the roof, and banksters and their agents engage in widespread fraud to speed the process. When the tip of that fraudulent iceberg is revealed, they use influence with corrupt Politicians to limit liability to prob. $20 billion, when their true exposure would be many, many, many times that [see case of Eric Schneiderman] http://www.newyorklawjournal.com/PubArticleNY.jsp?id=1202512265217&slreturn=1
http://4closurefraud.org/2011/08/24/back-off-banksters-ny-ag-eric-schneiderman-fights-back-after-being-kicked-off-robo-signing-investigation/

5. Starved of cash, fed and state governments now move to enact "austerity" measures since "spending is out of control". Not "the Banksters emptied out the US treasury after bankrupting the states, and need to go to jail and have their assets confiscated for fraud at every level" but "spending is out of control".

None of them mean it, of course, since, tellingly, not a single one of them goes after the biggest waste of money in the discretionary budget, defense spending. It's a $750 billion/year boondoggle, from which HALF A TRILLION DOLLARS A YEAR could be cut and the US would STILL outspend its next competitor on defense [China, a country of 1.3 billion] by 2:1. NO; instead Social Security is made the bugaboo, a program that is the most successful in US history, has never had a deficit, has paid out all its claims, and is not even forecast to be in trouble for 25-30 years depending on which economic forecasts you use.

6. What's coming next: Banksters tell revenue-strapped governments: "sounds like you need a loan! We have all this cash, maybe we can help you out."

[Sugar Ron]

Cons would toss their youngest offspring under a speeding locomotive if that's what was required to protect that disgraceful tax rate for hedge fund managers, er, "job creators" (LMAO), bks

The cult masters (Limbaugh, No-Degree Hannity, Grover Norquist) have complete control of their (simple) minds at this point...

[DJofSD]

Speaking of the HATED public sector, ever heard of the SEC and Christopher Cox? What a sterling example of government in inaction.

[ArlJim78]

typical, raise taxes and cut defense and all would be well?:lol:
all of the "bankster" crimes that bks enumerated were failed government programs/policies. always trying to hunt down and hang the wrong culprits.

[bks]

all of the "bankster" crimes that bks enumerated were failed government programs/policies. always trying to hunt down and hang the wrong culprits.

Jim, are you serious? The government rolled those crap mortgages into securities? Try addressing the facts. Go point-by-point. Which government policies are you talking about?

[bks]

Speaking of the HATED public sector, ever heard of the SEC and Christopher Cox? What a sterling example of government in inaction.

What's the point here? The SEC is one of many completely captured regulatory agencies. They are basically no help confronting corporate crime, pretty much. No argument from me there.

I notice you have no rebuttal to the main argument, which is: the big banks were dead in the water, literally dead, and they were bailed out using complete junk for collateral.

They then took the money for nothing, played their arbitraging games instead of committing to loan the money, built their reserves on the public dime, and now bitch and moan about the "poor investment climate".

Try this experiment: buy a win ticket for $100. After the race is run, if the horse you bet on loses, try taking the ticket to the bank and using it as collateral for a $1,000 loan. See how far it gets you.

[PaceAdvantage]

all of the "bankster" crimes that bks enumerated were failed government programs/policies. always trying to hunt down and hang the wrong culprits.Indeed. Gov't said "A House In Every Lot!" no matter if you can afford it or not...

Let's start with Bill Clinton (although we can go much further back in time):

http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/hotproperty/archives/2008/02/clintons_drive.html

But let's blame it all on the "banksters." I love how the left invents these new descriptive terms by the way...banksters... :lol:

[bks]

This is your evidence that the "government" was responsible for the financial crisis? Pretty thin gruel, even for PA. To begin with:

1. The strategy identified in the article was penned in 1994, five years BEFORE Glass Steagall was reversed by Congress. No repeal of Glass-Steagall [thanks Phil Gramm], no crisis.

2. There is zero evidence I am aware of that bankers were under any obligations whatsoever to give a single loan to anyone that was unqualified. This "strategy" bound no one to ignoretheir fiduciary responsibility. Show the proof, or you should retract this implicit claim.

When a crap mortgage is made, it is always the lending professionals [and not the borrowers] who must be held primarily responsible. They issued the loan, and they are the professionals in the deal. If they can't confirm income, it's really, really simple: don't lend the money. But they DID lend the money, millions and millions of times, and it's important to understand why: because the original lenders weren't going to be left holding the bag. They knew they were going to sell those mortgages as soon as they were consummated, and leave someone else holding a pile of crap.

Have a mortgage? I do. I bet it's not held by the originator any longer. Took about three weeks for them to sell ours.

3. The mortgages themselves, bad as they were, were not ever the main issue anyway. They never would have caused the financial crisis on their own. The problem always was, and remains, the securitizing of those mortgages, fraudulently rating them and fraudulently marketing them for sale. Did the "government" do this? No, but it didn't give a crap that it was being done. That should have been your line of attack. But you avoided these subjects in your zeal to paint me as a leftist [if you leave aside the labels and deal with the facts, it's a little harder to dismiss a person, innit?].

