Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs

The federal budget deficit has surged to an all-time high of $1.42 trillion as the recession caused tax revenues to plunge while the government was spending massive amounts to stabilize the financial system and jump-start the economy. The imbalance for the budget year ended Sept. 30 more than tripled last year's record. The Obama administration projects deficits will total $9.1 trillion over the next decade unless corrective action is taken.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

rightisright

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

The Obama administration projects deficits will total $9.1 trillion over the next decade unless corrective action is taken.
* * * *

Ummm . . . hello? YOU are the corrective action.

Soon to come, will be libbies saying that this is actually Bush's budget, which is true in the sense that this is still the fiscal year he started. But with another trillion in new debt piled on since January, it's time to own it. Obama can pick up a phone and close Gitmo, he can pick up another phone and ramp up Afghanistan or evacuate troops from Iraq. And he can decide how much more to spend than he takes in.

Time to be the Chief Executive, BO. If deficits are good, celebrate them. If they're bad, quit running them. Either way, time for him and the libbies to quit being pussies.

SHUT UP RIR!!

Obama has been the President for 8 months! You Stupid Neo Cons only argument is that he hasnt magically fixed everything yet!

GB Jr. spent 8 years screwing up our economy!! There are still repercussions to his actions!! It doesn't just stop because he's no longer the President.

We still have troops in Afghanistan and Iraq (GWB Jr.) thats still draining our economy. I vote we take them out of the stupid waster of a middle east. Maybe that would lessen this drain we have had to pay for for the past 8 years.

But then you Nutsy conservatives would bring up something about a job half done and leaving the middle east to be a breeding ground for terrorists.

Too bad Anti Christ GWB isnt around anymore. If he was you would probably be defending the 9.1 trillion deficit as just measures to prevent terrorism.

Rex is that you?

But then you Nutsy conservatives would bring up something about a job half done and leaving the middle east to be a breeding ground for terrorists.

We are a non factor. For another year the Republican Party has nothing to do with the decisions in Washington.

Also, it's upsetting that you feel President Obama ran for a position he wasn't prepared for, knowing what "mess" he was getting into. Have some faith in your guy, at least.

A billion vs a trillion?


One billion seconds ago was 32 years ago.


A trillion seconds ago?????



32 Centuries ago!

"One billion seconds ago was 32 years ago.
A trillion seconds ago?????
32 Centuries ago!"

Gee...if a trillion is a thousand billion, wouldn't that be 320 centuries ago?

You're only off by a factor of 10.

Funny thing is the deficit is only a fraction of what they are actually spending.

"Funny thing is the deficit is only a fraction of what they are actually spending."

Well, yeah...because they also have income.

"For another year the Republican Party has nothing to do with the decisions in Washington. "

Riiiiight...just ask Olympia Snowe.

it's upsetting that you feel President Obama ran for a position he wasn't prepared for, knowing what "mess" he was getting into.

#4 | POSTED BY ANDYUHENET AT 2009-10-16 06:55 PM |

Knowing you are getting into a "mess" doesn't mean you can fix it immediately.

The GWB mess is still occurring and will continue to occur. It has its own cycle and will resolve when enough measures have been taken and enough initiative has been applied.

I am sure you realize there is no reset button newly elected Presidents can push to start things over when they get into office.

We are a non factor. For another year the Republican Party has nothing to do with the decisions in Washington.

#4 | POSTED BY ANDYUHENET AT 2009-10-16 06:55 PM | REPLY |

Awe, you poor unrepresented Connies. Did the dems have house majority for the past year? Well that should mean every problem should be resolved then.

Lets over look the 8 or so years Nazi conservatives wiped their asses with our economy.

#10...

Like spending $800 billion on HC reform to save $80 billion?

"Like spending $800 billion on HC reform to save $80 billion?"

Phenomenally stupid.

Any and all initial savings compound over the years. And stemming medical inflation could easily save trillions through the baby boomer retirement years.

Convenient excuse, but it doesn't have practical applications. If things are bad leading into the 2010 cycle, Dems will take a bath.

The POTUS gets credit/blame for things whether those things are under his control or not. Of course, with the mainstream media leading the cheer, I suspect Obama will have an easier time retaining congressional seats.

At some point a person (or administration, or its supporters) need to stand up and take responsibility. Hiding behing Dubya's skirt is unbecoming.

We're nearly 20% into his term. Congress has been Dem for another couple of years.

What has improved? Foreclosures, unemployment, the war(s), our deficit, the value of the dollar, the political "tone" in America with our new hope and change?

You have to look really hard to find improvement in any areas.

Clown, what I am saying in my post that the Republican Party is a non factor is that President Obama is the Commander in Chief. If he is going to determine his actions on National Security issues based on what the minority (and opposite of his party) party will say (based on your statement: We still have troops in Afghanistan and Iraq (GWB Jr.) thats still draining our economy... But then you Nutsy conservatives would bring up something about a job half done and leaving the middle east to be a breeding ground for terrorists. ) then I would say he is not much of a Commander in Chief.

He also is eager to lose the healthcare debate, and surely you will blame the out of power party for this loss too.

"Congress has been Dem for another couple of years. "

Which meant virtually nothing with a Republican President and an all-time record for filibusters in less than half the time.

"He also is eager to lose the healthcare debate, and surely you will blame the out of power party for this loss too."

Hell the dems admitted they are going back to their bread and butter that won them the majority the last two elections. Blame Bush.

Sure seems that way Crispee. Their of undisputed power is closing and they are blaming President Bush, must be frustrating for the people that voted for change.

*Their window of undisputed

#12 | POSTED BY CRISPEE_OC

I would gladly have traded the Trillion of dollars dumped into the "War on Terror" for free health care.

Which, may I add, is available through out Europe and Canada, and is phenomenally successful.

Its not a new concept. There is enough tax money collected yearly by the government to adequately provide Health care and schooling for the citizens of the country.

The only ones that oppose free health care are the Insurance companies which are dumping tons of money appealing to your cold icy Neo Connie hearts.

DAN, It meant that nothing of consequence could be passed by Reps. So anything passed was middle of the road and Dubya signed off on it.

My point was that legistlation passed during the final two years (and I'd argue longer than that) was not a Republican ramrod effort by any stretch.

Obama, however, enjoys some stout majorities compared to what Bush had, no?

Oh that's right danforth 320 centuries ago


Fuckin vernon

"DAN, It meant that nothing of consequence could be passed by Reps"

Or the Dems. Between filibusters and vetoes, any and every Dem initiative required 67 votes in the Senate.

"Its not a new concept. There is enough tax money collected yearly by the government to adequately provide Health care and schooling for the citizens of the country."

If it was that easy, why didn't the dems simply enact HC for all when they controlled all three Houses in the 90's.

Obama has been the President for 8 months! You Stupid Neo Cons only argument is that he hasnt magically fixed everything yet!

And the Dems have had control of the congress for 3 years now.

How much has the debt increased in the last 8 months.

Damn Bush!

#14 | POSTED BY OOHRAH AT 2009-10-16 07:27 PM |

The main stream media, which it seems you haven't noticed, is strongly conservative biased. There isn't too many news reports you will hear cheering on Obama.

Also, he stepped into office in mid January. 20% of his term?
maybe if he only serves 1 term. and we count each year as 25%...
BUT by that equivalent GWB spent 90% of his term on vacation, 5% of his term snorting cocaine and 5% of his term destroying our economy.

And all the "...Foreclosures, unemployment, the war(s), our deficit, the value of the dollar..." all went to shit because GWB went out in a smoldering ball of shit, he used all our economic resources to finance the wars.

I am sure you, with your vast knowledge, would of by now improved America.
But realistically, things take time to change, and pointing out all the fires left behind by GwB, doesnt make it Obama's fault.

"How much has the debt increased in the last 8 months. Damn Bush!"

Well, since Obama's budget has barely been in operation for 8 days, you're not far off.


Which, may I add, is available through out Europe and Canada, and is phenomenally successful. Which, may I add, is available through out Europe and Canada, and is phenomenally successful.

#20 | Posted by ClownShack at 2009-10-16 07:33 PM


The opinion of a Clown who is also a damn fool if he/she/it believes what he/she/it said.

"But realistically, things take time to change, and pointing out all the fires left behind by GwB, doesnt make it Obama's fault."


