If the bailout isn't passed, unemployment might be in the double digits. (credit, buying)

[Bideshi]

Originally Posted by bentlebee

Some economist have stated that if no bill will pass, the economy will restore it self, starting within the next 6 months...so please no bail!

In the end, this is just a way for them to take the hard earned money from our pocket and put it into theirs.

[gwynedd1]

Originally Posted by goodbyehollywood

This is a wretched economy, but the media is driving expectations and sentiment with a negative bias. Unemployment is likely to hit double digits, stimulus or no stimulus, as companies continue to cut costs and shed workers hired during the boom cycle upstaffing. The party's over, the punch bowl's empty and excesses are being purged. And the stimulus bill is going to do nothing to stop that.

Hi goodbyehollywood,

There is simply no reason to accept these cycles as simply the way it is. Cycles have a cause. What is the cause of these economic cycles? The moon causes tides and the seasons cause a change in temperature but are all explainable. Strangely in economics it just goes up and down. The tropics do not tend to have these extreme cycles because they do not have the cause. The reason economics has booms and busts is because of, typically, monetary manipulation that has been documented for 100s of years.

Busts follow booms. Markets revert to the mean.

Even regression has cause. Condor populations certainly have a natural level but we cannot expect regression to remove lead from the environment. Someone who noticed populations going up and did not know about removing the lead would simply call it regression. However we know. When anyone accepts the mean in statistics class, it means you don't have a clue. I do know the cause, and its monetary manipulation. We allow banks to grow the money supply with fractional reserves which becomes fuel for booms and busts.

Many of our financial institutions are insolvent, and we have only seen a fraction of how insolvent they really are. Homeowners made poor decisions. Banks made bad loans.

If people make bad loans in a full reserve system then anyone not involved in these transactions would be unaffected. In that case, person A or person B has the money. With what we are doing now is money is retired as debt disappears and all people are affected by the disappearance of money.

People have racked up unpayable debt living beyond their means. Not all of these problems are fixable. People, banks and companies are going to have to fail-- just like they always have. It will be painful, but there isn't enough money to save them all, and the longer we try, the worse off we're going to be. How many trillions is it going to take to realize that? Can we learn nothing from Japan?

We have to create debt. Its impossible to get out of debt as a society because all money is debt. We could have monetized sea shells, rocks, pizza, goats, cattle, what ever, but in this society we have monetized debt. If you monetize pizza, what happens when you eat it? A depression must occur after the pizza party. It means we need more pizza than we would normally need to eat. Since we have monetized debt, less of it means a depression. If I live in a boat house I go up and down with the waves. Do houses on dry land do the same? We go up and down in boom and bust because we grow the money supply with debt backed by durable assets. This drives up the price of durable assets which in turn serves to create even more money to drive it up further. Thats the boom bust cycled engineered by money as debt.

The lesson form Japan is not what most people think it is. Japan's public debt isn't debt, its the money. Without a large Japanese public debt there would be few Yen since Japanese do not take on personal debt. They have the same idiotic system we do but they did not take the debt bait. So to grow the money supply, public debt was all there was. Even with this, Japan is better off with a huge public debt. If 1 trillion in M2 existed and 500 billion was public debt silly brain washed Americans would consider it a blessing to rather have 1 trillion in money supply and only 100 billion in public debt. The problem is that would mean 900 billion is private debt all at interest to a bank. Since this represents the entire principle the only way to pay the interest is more debt.

Only two things are going to help long-term: getting past it and moving on. So wouldn't it be nice if we could do that ASAP and stop squandering trillions on artificial stimulants and pointless pork that will only bleed taxpayers dry while prolonging the inevitable?

We don't have a debt problem; we have a money problem. We have monetized debt so we must have it. If you monetize garbage no matter how bad it is you cannot haul it away. You can try to kill the rats and put up with the stench but we need the trash when we decide to use it as money. The same goes with debt. So long as your salary is paid and contracted and expanded by mortgages and car loans, its pointless. Until we reform the money system to not use money as debt instruments, tax payers will be bled for nothing. We will perpetually have debt and boom bust cycles over and over again because the financial system has designed it that way against the public interest and for the interest of usury.

In this system the solution is simple. Simply replace the contracting private credit with public credit. To do this with without wealth transfer or central planning simply cut taxes which will grow public debt(the money) to counter the shrinking public credit. If inflation returns , raise taxes. Most of all, we need to replace federal reserve notes with treasury notes and stop calling it debt. Its our money. Then we need to go to full reserve banking and not allow the money supply to grow with debt.

