U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-26-2010, 03:02 PM
 
Location: Planet Eaarth
8,957 posts, read 17,005,188 times
Reputation: 7193

Advertisements

It just doesn't get any better than this.....

"In fact, most Americans still do not understand how horrific this financial crisis really is. Unfortunately most Americans will probably not wake up until a complete and total economic collapse happens, and by then it will be too late."

The National Debt Of The United States

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/a...infrastructure
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-26-2010, 04:29 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,093 posts, read 69,893,919 times
Reputation: 27519
I think the smart one do. TIPS went into negative territory with a $10 billion 5 year auction.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2010, 05:29 PM
 
64,629 posts, read 66,129,695 times
Reputation: 43046
they only went negative because the future outlook is things are going to pick up off in the future and inflation will pick up. they were willing to take a little hit in the near future for bigger rewards later on. quite the opposite of what you were trying to convey.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2010, 06:29 PM
 
8,268 posts, read 10,377,187 times
Reputation: 4748
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
quite the opposite of what you were trying to convey.
Or had a grasp of.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2010, 07:30 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,476 posts, read 16,972,235 times
Reputation: 4304
Not to mention inflation would make the debt burden less....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-27-2010, 02:52 AM
 
64,629 posts, read 66,129,695 times
Reputation: 43046
i have to think about that ..normally inflation makes debts smaller in dollar terms but in our case we arent really paying down the debt just carrying it at higher and higher interest rates as interest rates rise ... i got to be honest im not really sure of the answer on this one.

poking around the internet found this summary from the danske research team.

The conclusion of our model scenarios are that higher inflation rates initially will imply a lower debt to GDP ratio. However, in the longer run higher inflation rates will have a negative impact on the real economy with higher real interest rates and possible also lower real growth. Hence, in the longer run the debt to GDP ratio will actually increase which prompts the conclusion that higher inflation rates is not the solution for governments to reduce their debt to GDP ratios. Instead, governments should follow the traditional solution with economic reforms etc. to improve future growth rates in combination with fiscal austerity measures to reduce the government deficits.

my own view is ,beats the heck out of me i wont even try to guess on this.

Last edited by mathjak107; 10-27-2010 at 03:21 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-27-2010, 04:19 AM
 
Location: western East Roman Empire
6,112 posts, read 10,153,432 times
Reputation: 4850
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post

Quote:
The conclusion of our model scenarios are that higher inflation rates initially will imply a lower debt to GDP ratio. However, in the longer run higher inflation rates will have a negative impact on the real economy with higher real interest rates and possible also lower real growth. Hence, in the longer run the debt to GDP ratio will actually increase which prompts the conclusion that higher inflation rates is not the solution for governments to reduce their debt to GDP ratios. Instead, governments should follow the traditional solution with economic reforms etc. to improve future growth rates in combination with fiscal austerity measures to reduce the government deficits.
my own view is ,beats the heck out of me i wont even try to guess on this.
Interpretation: governments of the countries of early industrialization can continue to delude their populations by playing games with the money supply or they can measure real economic activity by its true relative value on a global scale, in a more or less protective environment, and adjust standards of living and consumption patterns accordingly.

It is not a question of government spending or not, it is a question of whether the actual people, by whatever name, deciding on the spending doing it productively and efficiently and in whose interest. It is a question of whether you trust these decision-makers, the ability to execute and, again, in whose interest.

Economic and investment diversification in today's world may also mean across jurisdictions, across bodies social and politic.

Good Luck!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-27-2010, 04:20 AM
 
64,629 posts, read 66,129,695 times
Reputation: 43046
HUH????????????? lol
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-27-2010, 04:31 AM
 
1,113 posts, read 1,889,436 times
Reputation: 824
Before Obama won the White House due to VOTERS BEING DISGUSTED with Republicans, here is what occured... according to Forbes Magazine:

Quote:
Clinton inherited a $290 billion deficit from George H.W. Bush. He reversed Bush's and Reagan's trickle down economic policies, raising taxes on the wealthy, and reducing them on the working and middle classes. He was able to reduce the deficit every single year of his presidency. By 1997, the government was running budgetary surpluses, the first since 1969. He delivered a $230 billion surplus in 2000.

Bush reversed Clinton's policies, lowering taxes on the very wealthy - his "base" as he called them - and effectively raising them on everyone else. In his first full year at the helm of the economy, he delivered a $157 billion deficit, and he never looked back. By 2004, the deficits were topping $400 billion a year. While Clinton delivered surpluses, Bush's deficits totaled some $3.7 trillion over his eight-year term. Clinton 6: Bush 0.

There is no subtlety, no ambiguity about the data or the economic performance they reveal. By every single measure, Bush's policies and tenure were worse - much worse - for the American economy and the American people than those pursued by Bill Clinton. And we are still living today in the aftermath of the destruction they have wrought.

We could add any number of other measures as well, measures not offered up by Forbes but which are still straightforward indices of economic performance. Clinton reduced poverty, from 15.1% when he took office to 11.3% when he left. Bush increased it, from 11.3% when he started to 12.5% at the end of 2008.

The stock market more than tripled under Clinton's tenure. The Dow went from 3,241 when he took office to 10,587 on the day he left. It actually declined under Bush's tenure, from 10,587 on the day he took office to 8,281 on the day he left. Between the recent stock market collapse and the housing crash, Bush destroyed more than $14 trillion in consumer wealth, a staggering, almost incomprehensible legacy of devastation that will haunt Americans for decades to come.


Bush voters owe 14 trillion. Pay up.

We'll call it a Personal Responsibility Shrub Was Stupid Tax
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-27-2010, 06:18 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,093 posts, read 69,893,919 times
Reputation: 27519
Quote:
Originally Posted by slackjaw View Post
Or had a grasp of.
I think I have a grasp.

Debt is growing. With QE2 the threat of inflation grows.
TIPS is running to the safety of government guarantee and hedging for future rising inflation.

Some folks look to next week and others look to next year.
Immediate market conditions and what's hot and what's not is following the herd. The smart money moves before the herd gets wind of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top