How about the leadership of Pelosi and Reid.Is that Bushs' fault?

#24 | POSTED BY CRISPEE_OC AT 2009-10-16 07:39 PM

wait, are you asking about whether there is enough tax money being collected to pay for health care and schooling or are you pointing out that the dems didnt enact national health care coverage in the 90s?


#25 | POSTED BY SLICKSTERWILLY AT 2009-10-16 07:42 PM |

Damn Obama for not using his ability to get our nation back on track in 8 months.

I mean, think about it, 8 month, thats like a whole school year, like almost as long as it takes for child to be born. Oh my god, if a woman can crate a baby and birth it out in about 8 months, why cant Obama fix our economy?

What have you accomplished in 8 months?

Yea I blame bush, he had 8 years to create the disaster we are currently living in.
and yes, cheney, did help him.

#30...

No on the first, yes on the second. Based on your post there is plenty of tax money collected and it is not a new concept.

"I mean, think about it, 8 month, thats like a whole school year, like almost as long as it takes for child to be born."

Yet it was enough time to garner the Nobel Peace Prize. Go figure....


National Debt stood at $10.6 trillion on the day Barrack Obama took office.

It now stands at $11.95 trillion. That ~10% increase in 6 months.

If his budget projections are accurate, President Obama's administration will run up nearly as much national debt in four years as Bush did in eight.


Danforth, STFU.

Yea I blame bush, he had 8 years to create the disaster we are currently living in.
and yes, cheney, did help him.

#31 | Posted by ClownShack at 2009-10-16 07:54 PM

Of course. Hillary also blamed Bushs' tax cuts for the power grid going out on the midwest some years ago. He is also blamed for not having the levees up to snuff in NOLA....

But do you blame Bush for the dems decision to make Pelosi and Reid leaders of their respective Houses and party?

You know that their published numbers are fake and phony. Double whatever they give you.

You know that their published numbers are fake and phony. Double whatever they give you.

True. This is a nightmare of debt out grandchildren might pay off. Maybe. Thanks ObamaBots.

#33

Yea, I have no idea why they gave him that. Some people speculate that its to provoke him into action. I can't defend it. sorry.

#34

You dont seem to understand that events have repercussions. Whether obama was in office or not, the deficit would have grown either way since we are still funding the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

#28

Its not my opinion. I have family in both europe and canada. I have witnessed their HC. I have gone to hospitals with them. I know what I am talking about.
Opinion is what you are spewing, what second hand news source are you trying to quote?

True. This is a nightmare...

Why is anyone surprised at the job a Jr. Senator with less than four years in Washington is doing? Not to mention never running a City, Couty or State budget. This is what happens when people vote ambition over talent.

#38...

What is your take on #32 and 35 Clownshack?

CRISPEE_OC

Whether its being spent on health care or a war, the United States government annually collects enough money.

the problem is that they spend it on wars in the middle east, walls along the mexican border, and missions to mars.

I believe that the money taken from us, the tax paying citizens of America, should be put back into America. Making schools and hospitals to help future generations of American citizens be smart and healthy.

I hear thats an unpopular notion because if the American majority was more self informed and aware, the Bush administrations agenda wouldnt have been accomplished.
dare I bring up that GWB wouldnt have been able to wrongfully steal his position as president.

#41...

You didn't answer either question... Clinton and the dems were not at war and how about the current leadership on both Houses?

I have family in both europe and canada. I have witnessed their HC. I have gone to hospitals with them

That story's getting old. Every liberal has friends and family in europe and canada who just looove the healthcare system in those counties.

Anecdotal evidence at best, but that's all it is.

Why do all the people on the face of the planet flee their super socialized healthcare system and come to the U.S. when the chips are down? That's just a mystery isn't it?

If you love the HC in europe or canada immigrate.

This is what happens when people vote ambition over talent.

So true. You can throw in experience. 2010 can't come fast enough.

Why do all the people on the face of the planet flee their super socialized healthcare system and come to the U.S. when the chips are down? That's just a mystery isn't it?


No, it is simply not true, aside from a few super-rich oil zillionaires and maybe three movie-stars. And they ***** service like in a hotel and some places in the US can do that.

32, i answered.

# 35 -

Katrina was a horrible event. I do not blame Bush for the damage or the levees. The levees are obviously something that should have been dealt with on a state level not a federal level. I do believe that reaction time was definitely what Bush is being held responsible for.

Compare twin towers and katrina's reaction time.
Bush had the military on site cleaning up the disaster with in the hour of the towers falling. (which i do believe was in order to hide the truth of what really happen that day)
katrina, which is equally as devastating a disaster, was at first ignored. It took a week+(?) before the national guard came in.


The power outages, and pelosi and blah blah blah....

In the end, the Bush administration has been let off the hook for devastating the US economy. Everyone is looking at Obama and expecting him to have our current issues magically solved.

Its not that simple and he cannot be held accountable.

slow down Crispy, I hadnt even read 40 when i wrote 41

#43 | POSTED BY ZULU

So because I think the HC in America can be improved I should move to another country?

Well, in that case, if you dont think Obama is a good president, you should move to mexico.

#47...

Sorry lol. I need to take the dog for her walk. So that should be plenty of time if you choose to answer.

#44 | POSTED BY ZULU

Talent? Mclame?? You think McLame is talented?

Sweet mother mary.

You nazi cons still make me laugh.

And where does sara palin tie in? she was neither ambitious or talented.

She was just the whore that the republicans were pimping on the american populous.

#45 | POSTED BY SITDOWN

uuumm... sit down, take a deep breath, and write that again in a fashion that will make sense.

#43 | POSTED BY ZULU

First off, have you ever left your trailer park??

Second, you think doctors and nurses will be less effective if they are paid by the government?

Police and Fire are paid with our tax dollars. are you suggesting by privatizing these sectors we would have better cops and firemen?

The only good thing about this huge deficit is that the vast majority of Americans are finally becoming less ignorant and passive and more involved. It will become increasingly difficult to con the American people by this administration and congressional representatives.

Well, in that case, if you dont think Obama is a good president, you should move to mexico.

It's all about damage control, can't do that from Mexico buddy.

Second, you think doctors and nurses will be less effective if they are paid by the government?

You think they won't be? Pay anyone less, double (at least) their work load and even you can guess the rest.

First off, have you ever left your trailer park??

That's the best you can do? Elitist socialist cliche.

The American people are ignorant, and will be coned as soon as another Republican gets elected into office.

you could say this is Bush's fault.

or SCOTUS's fault for ignoring the vote.

or the fucking idiots that voted for Bush.


but it doesn't change the fact that as far as the bailout, the transfer of wealth from workers to fraudulent leaches, their is continuity.

it doesn't make any difference whether the Rethuglicans or Demowussies are in charge.


Greenspan, Bernanke, Paulson, Geithner, Summers, Rubin are highly educated criminals who have systematically looted our country.

Then there's the Military Industrial Complex. Eisenhowers worst nightmare come true.

Damage control? by blogging? I hear theres a book burning in N.C. you should go join your brethren.

Maybe the sea level rising isn't such a bad thing-- you could get rid of the Eastern seaboard states and the loonie tune western states and have left the folks with common sense-- all those that got us in this economic mess (other then George) were agencies, financial centers, and individuals from the afore mentioned geographic areas.

you could get rid of the Eastern seaboard states and the loonie tune western states and have left the folks with common sense

There's a lot to that. All the coastline states are bankrupt and going freaking nuts mainly because they've ruined their economies with all the Liberal experimentation.

What kind of piss poor education did you have to have to think Obama was qualified to do more than recite the weather at some second tier tv station in Chicago?

Cut them loose and let them roll around like the elitist pigs they are in their own Democrat filth.

You know, it's fascinating. The $9.1 trillion in additional deficits to be rung up over the next 10 years assumes (1) economic recovery in 2010; and (2) that Obamacare doesn't get passed. As horrific a number as $9,100,000,000,000 is, the libbies are full of suggestions as to how to make it even more. While at the same time, criticizing Bush for eight years that tacked on $3 trillion.

Amazing how libbies believe simultaneously in mutually exclusive things.

"While at the same time, criticizing Bush for eight years that tacked on $3 trillion."