More ammo for you:

Clinton was a moderate Republican, and Obama is to the right of him. Obama has continued every major Bush-era policy of Constitutional controversy: both wars [now a third], Guantanamo, warrantless wiretapping, torture as policy and endless bailouts for Wall Street [with more coming] and declaring the right to kill an American citizen without due process. Plus he's pushed through a "health reform" bill that forces people to buy insurance from private companies, kept up the Bush-era policy of a completely unsustainable and ridiculous level of deficit spending on the military He's also done nothing while the Fed continues it's disgraceful and ruinous monetary policy that has weakened the dollar and assured years and years of a flat economy - no matter who is in office. Dig up this thread in 2014 and see if anything is much better.

What makes him a Democrat? Because he wanted gays to be able to openly serve in the military? :lol: Big win there!

Seriously, what makes him a "Democrat"?

[alytim]

Indeed. Gov't said "A House In Every Lot!" no matter if you can afford it or not...

Let's start with Bill Clinton (although we can go much further back in time):

http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/hotproperty/archives/2008/02/clintons_drive.html

But let's blame it all on the "banksters." I love how the left invents these new descriptive terms by the way...banksters... :lol:

How would you describe Lehman Brothers?

[skate]

I know, I know, gas and food are expensive.
How about everything else, especially residential and commercial real estate?
Lately, I've been hearing that D word from the talking heads and Bernacke himself has used the word.

So......are we going to save the United States or continue to try to save the global economy?

when someone steps in and Stops Immigration at the working man/woman levil, we'll start tp pull out from under.


Supply and demand, sayith the-skate. And when the wages go high enough for added Tax revenue to cover the high cost of OUR eff...in gov, boing...we start the re covers.:)

bees where the "save" is at...yep.

[PaceAdvantage]

But you avoided these subjects in your zeal to paint me as a leftist [if you leave aside the labels and deal with the facts, it's a little harder to dismiss a person, innit?].I never labeled you anything. I have no idea what your political leanings are.

Or are you saying "banksters" was a term invented by right-leaners? I doubt you're saying that...

Other than that, I'm not sure where you're getting that I "painted" you anything...

[PaceAdvantage]

How would you describe Lehman Brothers?You guys all act as if the "banksters" are the sole cause, while ignoring all the DEMOCRAT-led initiatives that paved the way for this mess...

Community Reinvestment Act: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act

And all those blaming "The Banksters" ALWAYS conveniently ignore this little ditty:

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/11/business/new-agency-proposed-to-oversee-freddie-mac-and-fannie-mae.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

Dateline: September 11, 2003 - Five Years PRIOR to Meltdown
''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.Barney Frank, incredibly, is rewarded for such flawed foresight with the chairmanship of the House Financial Services Committee in 2007.

[Tom]

How would you describe Lehman Brothers?

They are OK, but not as effective as Ludens. ;)

[so.cal.fan]

Bernanke himself has used the word DEFLATION, twice, actually, in his speeches on the state of the economy.
The proof is in the interest rate on the U.S. Ten Year Treasury.
The EU is short on U.S. dollars. Dollars are scarce?
What does that tell you?

[skate]

Bernanke himself has used the word DEFLATION, twice, actually, in his speeches on the state of the economy.
The proof is in the interest rate on the U.S. Ten Year Treasury.
The EU is short on U.S. dollars. Dollars are scarce?
What does that tell you?

How did she use the word?
Did she say No Deflation?
Did she say lots of Inflation?
Did she say once up once down with Deflation?

Dollars are Scarce?
Might be but i'd bet the same amount are still around, even more than before.

with the rest of the world "in on the economy"...i'll guess that "we are A leviler", seems that inflation/deflation wont be that dramatic.

[chickenhead]

Of course there has been some deflation. Thats what happens during massive recessions. But not free fall deflation, just some deflation. Housing isn't in a free fall. If it was, houses would be much cheaper than they are. If it was in free fall, it'd hit bottom. Nothing is in free fall. It's a very slow fall. It's a parachutes wide open and boosters on fall. Its been a very slow deflation. Its been a very long period of very slightly negative to barely positive non-growth. Boring, really. Way too slow. Far from free fall -- we're in boring sideways mode.

Persistently not very good is about it. Not free falling not good. Very slowly not goodness. Trending towards prolonged pretty bad, and slightly less crummy further out.

[ElKabong]

Cons would toss their youngest offspring under a speeding locomotive if that's what was required to protect that disgraceful tax rate for hedge fund managers, er, "job creators" (LMAO), bks

The cult masters (Limbaugh, No-Degree Hannity, Grover Norquist) have complete control of their (simple) minds at this point...

Shoot, I tossed my OLDEST son under a locomotive for a lap dance. My first born daughter? Got a new set of golf clubs cuz I put her under a freight train.

What, you think Obama's the only Joe to toss relatives under a bus for personal gain?.....

[so.cal.fan]

LOL, El Kabong!

That's not true. I know your kids, they are all spoiled rotten!
Good thing you have a good job and win at the track! ;)