its the fed.. the federal reserve who prints the countries money they are not a government agency its a privately owned corp, and they been printing money like crazy which lowers the value of the dollar. research it
The Economy May Never Recover!
- Thread starter popeye
- Start date
- Status
That's the real problem, though - this is an "economic stimulus" package. WE'RE POURING MONEY INTO A BROKEN SYSTEM, A FINANCIAL BLACK HOLE.
There is no "fix", there is only trying to re-inflate an unsustainable, utterly corrupt model.
If we're gonna print up and waste trillions, damed right I want it going to education and infrastructure. Stop funding the greedy corrupt banksters that created the mess! Fire the sumbitches (not a SINGLE ONE has lost their CEO job over this! Not a single one is in jail!), let the insolvent banks FAIL. $300 billion to AIG with no audit trail? Gazillions to Fannie and Freddie to create a generation of debtslaves tied to obscenely inflated housing prices? "Too big to fail"? ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?
"Fix the economy". It can't BE fixed. It has to be scrapped. "Economic stimulus" is BULLSHIT - it is facism disguised as socialism, it is governments deciding which businesses will live and which will die, is the strangling of the free market (that was never really free to begin with!) and the serious, severe erosion of democracy.
The dollar was thrown under the bus the minute Ben Bernanke decided to crank the printing presses in late 2007. The demise of the dollar is baked into the cake, folks - eductate yourselves on our monetary policy.
The ONLY thing that can be done by this or ANY administrationis to manage the avalanche. If we're gonna trash the dollar, may as well do it right and fund as much of the social net as possible before it tanks.
We have over $10 TRILLION in outstanding debt - the only way to handle the debt is to devaluate the currency it is denominated in.
The dollar is dead, print all you want, spend all you want, it's irrelevant to the process of real wealth transfer. Fiat currency is illusionary.
Don't get me fucking started.
-
That's nonsense. There is a debt money system that first consumed a bi-metal standard, then a gold standard, then the world reserve currency standard, and now there is nothing left to consume.
The system is broken, and facilitates a transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the aristocracy. The poor are kept on welfare, and the middle class are teased with electoral promises.
The system is broken. No one has any property rights, even over their own bodies, and no one can own anything without the state laying claim to it.
In 1913, the bankers won. They not only got a federally guaranteed cartel, they got an income tax, which is the security on loans of last resort. Essentially, the banks will loan (create money out of thin air) indefinitely, as long as the government promises to tax your kids, your grand-kids and your great grand-kids to pay it.
Government tax collection is the guarantee the loan will be paid.
YES yes and yes. Well said.
I saw it first-hand almost everyday in high school when I was working in the good 'ol grocery store.... people with Food Stamps and $800 designer purses. It's ridiculous.
I apologize for interrupting the duct-taped butt cracks and porn balloons, but a quick point about the stimulus package...
Spending money on education isn't necessarily bad. Nor is spending on infrastructure, global warming research, or child care subsidies. The problem is that government has consistently proven to be inefficient at spending taxpayer money. It's akin to entrusting your 401k to someone who has $50,000 in credit card debt. Short of a complete reversal of past habits (very unlikely), nothing good can come from it.
As an example...
I'm sure some of you saw the recent news report of the $72 million prison that was being built in Iraq. The project was inexplicably abandoned by the U.S. after sinking $40 million into it. That's one of thousands of examples of inefficient use of taxpayer money. The bigger the machine (in this case, the federal government), the greater the bloat. The greater the bloat, the more room for wasteful inefficiency.
I read a recent report in The Atlantic about the public school system in Washington D.C. For decades, the primary objective (as explained by high-level operatives who have since moved on) was to create jobs, not educate the young. Again, spending on education isn't necessarily bad. But, government has always proven to be inefficient due to conflicting agendas.
It's useless to blame the current economic climate on Democrats, Republicans, or specific individuals. That distracts from finding a reasonable solution. Plus, circumstances are never as simple as most people (including myself) imagine. To say that Bush Jr. or Clinton played a key role in the current financial crisis is surely an oversimplification. And again, it does little to advance the discussion toward real solutions.
Solving this mess is a real challenge for Obama. All eyes are upon him (whether or not that should be the case). His recent difficulties with his chosen cabinet members make it even more difficult for him. After all, controversy surrounding the ethics of one appointee is embarrassing. Tom Daschle makes #4.
If Obama isn't careful, he'll lose public support which can easily be filtered down to the House. In a few years, he could very well become a lame duck president. And that would bring things to a standstill.
On a side note, I seem to remember turbolapp promising man boobs. It'd be a shame if expectations weren't met.
Spending money on education isn't necessarily bad. Nor is spending on infrastructure, global warming research, or child care subsidies. The problem is that government has consistently proven to be inefficient at spending taxpayer money. It's akin to entrusting your 401k to someone who has $50,000 in credit card debt. Short of a complete reversal of past habits (very unlikely), nothing good can come from it.