Huh? If you count FY 2001-2008, it's $4.2 trillion, if it's FY 2002-2009 (Bush's last budget year ended two weeks ago), it's $6.6 trillion, and that probably doesn't include the Iraq war (off-budget), the trillion he pumped into the banking system a few days before the near-trillion dollar TARP was passed, or TARP itself.

en.wikipedia.org

Danforth, can you manage to go a single day without betraying your total ignorance of government accounting?

Iraq is funded largely through emergency appropriations, but still is accounted for in final government spending, and in the debt. Otherwise, why not just put everything "off-budget", and not run deficits ever? And, yes, Bush's bailouts are part of the deficits and debts too.

So fine. It's $4.2 trillion. And Obama's will be $9.1, assuming everything goes WELL. Why aren't the libbies PO'd about THAT? Do you guys agree with Dick Cheney now?

One very important item not accounted for, however, is government obligations in the event of FHA, HUD, or FNMA and FRE mortgages going bad. Or, the very real possibility that the FDIC will go insolvent, sometime in the first half of next year. Could be another $2-4 trillion right there. Those really are off-budget; they're real government obligations, with no reserves to fund them beyond the so-called "full faith and credit of the United States government." Read: we're going to borrow it from the Chinese.

But maybe Obama's right, and we're in the middle of a strong recovery right now, and there won't be any more foreclosures on government-guaranteed property. And Timmy Geithner and Barney Frank will be sharing next year's Nobel Prize for Economics.

Maybe.

"And, yes, Bush's bailouts are part of the deficits and debts too. "

Then how did he pump a trillion dollars into the banking system a few days before TARP, and spend TARP, and have about a half-trillion dollar deficit, and it still totals up to $1.42 trillion?

"So fine. It's $4.2 trillion."

Oh, so you lied, and were off by about 35%. But why isn't Bush's final fiscal year "credited" to Bush?

"And Obama's will be $9.1, assuming everything goes WELL. Why aren't the libbies PO'd about THAT?"

I, for one, am. I don't like deficits, regardless the letter after the name. Therein lies the difference.

And Timmy Geithner and Barney Frank will be sharing next year's Nobel Prize for Economics.

As recent events have shown the United States my be in the grips of a depression the likes of which it has never experienced and they could just as well receive next year's Nobel Prize for Economics.

The Tragedy of the Commons.

Do you guys agree with Dick Cheney now?

#62 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-10-16 11:16 PM |

You stupid fuck. Obama's been in office since January.

Your boy Chimpy started this clusterfuck.

#23 DAN "Or the Dems. Between filibusters and vetoes, any and every Dem initiative required 67 votes in the Senate."

Thanks for helping me make my point. With such thin majorities (and our party having enough moderates to stall anything substantive) there wasn't some sort of Republican ramrod effort going on.

(Well, except for Larry Craig, but that's a different story)

Dems have larger majorities now, plus the POTUS, so why do they need to get our support? Just ramrod the thing... Barney Frank could lead the charge.

The reason they want our votes is for political cover.

#64, DAN - "I, for one, am. I don't like deficits, regardless the letter after the name. Therein lies the difference."

Agreed.

With nearly the same ammount of time in office as BHO, G.W. Bush presided over the largest foreign attack on American soil.

The Tighties were desperately calling for Clinton's head in the matter.

This mess was left behind and ... AND.....

get this .... The stimulus belonged to guess who.... George W. Bush....

Now that's change you can believe in.

I would gladly have traded the Trillion of dollars dumped into the "War on Terror" for free health care.

#20 | Posted by ClownShack

You are nucking futs. In the first place a trillion was not spent on the war. Second, the constitution does say that the government is to protect our country, not provide cradle to grave care for us.

the constitution does say that the government is to protect our country, not provide cradle to grave care for us.

Providing health care protects America.

64, DAN - "I, for one, am. I don't like deficits, regardless the letter after the name. Therein lies the difference."


Agreed.

#68 | Posted by OohRah at 2009-10-17 08:18 AM | Reply

I Agree too, but, you really have no choice for the next several years, so decide who you would rather have in charge. Those Republicans?

I would take this President and even this Democratic Congress for the next 7 years or so over any Republican arrangement you could think of.

Not because I trust them, but I have more trust than in those others. Any of them.

Providing health care protects America.

#72 | Posted by snoofy
Now there is a stretch, even for a rubberneck socalist.

This crew we have in power are going to pound the last nail into the coffin. You best hope your wish doesn't come true. They epitimize the warnings sounded in Fredrich Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom".

They epitimize the warnings sounded in Fredrich Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom".

#76 | Posted by matsop

Hayek didn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. Yes, that's more than Ludwig Von Miserly but that's not saying much.

Based on your obvious love for Von Mises, you would probably be right there with the Nazis back in 1938 burning down his library in Vienna.

How long before Obama and the FED starting printing money only on one side so the can speed up the process?

Sept. 30th was the last day of George W Bush's last (2009) budget. Rejoice connies (conservatives), you've broken another record.

#80 - Timex - Think on this: At what point in his presidency did Bill Clinton balance the budget?

Ask Dick "Ronald Reagan proved deficits don't matter" Cheney

#82 As I expected, you can't admit it or even address it.


Based on your obvious love for Von Mises, you would probably be right there with the Nazis back in 1938 burning down his library in Vienna.

#78 | Posted by matsop at 2009-10-17 08:15 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Right along with Prescott Bush... Ahhhh the Bush legacy lives on.... war spoils....

the constitution does say that the government is to protect our country, not provide cradle to grave care for us.

#71 | Posted by Sniper at 2009-10-17 10:34 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Protect us from what? Ins. companies that take our money for years then shove a stiff one in us as soon as we get sick.

I'm not saying the health care reform on the table now is the best solution but it's a step in the right direction...

Insurance Companies,right fuc*ing now, have cranked up the biggest propaganda maching ever seen by mankind and intend to scare the shit out of the sheep. Then they intend to threaten the elected officials.

I have to find another Insurance company within a month because the on I have is:

A. denying every claim as pre-existing and placing the burden of proof on me.

B. Not paying claims on time after I prove that the Flu I had 3 months ago was not pre-existing, then the Dr's office comes after me wanting to be paid.

It's bullshit and it's wide spread. I've had several Ins companies over the 5 years and they're all the same.

I can't imagine having something serious happen to me...


the constitution does say that the government is to protect our country, not provide cradle to grave care for us.


#71 | Posted by Sniper at 2009-10-17 10:34 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e


while you're talking out of your ass, tell us how you feel about flood insurance. Better yet, call your senator or rep. and ask them how they feel about the government sponsored insurance program.

Why should I pay for my hard earned money for some that want to live in a posh neighborhood on the coast?

I keep forgeting you don't engage in serious debate.

When it's $2 TRILLION in a few months, who y'all going to blame?

#88 | Posted by nanc at 2009-10-18 08:48 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e


Certianly will not blame you Nanc... queen of "I got my free health care now you figure out how to get yours lazy bitches"

In a thread about the deficit there are no posts (that I found) regarding tax. In finding blame for the debt no discussion of tax cuts. Inconsideration of war expenses and their effect on the debt no mention that Bush and the Republicans cut taxes during war time for the first time in history. Regardless of your point of view a discussion about deficits and debt is silly if you leave out the cost of tax cuts and wars.

#90 | Posted by danni at 2009-10-18 09:10 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e


You're making too much sense for someone who is fueled by hatred to grasp.

Soon to come, will be libbies saying that this is actually Bush's budget, which is true in the sense that this is still the fiscal year he started.
#1 | POSTED BY RIGHTISRIGHT AT 2009-10-16 06:08 PM

Which is to say, the libs would be RIGHT, eh RIR?


How many bush budgets included iraqnam or afghanistan occupations?

The national DEBT on Jan 20, 2009 was over 10 TRILLION.

reagan/bush41 QUADTRUPLED it.

bush43/hallichainy DOUBLED it.

Interesting how NOW all the right wingers are so fkn concerned about the debt, but they weren't as they continued to vote in "neoconservatives" who created that debt, while giving the richest 1% tax breaks (141,000 Americans who avg. 7.4 million a year), eh?

Partisan much?

Bush's fault. It's his economy and budget that brought this about.

It's Obama's fault - the stock market is over 10k.