[cdelena]

The current spending bill being debated spends most in the areas where employment is the best... education, health care, and government. It is only the trickle down from these well funded areas that will help elsewhere.

Better targeting of spending to aid manufacturing, construction, and hard to fund infrastructure projects would make more sense. Balancing spending with tax rate cuts for industry would prompt job creation.

I would not vote for the bill in it's current form as I think it hurts more than helps. Changes in the employment rate will not be substantially changed by the bill as proposed.

[hindsight2020]

Originally Posted by gwynedd1

Hi goodbyehollywood,

There is simply no reason to accept these cycles as simply the way it is. Cycles have a cause. What is the cause of these economic cycles? The moon causes tides and the seasons cause a change in temperature but are all explainable. Strangely in economics it just goes up and down. The tropics do not tend to have these extreme cycles because they do not have the cause. The reason economics has booms and busts is because of, typically, monetary manipulation that has been documented for 100s of years.

Even regression has cause. Condor populations certainly have a natural level but we cannot expect regression to remove lead from the environment. Someone who noticed populations going up and did not know about removing the lead would simply call it regression. However we know. When anyone accepts the mean in statistics class, it means you don't have a clue. I do know the cause, and its monetary manipulation. We allow banks to grow the money supply with fractional reserves which becomes fuel for booms and busts.

If people make bad loans in a full reserve system then anyone not involved in these transactions would be unaffected. In that case, person A or person B has the money. With what we are doing now is money is retired as debt disappears and all people are affected by the disappearance of money.


We have to create debt. Its impossible to get out of debt as a society because all money is debt. We could have monetized sea shells, rocks, pizza, goats, cattle, what ever, but in this society we have monetized debt. If you monetize pizza, what happens when you eat it? A depression must occur after the pizza party. It means we need more pizza than we would normally need to eat. Since we have monetized debt, less of it means a depression. If I live in a boat house I go up and down with the waves. Do houses on dry land do the same? We go up and down in boom and bust because we grow the money supply with debt backed by durable assets. This drives up the price of durable assets which in turn serves to create even more money to drive it up further. Thats the boom bust cycled engineered by money as debt.

The lesson form Japan is not what most people think it is. Japan's public debt isn't debt, its the money. Without a large Japanese public debt there would be few Yen since Japanese do not take on personal debt. They have the same idiotic system we do but they did not take the debt bait. So to grow the money supply, public debt was all there was. Even with this, Japan is better off with a huge public debt. If 1 trillion in M2 existed and 500 billion was public debt silly brain washed Americans would consider it a blessing to rather have 1 trillion in money supply and only 100 billion in public debt. The problem is that would mean 900 billion is private debt all at interest to a bank. Since this represents the entire principle the only way to pay the interest is more debt.





We don't have a debt problem; we have a money problem. We have monetized debt so we must have it. If you monetize garbage no matter how bad it is you cannot haul it away. You can try to kill the rats and put up with the stench but we need the trash when we decide to use it as money. The same goes with debt. So long as your salary is paid and contracted and expanded by mortgages and car loans, its pointless. Until we reform the money system to not use money as debt instruments, tax payers will be bled for nothing. We will perpetually have debt and boom bust cycles over and over again because the financial system has designed it that way against the public interest and for the interest of usury.

In this system the solution is simple. Simply replace the contracting private credit with public credit. To do this with without wealth transfer or central planning simply cut taxes which will grow public debt(the money) to counter the shrinking public credit. If inflation returns , raise taxes. Most of all, we need to replace federal reserve notes with treasury notes and stop calling it debt. Its our money. Then we need to go to full reserve banking and not allow the money supply to grow with debt.

BINGO! Correct in all counts. If we could only have those in power understand this!!

I don't mean to be facetious, but why is it that the answer to this huge debacle can be consolidated into ONE post in some anonymous message board but we can't get the government with thousands of "consultants" and people who think they're smarter than they are, agree on anything remotely as useful as the answer deliniated above? Seriously....oh that's right, private interests prevail. This aforementioned solution would screw a lot of people up there in the control-by-usury department. Not good for their bottom line. Noted.

[mjohnson4381]

Great post, gwynedd.

[Icy Tea]

Washington helped create the mess and now wants us to get behind them and let them fix it. I hope people aren't that dense.

[70Ford]

Originally Posted by gwynedd1

Hi goodbyehollywood,

There is simply no reason to accept these cycles as simply the way it is. Cycles have a cause. What is the cause of these economic cycles? The moon causes tides and the seasons cause a change in temperature but are all explainable. Strangely in economics it just goes up and down. The tropics do not tend to have these extreme cycles because they do not have the cause. The reason economics has booms and busts is because of, typically, monetary manipulation that has been documented for 100s of years.

