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.
This consolidation of power to those closest to the production of money comes straight from the Council on Foreign Relations. These occupy movements need to focus in on them too with their headquarters being in NYC.
Did anybody read this?! Anyone? You want an economic lesson, read this. Why do people gloss over posts like this one...people ask a question, here's a damn fine answer and....crickets? Really?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
You're not in recession, and the economy has already recovered.
And what's wrong with that?
This is the way it was alwayssupposed to be.
You interfered, politically, economically, financially, militarily, socially and culturally with the course of human events to influence them to your favor so that you could gain an unfair advantage.
Now, you neither have the power nor the ability to continually interfere, and so everything is moving back to the way it was alwayssupposed to be before you started interfering.
Yeah, so? What is wrong with that? Nothing.
The Laws of Economics are inviolable. I cannot violate them, and neither can you nor any government nor any group of people nor any god-thing.
You can only bend the laws and attempt to violate them for a brief period, before the Laws force a correction. That's the beauty of Economics and why I love it so much. It is self-correcting, just like Science, but where Science needs men to realize they've made a grotesque error, like claiming it is impossible for there to be mountains on the Antarctic continent, or that there was a "Land Bridge" for people to cross into the Americas, or that benzene-rings are not at all harmful to humans, Economics does it all by itself, and no one can stop it or prevent it from happening.
The reason there are foreclosures is because those people were never supposed to ever be in their own home. You turned a blind eye while the government and other groups, and even the very people being foreclosed upon, violated the Laws of Economics and tried to force those people into a home that they never should have had in the first place.
And now, Economics is simply correcting everyone's sins.
Those people were taken advantage of by evil banks? Then why aren't they filing legal malpractice lawsuits? Their real estate lawyers should have advised them that the loans were bad.
They didn't pay a real estate attorney to review the loan documents? Why, because they couldn't afford one? If you can't afford a real estate attorney, then that is the first clue that you cannot afford your own home. When you can afford to pay a real estate attorney, then you can think about actually buying a home. That's their fault, and they should bear the burden for their stupidity.
They didn't know they were supposed to consult with a real estate lawyer? Then that is the first clue that they are financially immature and not mature enough to handle their own home. That's why there are public libraries; to educate yourself about something so that you are no longer ignorant and in the dark.
A real estate attorney is a neutral 3rd Party. They don't give a damn if you buy the house or not, they only care if you're about to be screwed over for whatever reason, since you are paying the measly $75 or $150 or $250 consultation fee for them to protect you.
If they had put 20% to 50% down on the home, like every single Middle Class generation before them, then their monthly mortgage payments would have been more manageable, and they wouldn't be paying $300,000 in interest on a home that is now valued at $115,000.
And if they had practiced sound financial sense, like the vast majority of people in very single Middle Class generation before them, they would have had 6 months of mortgage payments sitting in the bank, along with 6 months worth of electric, natural gas, cable, cell-phone, credit card, car payments, car insurance and grocery bills, which would have allowed them to weather the storm better.
Of course, that's the real problem, isn't it?
You're in a consumption driven economy. It's either consume or lose your job, except that ends up with you having to spend every penny you make (so you can't save any money), and then spend $Thousands you don't have borrowing against your credit cards, and then even that fails, so you end up refinancing your home in order to roll all of the credit card debt you never should have had to begin with into the mortgage.
And your Consumption Economy is over-laid with a FIRE Economy. Switzerland with a population of 7 Million can have a FIRE Economy and be successful. The US with a population of 308 Million cannot. It's just that simple.
You were always doomed, and it was always a matter of when, not if.
Maybe you can try to explain that to the OWS crowd.
One of the criticisms of the central bank (the Federal Reserve) is that it moved way too late to inject liquidity into failing banks. When it finally acted, it was too little; too late. Had the central bank acted promptly, understand it would not have prevented the Great Depression, but it would have lessened the severity.
People were dying to start businesses or expand existing businesses, but couldn't because the banks had no money to loan, or in those areas of the country that were not affected by the Great Depression, the banks were deathly afraid of panics and runs, and didn't want to loan out what little money they had.
But of course. Those are consumer driven enterprises that thrive almost entirely on disposable income. So long as people have disposable income, those sectors of the economy fair well. If not, then they suffer.
If you drank the Kool-Aid, then you know where you can find "sympathy" in the dictionary.
You have recovered. Your job market will remain soft until you elect leadership to your government at all levels, and even if you could manage to do that (you cannot -- it is not in your nature) it will never be the same. Not ever.
It ended long ago.
Well, there you go.
There you go, again.
It doesn't really depend on who you ask.
The moronic idiots at NBER define recovery as two quarters of positive GDP (but only when it is politically convenient for them to do so).
Most traditional economists define recovery as exceeding the benchmark for two consecutive quarters (I define it as exceeding the benchmark for 4 consecutive quarters).
Your GDP decreased a measly $500 Billion then increased to its original (benchmark) point and then has increased for 4 consecutive quarters.
Your economy has recovered from recession, although it is still recessionary (and will remain so through the end of the decade).
If you have Real Inflation, then your wages rise. There's nothing you nor anyone else can do about it. That's right, your wages rise even if you don't want them to rise, even if your employer doesn't want them to rise. If you have Real Inflation of 35% then your wages increase 35%. If Real Inflation is 100%, then your wages increase 100%.
That is the nature of Real Inflation. In other words, it is impossible to have Real Inflation and wages not rise.
You do not have Real Inflation, at least not yet (but you will in about 12-13 years).