It's Bush's fault, they made a Democrat-controlled House pass anything he wants.

It's Obama's fault, he couldn't make a Democrat-controlled House pass healthcare.

It's Bush's fault the wars were started.

It's Obama's fault Bush didn't end them before he took office.

It's Bush's fault soldiers keep dying.

It's Obama's fault he won the Nobel Peace Prize.
And, they are still dying.

Soon to come, will be libbies saying that this is actually Bush's budget, which is true in the sense that this is still the fiscal year he started.

A moment of clarity award to RisR. WHen that haze lifted for a moment wasn't it nice being able to see for miles and miles?

It's Obama's fault - the stock market is over 10k.

I wouldn't treat that as a positive. That's where the stimulus money went. It didn't go into building factories and creating new jobs. When the money is easy; speculation is in. When the risks are too great; creating wealth is out.

" That's where the stimulus money went."

From what source did you find this little gem????

tell us how you feel about flood insurance. Better yet, call your senator or rep. and ask them how they feel about the government sponsored insurance program.
Why should I pay for my hard earned money for some that want to live in a posh neighborhood on the coast?

#86 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS AT 2009-10-18 07:43 AM


A good point, and those supports are more for real estate companies and rich speculators who invest in beach properties that are then rented to people like me for exhorbitant prices, rather than just good old American homeowners.

i appreciate being able to access the ocean once in awhile though, I'm not believing it's a necessity. In tough times, it might be an area to consider reforming.

The problem with most political party's members is they can't see that problems in their own party.

I have never belonged to a particular party. Parties represent their party, not their members.

It is very much like a union. The union promises they'll fight for you, but in the end, they make agreements with management that you doubt anyone in the ranks would ever had made.

The R's and D's both suck. They had ratings as bad if not worse in Congress than Bush's. Yet, we re-elect those members of Congress with ease.

People are afraid of the other party when they should fear both.

Deficits have been run by both parties. Doesn't matter whether they have held the House, Senate, or WH. Neither party can fund need over want and deny want necessary.

Continue to fight between parties.
Good question from a friend to me today: Why do they call it budget if it is a deficit?

I have a budget. I stay within the bounds I set.

The Congress has a deficit. They try to stay within those bounds they set.

The have no budget. They do tend to borrow quite a lot.

Ray, you continue to impress me with your grasp of knowledge and its application. You could be right that we have another speculative bubble brewing in the stock market due to the easy money policies in place. Also could in part be due to the "dollar carry trade". Another possiblility is that money from the Working Group on Financial Matters is flowing into the market. The last possibility is that the market is pointing to a stronger recovery then expected. However, the economy is not going to be that strong since once again "funny money" is looking for a home instead of solid structural job creation and ultimately we will revert back to the secular bear market in place. Ray, why do you even bother to post since your acumen and knowledge is so obviously advanced compared to your critics?

Petrous, nice job-- your betz cell synapsis is obvoiuosly functioning well and is very logical.

"Parties represent their party, not their members." - Petrous

Possibly. However, what's the alternative in a republic (or democracy)?

"Ray, why do you even bother to post since your acumen and knowledge is so obviously advanced compared to your critics?" - Matsop

Because Ray feels that the one item missing from debates is the worse possible scenario. It is therefore his mission to supply it. The part where he calls people who disagree with him "idiots" (or similar) is a bonus for him. The part where people point out that he invariably represents a fringe position disdained by most people conversant on the topic is to him a badge of martyrdom. And helps him view life as good.

Also makes Nulli's life more entertaining, but that is a different story.

"Also makes Nulli's life more entertaining, but that is a different story."

Well, I used to one of the few that debated Ray's crackpot Austrian economics, but then posters like you and Zombie and others stepped up to the plate, so I'm content to let you guys do the heavy lifting nowadays.

I agree that Ray (or anyone else) in discourse should not be verbally abusive--Ray could you do better in the future? Point well taken ailtd.

Matsop

What I know comes from a background in Austrian Theory and hours of daily reading from professional analysts who have experience with financial statistics.

There is an enormous amount of manipulation in every market by the big banks at the behest of the Treasury and Federal Reserve. Low trading volume and falling corporate profits are two giveaways that stocks are riding on fumes. The Crash of 1929 had a bear market rally similar to this one, almost a 50% recovery. The current Dow is at a 46% recovery at 10,000 and showing signs of running out of steam.

The dollar carry trade is another issue, and one that could prove fatal to the dollar if Bernanke keeps interest rates at .25 percent. The effect is to drive the dollar down as it did for Japan in the 90s. At that rate, it pays to borrow (short sell) dollars for almost nothing and invest them elsewhere for higher gains. The trade profits a second time when they buy dollars at a lower price. Bernanke could raise interest rates and change the dynamics, but one never knows.

At this point for a host of reasons, government has crippled the capital markets too badly for there to be a recovery. If there is any consolation it is that government jobs are dependent on taxes which are dependent on the market. You are soon going to see massive government layoffs, first the states and localities, then at the federal level. It's a classic case of the boy killing the golden goose.

Ray, why do you even bother to post since your acumen and knowledge is so obviously advanced compared to your critics?

This site gives me an outlet. The way they are screwing themselves is almost comical. I feel for the innocent people who will be hurt for this. As for the statists, they deserve what they are going to get.

Here's five good sources to bookmark.

mwhodges.home.att.net
www.321gold.com
economicedge.blogspot.com
jsmineset.com
www.financialsense.com

Ray is disgruntled that his predictions of doom and gloom have not come true yet.

Ailtd, in this republic I would love to see more individuals that are not linked so strongly to either party but instead have more that are truly independent. The way it is set up now, neither party members will throw thw bums out that lack integrity within their own parties. That, as an independent, is what bothers me the most about our strong two party system.

The part where he calls people who disagree with him "idiots" (or similar) is a bonus for him.

I haven't ever to my recollection called Ailtd idiot or anything like it. He mistakes name calling for how he feels after arguing with me.

Well, I used to one of the few that debated Ray's crackpot Austrian economics, but then posters like you and Zombie and others stepped up to the plate, so I'm content to let you guys do the heavy lifting nowadays.

Notice their complaint that I think outside the way they think. Ailtd once scolded me to think outside the box. That was funny.

My problem with Ray is that he can't seem to realize socialism works in parts of Europe and could work here if people weren't so greedy with their tax dollars.

Ray is disgruntled that his predictions of doom and gloom have not come true yet.
#106 | Posted by jackass

I can post numbers and charts all day long to support my thesis. That's the best Jackass can come up with. He did add "yet" as a qualifier. That's, in effect, what I've been saying.

socialism works in parts of Europe


Links please and that little French bakery in Buckhead does not count.

"Ailtd, in this republic I would love to see more individuals that are not linked so strongly to either party but instead have more that are truly independent." - Matsop

"Independent" is not a synonym for "fringe". I find very little that's worthwhile in people whose position is that alone hold accurate knowledge. Other than that, I agree with you.

Jackass, it would behoove us to consider some of what Ray is spoonfeeding us. My hobby is reading about economics and markets. I do it since I handle my own investments instead of trusting them in the hands of others. Ray makes some legitimate points and time will bear out whether he has an accurate reading on what is currently swirling under our feet. Ray, I do believe this market is going higher yet (for awhile). My technicals point to a higher market and historically when you get the massive downturn we had, there is an average upturn of approximately 72%. Interestingly, Marc Faber, one of the few who saw this thing coming made a statement the other day that the downturn we recently experienced is only the appetizer of the meal to come. One of my major positions since about 4 years ago has and will be in the future gold and silver in various forms.

My problem with Ray is that he can't seem to realize socialism works in parts of Europe and could work here if people weren't so greedy with their tax dollars.
#109 | Posted by jackass

It is impossible for any system of systematic theft and abrogation of property rights to succeed. Socialism has no means of producing wealth. The Europeans are plagued by problems that we don't hear about in the American press.

"I haven't ever to my recollection called Ailtd idiot or anything like it." - Ray

Selective memories are such fun, aren't they.


"Ailtd once scolded me to think outside the box."

Thinking outside the box is a benefit only when the box is essentially correct and something extraordinary pops up. Like when extraordinary situations require extraordinary responses. But not as a consistent endeavour. And doing nothing is not thinking outside of the box. Ya gotta learn to pick your spots.