As an example...
I'm sure some of you saw the recent news report of the $72 million prison that was being built in Iraq. The project was inexplicably abandoned by the U.S. after sinking $40 million into it. That's one of thousands of examples of inefficient use of taxpayer money. The bigger the machine (in this case, the federal government), the greater the bloat. The greater the bloat, the more room for wasteful inefficiency.
I read a recent report in The Atlantic about the public school system in Washington D.C. For decades, the primary objective (as explained by high-level operatives who have since moved on) was to create jobs, not educate the young. Again, spending on education isn't necessarily bad. But, government has always proven to be inefficient due to conflicting agendas.
It's useless to blame the current economic climate on Democrats, Republicans, or specific individuals. That distracts from finding a reasonable solution. Plus, circumstances are never as simple as most people (including myself) imagine. To say that Bush Jr. or Clinton played a key role in the current financial crisis is surely an oversimplification. And again, it does little to advance the discussion toward real solutions.
Solving this mess is a real challenge for Obama. All eyes are upon him (whether or not that should be the case). His recent difficulties with his chosen cabinet members make it even more difficult for him. After all, controversy surrounding the ethics of one appointee is embarrassing. Tom Daschle makes #4.
If Obama isn't careful, he'll lose public support which can easily be filtered down to the House. In a few years, he could very well become a lame duck president. And that would bring things to a standstill.
On a side note, I seem to remember turbolapp promising man boobs. It'd be a shame if expectations weren't met.
Can I get an AMEN.
1913 - the birth of the bankster cartel legally raping the citizenry to infinity and beyond
1971 - the death of real money
Thank you, Woodrow Wilson and Richard Nixon. I'll be kicking both your douchebag Keynesean asses when I get to hell.
-
i agree with you that it's fucked up. but power corrupts, it's inevitable. it would have happened one way or another.
Dude its so simple economic success is built on Manufacturing. American became a super power through Manufacturing growth after WII. Look at China the growth came from and industrial expansion. Ever since we started to out-source our jobs our economy became weak. It's the everyday worker that holds this 2/3 consumer spending economy going. Without a solid base of steel workers,auto workers,and every other type of solid working man job. This country will be a ghost of its self. A perfect example of where we are heading is Detroit. Good luck and Good night.
I thought we were supposed to post stupid pictures in political threads - this ain't cnn 
(although I agree this bill is just an ass load of pork with no planning, and it won't accomplish what they are trying to do )
(although I agree this bill is just an ass load of pork with no planning, and it won't accomplish what they are trying to do )
Why do you think this country started outsourcing? The unions made local industry too damn expensive.
Ever take a tour of a car factory? For every 1 guy working you've got 2-3 guys sitting around playing cards. The supply of those kind of workers is huge, and the demand isn't. By forcing demand to equal supply, you break the system.
True story.
most unions are sucking on the teet of the american government - expecting a handout for barely working. they are entitled to it, don't cha know. Look at almost any unionized company or industry and it is likely that they have gone in the shitter. Airline, auto, manufacturing. And for every unionized sob story, there is a privitized success story - Virgin Atlantic, Toyota....you get the point.
Its a Catch 22 consumers want cheap goods i.e. walmart. So to get those cheap goods you have to get them from countries that don't have an expensive work force. Sad thing is we are going to have to move over to a welfare state with goverment jobs as a job base solution. Unless technology like Alternative energy and IT come soaring in for the US.
I don't believe this is entirely accurate. I'm not an economist, but I'm a frantic reader of economic theory and policy. From what I understand (standard disclaimer applies), most growing economies experience rapid growth through the application of labor toward the production of real goods.
However, that economic growth plateaus. In order to continue growing, (albeit, at a slower pace initially), a country must transfer the productivity of its labor force away from manufacturing. China still relies heavily upon their labor force toward the production of goods. They can only (according to some economic theorists) sustain that growth by eventually moving away from the production of goods.
I'm not arguing for or against that transfer of a labor force's productivity. I'm merely explaining economic theory as subscribed by smarter people than I.
Austrian economics ftw.
Most of us Americans are stupid. Thats a fact I don't think anyone can deny. Everyone wants free, useless, materialistic shit and actually like their lives being controlled by the government for whatever reason.
What reasonably educated (and free thinking) person actually believes we can spend another trillion dollars to get out of this mess? Spending is what got us here in the first place. I guess we don't have many free thinkers left here in America. Everyone believes the propaganda bullshit the media and government spews into their ears.
We're doomed.
Most of us Americans are stupid. Thats a fact I don't think anyone can deny. Everyone wants free, useless, materialistic shit and actually like their lives being controlled by the government for whatever reason.
What reasonably educated (and free thinking) person actually believes we can spend another trillion dollars to get out of this mess? Spending is what got us here in the first place. I guess we don't have many free thinkers left here in America. Everyone believes the propaganda bullshit the media and government spews into their ears.
We're doomed.
- Status