What you are describing is Cost Inflation. Cost Inflation has nothing to do with the Federal Reserve and everything to do with you. Cost Inflation occurs when demand for anything exceeds the supply, or when the supply declines and demand remains constant or increases.
If you want food, health care, education and "energy" prices to stop rising, then there is a very simple solution:
STOP CONSUMING THEM.
I would say increase production to increase supply, but at this stage of the game, that would end up increasing prices.
If you want cheaper food prices, stop putting corn in your gas tank and in the beverages you drink (that you don't need to be drinking).
That would help tremendously.
So? Whose fault is that? That is the fault of ignorant immature home-owners who should not be living in those homes anyway, because they are way too immature.
Every county in the US (and there are thousands) have different policies, but in very general terms, like Hamilton County, Ohio as an example, your property's value is assessed every 6 years. That means you will continue to pay on the value of the home as it was assessed for a period of 6 years.
Now, there is animal, a strange one indeed, called "the public library" and if you go there, the very fine staff at the public library will guide you to the government section where you can read and review the rules regarding the assessment of property taxes, and you can file a petition for a review so that the value of your home is correctly assessed and you pay the correct tax.
Or, you can just pick up the telephone and call your real estate attorney, and s/he will take care of it for you.
Of course, you have to be financially mature enough and have the common sense to retain or consult with a real estate attorney before you buy the home.
Did I not previously mention the tremendous value of real estate attorney's?
It costs money to hire a real estate attorney? Would you spend $150 to avoid spending $15,000 or to save $15,000?
I would.
Dude, real estate attorney.
That's funny, because it was "normal" in the 1950s and you all think that was just a peachy time for Americans in the US.
Elect who you want. It matters not. Your fate is sealed and no president can change it.
I could not have said it better.
This grotesque stupidity all started with the 1992 Election when the Media frothed about the economy, and Americans drank the Kool-Aid and became convinced that a president actually could do something.
Government can influence the economy at best, and nothing more. And of course I'm talking about a government in a country that uses Capitalist property theory combined with the Free Market System.
Naturally, the government could nationalize all industries and switch to a Command Economic System, and you'd all be in a living hell, but we're assuming hypothetically that won't happen.
The way government can influence an economy is through regulation and taxation, and also through monetary and fiscal policies.
Regulations are not inherently bad or evil. They are only that when regulations force business, industry and persons to pay to comply. Regulations that do not cost money for compliance generally have a negligible effect (but they might also hinder).
Taxation can strip consumers at all levels (home, business and industry) of disposable income or income in general which reduces or limits economic transactions between all consumers at all levels.
And then of course, government policies. Forcing banks to loan money under penalty of legal action to people who should never be allowed to touch or even look at a credit card just so you can say that home ownership increased under your administration is a stupid policy.
That's true.
I don't fault Obama for what has happened, but I do fault him for failing to exhibit even one iota of leadership, and for failing to take actions to address issues.
He has demonstrated a total lack of foresight, being focused on the "here and now" for political reasons, mostly to satiate his own ego, instead of developing a long term plan for the future.
That's right. And the Upper Class cannot be blamed if the Middle Class acts stupidly with their money.
The best you can do for now and through the end of the decade is stabilize the ship so that tug boat can take it in tow.
That won't work. It's a different world. If you did that, then you would also have to accept a 1940s life-style, which would be a life-style sans laptops, Wi-Fi, cell-phones, Plasma TVs and everything else you know and love.
Economics is not pure. No society is free of all regulation, geographic limitations, cultural influences, and the wishes of the people who live there. I do not hold vacuous economic theory as a religion-like theory of the way the world was created.
Economics work within political, societal, and capital structures. The problem we face with globalization has a lot to do with diverse governmental/capital structures as well as differing beliefs on what those countries want for their people. These issues are coming to a head in Europe and will continue to create great tension as many of the differing beliefs cannot be easily reconciled.
The future may result in groupings of countries with common beliefs and philosophies largely trading with each other while trade between incompatible countries my be limited to commodities used for monetary exchange.
The other possible outcome is a major world war which I hope never comes to be.
This consolidation of power to those closest to the production of money comes straight from the Council on Foreign Relations. These occupy movements need to focus in on them too with their headquarters being in NYC.
ahhhh . . . go to the root(s) of the problem?
You have to have some real high level, big picture thinking to get that.
Once you, or the kids, or whomever, starts looking at the folks and directors behind the curtain . . . that will get some real "negative attention."
I do not blame the kids for missing the target. Most folks do not even know CFR, etc., exist -- let alone comprehend who and what they are.
These are a lot of collegy type kids, and CFR has been intentionally embedded all through academia -- just for intentional mis-education.
These kids have a way to go...getting a bank branch manager upset because you sit in their lobby is not going to change a damn thing.
Sure. This is just early in the game.
Pawns bumping into pawns, as it were.
Interesting part coming up will be if the actual real world Tea Party folks and the Occupy Kids will manage to figure out they have a set of common enemies?
So far the T.P. folks still seem enthralled with the Kochs and the Corporate con games.
Interesting part coming up will be if the actual real world Tea Party folks and the Occupy Kids will manage to figure out they have a set of common enemies?
So far the T.P. folks still seem enthralled with the Kochs and the Corporate con games.
why is it significant that they may have some of the same enemies? the occupy folks have the wrong solutions. the tea party has politicial power, the occupy kids have nothing. but it goes to show how pathetic the democratic party is today and how useless obama is that they seem to be depending on the occupy children to motivate voters to give obama another term. not gonna happen.
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.
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.