"My technicals point to a higher market ..." - Matsop

Guess you are unaware that Ray has predicted the Dow will drop to 1400 or something like that. And he rips Danni (and others) when they suggest otherwise. Of course, since you are into gold, that should get you a break.

"Independent" is not a synonym for "fringe". I find very little that's worthwhile in people whose position is that alone hold accurate knowledge. Other than that, I agree with you.
#112 | Posted by AILtd

Truth is not decided on the basis of majority or authority opinion. -Logic 101.

I estimate that real realists like myself are one in a thousand. The rest are group thinkers like Ailtd and Nulli.

Uncontrolled capitalism isn't the answer either. Preying on the lower classes hasn't been working either.

Guess you are unaware that Ray has predicted the Dow will drop to 1400 or something like that. And he rips Danni (and others) when they suggest otherwise. Of course, since you are into gold, that should get you a break.
#116 | Posted by AILtd

And I remind people that this bear market is not over. Bottoms can't be timed and I never tried.

I guess I'll look that much better when it resumes its fall below its previous low.

"I estimate that real realists like myself are one in a thousand. The rest are group thinkers like Ailtd and Nulli."

Yeah, you're a "real realist" all right.

"The rest are group thinkers like Ailtd and Nulli."

Well, you may be HALF right, I don't know anything about Ailtd, but I know Nulli isn't a thinker. He posts brain farts now and then but other than that there's no output from the ol' gray matter.

Uncontrolled capitalism isn't the answer either. Preying on the lower classes hasn't been working either.
#118 | Posted by jackass

You have it backwards. Capitalism breathed its last breath when Nixon took the dollar off the gold standard. Our problem is that government is out of control. One has to be willfully blind not to see it.

Jackass, if we could agree that socialism and "welfare" have a symbiotic relationship, I would say that we already have a heavy dose of socialism in this country and that is our dilemma. Take for example, we have corporate and wallstreet welfare, social security, SSI, medicare, medicaid, etc. The only group that has minimal government help is the average wage earner and member of the middle class. Now they're going to be crushed further by a government that wants to become increasingly "socialistic"-- that means more taxes for those poor folks that are the backbone of this country and mostly don't deserve what has happened to them and is going to happen to them.

Matsop should we just allow the poor and elderly starve?

If ore people had union jobs like myself they may not have to worry so much when they get older.

Capitalism is doomed, Ray. It is a "grow-or-die" system that requires ever-increasing levels of consumption in a world of finite resources.

Ya gotta learn to pick your spots.
#115 | Posted by AILtd

Reality doesn't pick spots.

If ore people had union jobs like myself they may not have to worry so much when they get older.
#125 | Posted by jackass

What a disconnect! Jackass thinks that unions can improve the lot of workers by extorting their employers. Then he wonders what happened to union jobs and why so many corporations left the country.

Capitalism is doomed, Ray. It is a "grow-or-die" system that requires ever-increasing levels of consumption in a world of finite resources.

#126 | Posted by nullifidian

Well it's rapidly growing in Asia.

The grow-or-die requirement has to do with our credit money Federal Reserve system that has been the engine of inflation. But as usual, when I point to Nulli that government intervention is behind what he attributes to capitalism, he goes into denial.

Ray people work for a dollar a day in Asia. Is that what you want for America?

Jackass, I couldn't agree with you more--unbridled "capitalism" (laissez faire) is not the answer-- I would argue that the last few years were not capitalism but an unholy government/wallstreet alliance and socialism for wallstreet and corporate America. It was welfare to the upper eschalons of public corporations and those that ran them. It wasn't capitalism but a welfarism. In a true capitalistic system the share-holders whether union, individuals, pension funds would have a say on board of directors and pay. We had a paper aristocracy that was running loose that was adding to it. Also, absolutely, we should take care of the poor and elderly. They could be taken care of much better in a true capitalistic system and not the fraudulent one of the past few years which was aided and abetted by our government which in itself made it a socialistic system.

"The grow-or-die requirement has to do with our credit money Federal Reserve system"

As usual, you miss the big picture, Ray. Credit has nothing to do with it. Capitalism is not a "no-growth" system and yet that's what will be required to cope with resource depletion. If every Chinese consumed resources at the rate of Americans, the world would become a toxic wasteland. That's the capitalist future.

"Truth is not decided on the basis of majority or authority opinion. -Logic 101.
I estimate that real realists like myself are one in a thousand. The rest are group thinkers like Ailtd and Nulli." - Ray

Truth is seen by very many people, not by a chosen few. You can keep thinking you are a realist, yet the very fact that your "realism" stems from opposition to the accepted makes it gibberish.

#119 | Posted by Ray

Yeah, keep hoping. Doesn't make your position real. Just a very worst case scenario, like all of your "opinions".

"Reality doesn't pick spots." - Ray

Yeah, it does. It avoids you, for instance, though that would be of your choosing.

#131 | Posted by matsop

Those are the inevitable results of unchecked, unregulated capitalism. A "true" capitalist system produces exactly that. Even Adam Smith admitted that.

Yeah, it does. It avoids you, for instance, though that would be of your choosing.
#135 | Posted by AILtd

There you go again, defending group think.

I'm guessing that you worked in government with a job that had authority. Maybe a teacher. Am I right?

"Well it [highly regulated capitalism] is rapidly growing in Asia. "

Fix that for you, Ray.

What a disconnect! Jackass thinks that unions can improve the lot of workers by extorting their employers. Then he wonders what happened to union jobs and why so many corporations left the country.

Corporations have not left the country, they are still here getting the provided protection from the people in unions that the corporations are extorting by off shoring their labor.

It is amazing you ray are still here, I am surprise you can even leave your house for how anti-American you seem to be.

Ray - all people and labor are enemies and all corporations are god bound.

"There you go again, defending group think." - Ray

"Group think" means that ideas are vetted. The pros and cons of them are debated, the weaknesses pointed out and discussed. Alternate theories are proposed. All done until there is general consensus.

In your world there is "I estimate that real realists like myself are one in a thousand." No discussion needed, just acceptance and memorization.

Yeah, I do prefer "group think".

"I'm guessing that you worked in government with a job that had authority. Maybe a teacher. Am I right?" - Ray

Wrong. Closest came when I was involved with the Libary of Congress Research division.

But, then, this "analysis" of yours is typical for you.

That's not to say whether free market capitalism works or not. No self-respecting statist could tolerate a free market.

"I'm guessing that you worked in government with a job that had authority. Maybe a teacher. Am I right?"

Ray always accuses his opponent of being a government employee when he gets frustrated. Done it hundreds of times.

Ailtd, you are very right. I, in my own way, look at a "good and just and true capitalism" as different from Adam Smith which to the nth degree was laissez faire. Of course, generally, it means to "let it be" with no government interference. Unfortunately, because of man's depravity, government involvement and laws are needed and that's where it gets sticky. We had the regulations and laws in place to protect us but some were repealed and the regulators in place didn't regulate based on the powers and responsibility given to them. The influence of wallstreet and investment bankers in Washington is amazing. If the definition of "laissez faire" is lack of government involvement then we truly did not have a capitalism to the nth degree since government was involved allowing extreme leveraging, etc and therefore, the welfarism. If we were back on the gold standard or some other standard the odds of this happening (in my mind) would be low.

Wrong. Closest came when I was involved with the Libary of Congress Research division.
But, then, this "analysis" of yours is typical for you.

Hahaha. Said I was guessing. But I was right about you working in government.

Yeah, I do prefer "group think".
That means to let majority opinion do your thinking for you. Then you accuse me of rote memorization. You're a riot!

Ray always accuses his opponent of being a government employee when he gets frustrated. Done it hundreds of times.
#143 | Posted by nullifidian

It's not a compliment. They are the most rigid group thinkers I know.

In your case, I wonder how you function on life. You must have a good reason to be secretive about your background.

Corporations have not left the country, they are still here getting the provided protection from the people in unions that the corporations are extorting by off shoring their labor.

I believe unions are strongest in government now. In the private sector, nobody wants to join anymore. Why is that?

It is amazing you ray are still here, I am surprise you can even leave your house for how anti-American you seem to be.

Bitching about politicians is an American pastime.