Even regression has cause. Condor populations certainly have a natural level but we cannot expect regression to remove lead from the environment. Someone who noticed populations going up and did not know about removing the lead would simply call it regression. However we know. When anyone accepts the mean in statistics class, it means you don't have a clue. I do know the cause, and its monetary manipulation. We allow banks to grow the money supply with fractional reserves which becomes fuel for booms and busts.

If people make bad loans in a full reserve system then anyone not involved in these transactions would be unaffected. In that case, person A or person B has the money. With what we are doing now is money is retired as debt disappears and all people are affected by the disappearance of money.


We have to create debt. Its impossible to get out of debt as a society because all money is debt. We could have monetized sea shells, rocks, pizza, goats, cattle, what ever, but in this society we have monetized debt. If you monetize pizza, what happens when you eat it? A depression must occur after the pizza party. It means we need more pizza than we would normally need to eat. Since we have monetized debt, less of it means a depression. If I live in a boat house I go up and down with the waves. Do houses on dry land do the same? We go up and down in boom and bust because we grow the money supply with debt backed by durable assets. This drives up the price of durable assets which in turn serves to create even more money to drive it up further. Thats the boom bust cycled engineered by money as debt.

The lesson form Japan is not what most people think it is. Japan's public debt isn't debt, its the money. Without a large Japanese public debt there would be few Yen since Japanese do not take on personal debt. They have the same idiotic system we do but they did not take the debt bait. So to grow the money supply, public debt was all there was. Even with this, Japan is better off with a huge public debt. If 1 trillion in M2 existed and 500 billion was public debt silly brain washed Americans would consider it a blessing to rather have 1 trillion in money supply and only 100 billion in public debt. The problem is that would mean 900 billion is private debt all at interest to a bank. Since this represents the entire principle the only way to pay the interest is more debt.





We don't have a debt problem; we have a money problem. We have monetized debt so we must have it. If you monetize garbage no matter how bad it is you cannot haul it away. You can try to kill the rats and put up with the stench but we need the trash when we decide to use it as money. The same goes with debt. So long as your salary is paid and contracted and expanded by mortgages and car loans, its pointless. Until we reform the money system to not use money as debt instruments, tax payers will be bled for nothing. We will perpetually have debt and boom bust cycles over and over again because the financial system has designed it that way against the public interest and for the interest of usury.

In this system the solution is simple. Simply replace the contracting private credit with public credit. To do this with without wealth transfer or central planning simply cut taxes which will grow public debt(the money) to counter the shrinking public credit. If inflation returns , raise taxes. Most of all, we need to replace federal reserve notes with treasury notes and stop calling it debt. Its our money. Then we need to go to full reserve banking and not allow the money supply to grow with debt.

Lead ammunition makes condor populations go....down.

[texdav]

I thnik stimulus or not it will get into double digiteds. The best estimates put the stimulus as making a 1-1/2 % difference in the next two years. That is not much considering the moeny being spent and the future danger of inflartion from it and the fact that it well have to be paid back with interest for decades.That means higher taxes and fees in the future for evryone that works.

[Woof Woof Woof!]

Originally Posted by gwynedd1

If you monetize pizza, what happens when you eat it? A depression must occur after the pizza party.

I think I liked Goodbye's "the party is over, the punch bowl is empty" analogy better. It just had a little more ring to it or something.



# # #

[Philip T]

Originally Posted by luzianne

It's just a tactic to make us "okay" with ridiculous bailouts. Ronald Reagan said you can't spend your way out of a recession. He warned against the very thing that is happening now.

Sad comedy of that, spending and debt is what Reagonomics turned out to be. Go back and look at the debt growth numbers and you can see it was all a lie. He just made it tolerable to most by saying it was not so.

What the government doing is not going to help, and it's funding all their agendas that they wanted to tax us for anyway. They are thrilled that with the scare of economic downturn people are going to be more willing to accept it.

No tax boogie man in this -- they are mostly just running open loop. Pretty much Reagonomics all over again. Just spend and debt.

I do not really care about this silly political myth or any other -- just ironing out the bs of the topic.

This is much more a math and method problem, as gwynedd1 has described around here for months. Exponential Debt attempting to fund Exponential Growth is always going to crash in a real world. But to run without the debt, we would have to "kill off" the Banker Class. Good luck on that. So deeper in debt shall we sink.