Ray - all people and labor are enemies and all corporations are god bound.
#139 | Posted by moneywar

I would argue that they are their own worst enemy. As for corporations, I'm an atheist.

Ailtd, you mentioned Ray said the market (Dow?) would go to 1400. He could be right but who knows? All I know is that we're in a "secular bear market" where the cyclical direction is a "bull" for awhile and then will be crushed again. How low we'll go then is anyone's guess. This market should trade up and down yet for a minimum of 8 years until we have a chance for a new secular bull market. Hard assets will be the place to be (commodities, materials, gold, etc). The Chinese understand this and is why they're buying companies with hard assets spending their soon to be worthless dollars. They've also encouraged their citizenry to purchase gold and silver.

"If we were back on the gold standard or some other standard the odds of this happening (in my mind) would be low." - Matsop

Then you need to read our history of the 19th century up to the Great Depression. When we were on the gold standard we had lots of recessions. And the gold standard is extremely ineffective in dealing with them. Which is why you hear that "doing nothing is the best response to a recession" from its supporters.

"Ailtd, you mentioned Ray said the market (Dow?) would go to 1400. He could be right but who knows? "

No. Ray predicted that the market crash of *this* year would end up at Dow 1400. As is usual with people who make apocalyptic predictions that don't pan out, The End of Civilization as we know it has been postponed.

"If we were back on the gold standard or some other standard the odds of this happening (in my mind) would be low." - Matsop

Then you need to read our history of the 19th century up to the Great Depression. When we were on the gold standard we had lots of recessions. And the gold standard is extremely ineffective in dealing with them. Which is why you hear that "doing nothing is the best response to a recession" from its supporters.

#149 | Posted by AILtd

and 3 depressions..There is not enough gold in the world to return to a gold standard and have normal everyday commerce. You would have to use a specie that does not have industrial, medical or other demand and in sufficient quantity to allow minute transactions within the economy..we have nothing. paper is as good as it gets.

"That means to let majority opinion do your thinking for you." - Ray

"Group think" means that ideas are vetted. The pros and cons of them are debated, the weaknesses pointed out and discussed. Alternate theories are proposed. All done until there is general consensus. That it becomes the "majority opinion" at that point means that it has passed the exam. Which is how knowledge builds, not by stating that the "majority opinion" is wrong and acting accordingly. If humans had followed your logic, we'd still be living in caves.

"It's not a compliment. They are the most rigid group thinkers I know." - Ray

So you have worked for government? Or is this another blanket, pulled out-of-my-ass, theory of yours? I have worked with lots of people who worked for the government. Very many much more open to discussion and debate than you. Not that such would be difficult.

"When we were on the gold standard we had lots of recessions. "

In the United States, economists typically refer to the Depression of 1873-79, which followed the Panic of 1873. The National Bureau of Economic Research dates the contraction following the panic as lasting from October 1873 to March 1879. At 65 months, it is the longest-lasting contraction identified by the NBER, eclipsing the Great Depression's 43 months of contraction.[4] [5] Following the end of the episode in 1879, the U.S. economy would remain unstable, experiencing recessions for 114 of the 253 months until January 1901.[4]

en.wikipedia.org

"The Chinese understand this and is why they're buying companies with hard assets spending their soon to be worthless dollars." - Marsop

Ah, no. They are buying because they have lots of dollars and don't want (or don't know how) to get them into the hands of their people. So, they are doing what the Japanese did previously. Don't think the Japanese cared that much regarding gold re their economy or currency.

BTW, The Japanese are very close to the Chinese in holding our debt - IIRC, $800+ billion to $700+ billion. Don't hear anything about them, though.

Bull! I did not say this year. Timing market bottoms is a guessing game. The rest of your post is more brain turds.

Depressions don't hit evenly. If you are out of work, it is the end of civilization. If you are working, times couldn't be better. For me, I'm collecting SS and working, AND well stocked in silver and gold.

Ailtd, true there were recessions on the gold standard but to the best of my knowledge not the severe downturn of the great depression and the coming problems that are emerging now. If memory serves me right the recessions on the gold standard were mostly short periods of time. Also if memory serves me right, up until 1913, the people of this country (about nine times) rejected the notion of a central bank. Thomas Jefferson was right when he warned that money (fiat) not backed by some instrument would ultimately enslave a community and take away the liberties of those in said community-- unfortunately, my feelings are that we're on our way.

"There is not enough gold in the world to return to a gold standard and have normal everyday commerce." - Legio

Not to mention, as I've seen mentioned by their supporters multiple times on the net, that it would require not just a static economy, but also a static population. Good luck with the population control.

"Bull! I did not say this year. "

No, you said the last bear market. It's over. You were wrong. Period.

"Ailtd, true there were recessions on the gold standard but to the best of my knowledge not the severe downturn of the great depression and the coming problems that are emerging now." - Matsop

We were on the gold standard before and during the Depression. Didn't come off it until most other countries had - and amazingly enough, they came out of the depression sooner than we did.


"Also if memory serves me right, up until 1913, the people of this country (about nine times) rejected the notion of a central bank."

The problem is that, without a central bank, not only is there no efficient clearinghouse, but no standards for banks. Among other issues. And why the Fed was created.

"If you are out of work, it is the end of civilization." - Ray

And doing nothing until the market collapsed and "cleaned itself" would expose increasing, and increasingly huge, numbers of people to that. Yet you have no problem with it, in fact push that it is the "correct" course. And wonder why they question your "expertise".

So you have worked for government? Or is this another blanket, pulled out-of-my-ass, theory of yours? I have worked with lots of people who worked for the government. Very many much more open to discussion and debate than you. Not that such would be difficult.
#153 | Posted by AILtd

Of course! They are all group thinkers like you.

"Group think" means that ideas are vetted. The pros and cons of them are debated, the weaknesses pointed out and discussed. Alternate theories are proposed. All done until there is general consensus. That it becomes the "majority opinion" at that point means that it has passed the exam. Which is how knowledge builds, not by stating that the "majority opinion" is wrong and acting accordingly. If humans had followed your logic, we'd still be living in caves.
#152 | Posted by AILtd

That's very entertaining. For years, I've been explaining why America is sinking into the worst depression in its history. Like Matsop noticed, all I get is abuse for it. When I try to explain government criminality, I get mocked. Okay. Have it your way.

Ailtd, the Japanese held on to our dollars in the past because their currency was weak and ours was strong. I can't speak to their game plan today but I guarantee you the Chinese want to do something with our dollars before they lose too much value. They know that over the next few years the statist of our dollar as a reserve currency is going to be diminished and that means further depreciation of our currency. I don't argue the deflation/inflation positions because all I know is the gold chart (moving averages) continues to be the only chart consistently strong through this mess. That means nothing ultimately positive for this currency or nation is going to happen in the near future.

"Of course! They are all group thinkers like you." - Ray

Yeah, that's called having people who know something about a subject discuss it. Forbidden in the "realistic" world of the 1000 "realistic" people of whom Ray is one.


"That's very entertaining. For years, I've been explaining why America is sinking into the worst depression in its history. Like Matsop noticed, all I get is abuse for it."

To start, it hasn't, so you are/were wrong. To continue, wtf does that have to do with anything other than you executing your duty to provide the worst case scenario?

The problem is that, without a central bank, not only is there no efficient clearinghouse, but no standards for banks. Among other issues. And why the Fed was created.
#160 | Posted by AILtd

More group think. The Fed is engaged in legalized counterfeiting and check kiting. By being the instrument of credit money, it was only a matter of time before America became saturated with debt. That time is now.

And doing nothing until the market collapsed and "cleaned itself" would expose increasing, and increasingly huge, numbers of people to that. Yet you have no problem with it, in fact push that it is the "correct" course. And wonder why they question your "expertise".

Like I said in the previous paragraph, the debt pyramid scheme went too far. Now we're fucked no matter what we do.

Your savings and pension is riding on my being wrong. You can continue to argue with me, or take an interest in understanding what I'm telling you.

There is not enough gold in the world to return to a gold standard and have normal everyday commerce. You would have to use a specie that does not have industrial, medical or other demand and in sufficient quantity to allow minute transactions within the economy..we have nothing. paper is as good as it gets.
#151 | Posted by Legio

That is an inflationist's argument - a justification for fiat money. There is always a price at which demand is in balance with supply. I think the naysayers are going to be shocked at the price levels gold will be going to.

"... but I guarantee you the Chinese want to do something with our dollars before they lose too much value. They know that over the next few years the statist of our dollar as a reserve currency is going to be diminished and that means further depreciation of our currency." - Matsop

Yet that isn't what most economists think. Especially those covering the Chinese economy. They believe what I stated previously (post 155) - which wasn't something I came up with on my own. The Chinese are playing a game. One which they think will help expand their economy through their population. It remains to be seen how good they play it because it requires at least some buy-in from other countries. And none seem inclined to be willing to accept their currency as the world standard.


" gold chart (moving averages) continues to be the only chart consistently strong through this mess..."

It did that during the 70s and early 80s. Then the market rebounded and the value of gold dropped. BTW, the value of gold at its peak then was the equivalent of $2000 now. Seems we have a ways to go to that. And yet the market rebounded then.

"More group think." - Ray

What an utterly feeble and inept argument. Waaah, they don't agree with me. They _must_ be wrong. If you can't do better, what is the purpose of all that "studying" you did? Or is it indicative of it?


"Your savings and pension is riding on my being wrong. You can continue to argue with me, or take an interest in understanding what I'm telling you."

Yep, that's why I disagree with you. I want to both keep my money and increase it. You add nothing to that. Your "expertise" is hot-air worst case scenario which keeps proving wrong.

"naysayers are going to be shocked at the price levels gold will be going to."

Your predictions are about as useful as that made by blind-folded drunken monkeys throwing darts at a gold chart.

"I think the naysayers are going to be shocked at the price levels gold will be going to." - Ray

When it gets to $2000, we'll be at the equivalent level to its previous high. And the market rebounded then.


"That is an inflationist's argument - a justification for fiat money."

Maybe. Or maybe it is a justified critique of the gold standard and its inadequacies. Judging by the 19th century, I'd say the latter.

Ailtd, over time we may not go back to a gold standard but I'm sure how we create money will change. Our bankers, the Chinese and other nations will demand it. It could possibly be a new order where there is no longer one reserve currency (ala, dollar) but instead a basket of currencies with gold playing a role. There will also be anew way in how petro is priced and it won't be petrodollars. Regions of the world will over time create their own dollar exchange systems. As the changes occur, the dollar will slowly lose it ultimate place in history.

To start, it hasn't, so you are/were wrong. To continue, wtf does that have to do with anything other than you executing your duty to provide the worst case scenario?
#164 | Posted by AILtd

I've been wrong about nothing. Economic conditions change over years and decades. They've been eroding since 2001 and accelerating. Government and the mainstream press is hiding it from the public.

#171 | Posted by matsop

All of which is true. And was always inevitable. Of course, it probably won't happen for 25 years or so. But I'll bet that the countries which presently use the dollar as their currency will continue to do so. And I'll bet the Chinese will drag their feet since it doesn't fit their plan of how to spread the economy in China. After all, they want _their_ currency to be the world's currency, not a basket of currencies. And I think gold will play a very minor role. Most countries in the world have very little gold, if they have any.

Still, diamonds would be a much better alternative than gold. Wonder why that isn't being proposed.

When it gets to $2000, we'll be at the equivalent level to its previous high. And the market rebounded then.

The next high for gold will have at least another digit. Maybe 10 years. Maybe five years. Whatever it does, it will exceed every dollar denominated asset.

Maybe. Or maybe it is a justified critique of the gold standard and its inadequacies. Judging by the 19th century, I'd say the latter.

The gold standard forces politicians to live within a budget. They hate it.
Gold provides a standard measurement of value. Fiat money changes value in direct proportion to its expanding supply.

Ailtd, this'll date me a little-- I was present and studying the markets back in the 70's. Remember buying Kruggerands back then. Conservatively,on an inflation basis, gold can go to 2000. However, markets tend to overshoot and gold probably will hit a much higher high. Also, if I am correct and we're in the midst of a secular bear market that has a minimal 8 years to run,you might want to look at a chart of a dow/gold ratio. Usually at the bottom of a bear market the dow/gold ratio will ultimately reach a low level of 4/1 or even lower. At one point in history I believe it was 1/1. If you do the math, the gold price has a lot further to run or the dow has a lot further to drop or it could be a combination of both. Just one of the interesting charts I constantly watch.

"Government and the mainstream press is hiding it from the public." - Ray

Of course they are. There, there, don't get upset. They always do that. Hell, they are concealing what _really_ happend on 9/11/01 and with the moon landing, so it is in their nature. Also that they are being controlled by the hidden world government. Talk to JeffnD. He'll give you all the details.

"The gold standard forces politicians to live within a budget. They hate it.
Gold provides a standard measurement of value. Fiat money changes value in direct proportion to its expanding supply." - Ray

The gold standard can't handle problems. It can't deal with a world-wide economy not international trade. It requires a static economy and a static population. Let us know your thoughts on population control.

"gold probably will hit a much higher high...." - Matsop

I'd bet it won't even come near.


"Just one of the interesting charts I constantly watch."

It's good to watch charts. Many of the companies I worked for and with did that. Won't comment on the accuracy of their conclusions.

Btw, I made quite a bit of money speculating on gold back then. So did friends of mine. Unfortunetly, some didn't get out in time.

Ailtd, aaah diamonds. You mentioned there is a scarcity of gold . Diamonds have the opposite problem. There is a ton of diamonds. I tried to convince my bride to have a precious stone (sapphire) in place of a diamond since on a supply/demand and scarcity issue diamonds are worthless. It's a contrived market by De Beers. Like gold, precious gems are relatively scarce. Can you imagine if countries went on a "diamond standard"? It would give central bankers a chance to print even more money and put us behind the eight ball in the pocket.

#176 | Posted by AILtd
I could point to sources that used government's own statistics they are lying about the recovery. But you rather connect me to JeffnD.

#177 | Posted by AILtd
If you say so Mr. Group Thinker.

Let us know your thoughts on population control.

I have none. War, poverty and pestilence have worked in the past.

Ailtd, when gold hits "a much higher high" I'll gently remind you of our friendly wager. This next run won't take us there, however, I'm talking about a time framework of 5-8 years.

#180 | Posted by Ray

So much whizzes over your head. Still, an overheated brain does require much ventilation.

"Ailtd, when gold hits "a much higher high" I'll gently remind you of our friendly wager." - Matsop

As long as you merely "remind" me. Leave the crowing and the victory dance to Ray. We'll probably be in a water shortage by then.

Honestly, isn't it a bit ridiculous to NOW be upset about an 11 trillion dollar debt, when you weren't upset at the 10 trillion accrued before Obama took office?

Watching people become hysterical about adding 700 million for healthcare for AMERICANS over 10 years, while not batting an eye at 10 trillion for tax breaks for the richest 1%, 2 nationbuilding invasions/occupations that cannot end, and allowing banks, utilities and corporations to do as they pleased for nearly 4 decades, and especially the last 8 years is pretty damned disengenuous and transparently partisan imo.

Woke based on your ignorant posts, I can tell you are a complete fucking idiot.

Have a good day.

I am and still thinking freely, thanks very much, Slick.

Having a good day, that is....

"Like I said in the previous paragraph, the debt pyramid scheme went too far. Now we're fucked no matter what we do."

I think this is the part of Ray's theories I find most pompous and arrogant. America has been presented with circumstances before and there were "Rays" telling us that "no matter what we do we're fucked." They have always been wrong. We have always not only survived but prospered. We are going through trying times right now but it isn't exactly rocket science to figure out why. We had a certain political party who told us that it was their goal to "starve the beast" in order to prevent the other party from creating any more programs, like helth care reform or social security. If we focus on reversing the steps they took trying to "starve this beast" we will quickly find out that this beast can easily be revived. We need to never ever let those people gain power again. They are the biggest flag wavers and they proudly tell you how much they love America but they forget that to love America it also requires that you love Americans, all American, not just a selected elite.

Danni

You keep dreaming. This time is different; it's the final act of a hundred years of deficit spending. Every time I show you the math, you ignore it. It even goes beyond ethics. The Washington establishment has no sense of ethics. They're going to continue stealing from the general public until there is nothing left to steal. That's why I keep all of my savings in silver and gold. Trust no institution.

Sounds like Ray is promoting the "global warming" theory of our debt.

Interesting that he wasn't taking to the streets while 10 trillion debt was accrued during the last few decades, especially the nearly 5 trillion in the last 8 years, but is becoming hysterically defeatist about it, now that Obama is potus. 10 trillion for foreign wars and tax breaks for the rich? >>No problem. But 700 million for Americans to all have healthcare....NO WAY!!

No partisanship there, eh?

What's your suggestion Ray. Go back to the neocon policies that created the 10 TRILLION? Give up entirely? Take over the govt? Impeach obama? He didn't create this mess, he inherited it.

Do tell us what we should do. What is your plan Ray?

Danni, I'm afraid Ray is onto something. Our debt (through excessive money creation) is now so large as a percentage of GDP that just paying back the interest will take years and billions. And if you add more debt we are indeed screwed-- and with the unemployment climbing and no new jobs being created these problems aren't your garden variety "we have always not only survived but prospered".

MATSOP what I think you and Ray both fail to notice is that the rest of the world depends on our economy being successful. Few countries would be better off if our economy was destroyed. Interdependence is our guarantee that your scenarios of destruction will not materialize.
Be aware that you echo theories which are not new, which have been around for, at least, a century.
Sorry, your scenarios of economic disaster are about as realistic as the beliefs of some who believe we will be visited soon by a second coming of Jesus. While you and Ray are devising your silly theories others are busy actually selling the properties that were overvalued in the latest banking scandal. The real world will continue on, some will get rich, some will become poor, but be assured, it will continue on and your theories are just the rantings of the eccentric.

Danni, I don't think I said anything about economic disaster---just that the future is going to be very difficult based on adebt levels we have never experienced before. We're now at the beginning of a deleveraging era that just doesn't take a couple of years and then back to normal. Historically, there has never been a country that has accumulated the kind of debt we have and not had significant pain in resolving the issue-- if Ray and my theories are silly then obviously you haven't been reading the writings of some of the main economists--not that they have been particulary prescient (look it up) in the past.

Ailtd, true there were recessions on the gold standard but to the best of my knowledge not the severe downturn of the great depression and the coming problems that are emerging now. If memory serves me right the recessions on the gold standard were mostly short periods of time. Also if memory serves me right, up until 1913, the people of this country (about nine times) rejected the notion of a central bank. Thomas Jefferson was right when he warned that money (fiat) not backed by some instrument would ultimately enslave a community and take away the liberties of those in said community-- unfortunately, my feelings are that we're on our way.

#157 | Posted by matsop

wrong..

There are six depressions in American history that are thought to be the worst since detailed records of economic data started to be kept (around 1867), 1873-79, 1893-97 (actually two contractions separated by an incomplete expansion), 1907-08, 1920-21, 1929-33, and 1937-38. Although depressions vary on length and severity, the similarities are so profound that Nobel Laureate Robert Lucas has stated, "business cycles are all alike." Since it's been about 60 years since we've had a depression, one might think that the economy is being managed better than it used to be. It's not clear why the economy is being managed better. The Federal Reserve Board was created in 1913 and yet half of the worst depressions happened after its creation. A better candidate might be the adoption of Keynesian management techniques, which were not fully implemented until after the last severe contraction in 1937. But there are some indicators that that is not responsible either. Detailed studies have been done to compare post-war business cycles with prior ones. At least one indicates that there was no improvement.

Danni, I'm afraid Ray is onto something. Our debt (through excessive money creation) is now so large as a percentage of GDP that just paying back the interest will take years and billions. And if you add more debt we are indeed screwed-- and with the unemployment climbing and no new jobs being created these problems aren't your garden variety "we have always not only survived but prospered".

#191 | Posted by matsop

you are missing the point.. this "debt" will be paid back pennies on the dollar once our currency is devalued.

Put you money into Norwegian Kroners.

What's your suggestion Ray. Go back to the neocon policies that created the 10 TRILLION? Give up entirely? Take over the govt? Impeach obama? He didn't create this mess, he inherited it.

$10 Trillion? That's what they tell the public. It's no where close. Counting bonded and unfunded debt, it's well over $100 Trillion. The derivative market is over a quadrillion dollars.

Do tell us what we should do. What is your plan Ray?
#190 | Posted by woke

Get your money out of the system into gold and silver where they can't get it.

No partisanship there, eh?

The whole political system is totally corrupt.

Sounds like Ray is promoting the "global warming" theory of our debt.

I know it sounds crazy. Parodixically, foreigners see it better than Americans. They're slowly pulling their money out. The dollar and gold is your barometer.

Legio, bingo!-- you're absolutely right---"inflate or die"-- there probably are no other alternatives-- the Chinese know it and are figuring out what to do with all our money. I love it when administration officials come out stating their belief in a strong dollar policy-- if you notice, those statements no longer move our currency at all. The dollar will continue to depreciate.

Legio, also the Australian and canadian dollars since they're resource rich.

Ray, if there is any ray of light it's the quatrillion derivative position--that's the notional value and one only hopes they can inflate this economy fast enough so as to decrease the at risk portion whatever that amount is.

I know it sounds crazy.

#196 | POSTED BY RAY AT 2009-10-18 10:31 PM


Yes, it does. Two questions for you Ray.


1. Why do you suppose that only since a dem was elected potus that you suddenly "woke" up to a debt senario, that was already 10 trillion when Obama took office?

2. Why do you hate our govt so that you are willing to have it destroyed rather than support a dem to run it?


You are being DUPED by rw neocons whose pathetic policies FAILED miserably.

time you woke too

You "gold standard" fellas ought to go back and ask yourselves why NIXON took us off the system for good.

After the Second World War, a system similar to a Gold Standard was established by the Bretton Woods Agreements. Under this system, many countries fixed their exchange rates relative to the U.S. dollar. The U.S. promised to fix the price of gold at $35 per ounce. Implicitly, then, all currencies pegged to the dollar also had a fixed value in terms of gold. Under the regime of the French President Charles de Gaulle up to 1970, France reduced its dollar reserves, trading them for gold from the U.S. government, thereby reducing U.S. economic influence abroad. This, along with the fiscal strain of federal expenditures for the Vietnam War, led President Richard Nixon to eliminate the fixed gold price in 1971, causing the system to break down.

wiki

Woke

You are asking leading questions when you know nothing about me. I started voting as a Goldwater Republican. I stopped voting when Reagan proved to be a fraud.

I've held a Jeffersonian minimum government philosophy since I was a teen before you were born. It was from that basic mistrust that I've studied the nature of government in more detail than most. So I can say with confidence, that our government is a criminal institution with no moral conscience. It operates by means of fraud, coercion and force. As one should expect, it attracts psychopathic personalities.

No one knows how the course of events will end with the fall of American empire. But I can assure, at this stage, our fate is sealed. It is you who are being duped by criminals who know how to manipulate the masses for the sake of power.

Ray, if there is any ray of light it's the quatrillion derivative position--that's the notional value and one only hopes they can inflate this economy fast enough so as to decrease the at risk portion whatever that amount is.
#199 | Posted by matsop

That's impossible. As the imbalances worsen, the notional amount grows. I rounded off at one quadrillion. Its much higher now.

Their margin of error is so small that they almost couldn't contain it when Lehman Brothers, Bear Sterns and AIG blew up.

I started voting as a Goldwater Republican. I stopped voting when Reagan proved to be a fraud.

#202 | POSTED BY RAY AT 2009-10-19 08:12 AM


I also started voting as a Goldwater repug, but woke up in 1969 in a jungle.

I didn't give up or stop voting or believing in our govt.

Apparently, that is the major difference between us.


I still have faith that the US Constitution and the govt it provides is the best in the world and can be made better since it''s a work in progress and that work must be done BY, OF, and FOR the PEOPLE.

No one knows how the course of events will end with the fall of American empire. But I can assure, at this stage, our fate is sealed.

#202 | POSTED BY RAY AT 2009-10-19 08:12 AM


Nobody knows.

But YOU know?


O, ye of little faith, eh?

We don't disagree on as much as we agree on and i believe that is true of nearly ALL Americans, despite political stripes, however, I'm not ready to give up yet.

Post a comment
Comments are closed for this entry.
Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | Copyright 2009 World Readable