Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 06-07-2014, 10:54 AM
 
7,359 posts, read 5,463,530 times
Reputation: 3142

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks View Post
I understand that's what you need to tell yourself.
Uh, he's right. You being condescending when the other person is simply pointing out the truth just makes you look petty.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-07-2014, 11:30 AM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,468,904 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
Even though you are doing a lot of name calling, im going to try and be nice and explain this to you, because it is clear that you do not understand why you are wrong.

The length of a recession has nothing to do with how bad it is. The 2 things are not tied together.

GDP and business activity are not tied to length, nor is the stock market. Those entities could all fail in one quarter and cause a massive fall in the economy that only last 9 months, or it could systematically happen over 2 years and soften the blow to other industries causing a less steep fall in the economy.
Here, for the not so well informed...

Quote:
When commentators invoke 1929, I am dubious. According to most historians and economists, that depression had more to do with overlarge factory inventories, a stock-market crash, and Germany's inability to pay back war debts, which then led to continuing strain on British gold reserves. None of those factors is really an issue now.Contemporary industries have very sensitive controls for trimming production as consumption declines; our current stock-market dip followed bank problems that emerged more than a year ago; and there are no serious international problems with gold reserves, simply because banks no longer peg their lending to them.

In fact, the current economic woes look a lot like what my 96-year-old grandmother still calls "the real Great Depression." She pinched pennies in the 1930s, but she says that times were not nearly so bad as the depression her grandparents went through. That crash came in 1873 and lasted more than four years. It looks much more like our current crisis.
http://csinvesting.org/wp-content/up...3-and-2008.pdf

You'll have to read the rest because I don't have the time or the patience to teach you history. Ultimately the Panic of 1873 led to two world wars, the Soviet Union and communism, the rise of the Ku Klux Klan, the Federal Reserve along with too many other things to even go in to at this point.

Quote:
Southern blacks suffered greatly during the depression. Preoccupied with the harsh realities of falling farm prices, wage cuts, unemployment, and labor strikes, the North became less and less concerned with addressing racism in the South. White supremacist organizations like the Ku Klux Klan, which had been suppressed through punitive Reconstruction legislation starting in 1868, resumed their campaign of terror against blacks and Republicans. Violent conflicts erupted, including 1873's Colfax Massacre in Louisiana. By the time the depression lifted in 1879, southern whites would already be regaining power.
The Panic of 1873 . U.S. Grant: Warrior . WGBH American Experience | PBS

There is a reason why this was called the Gilded Age.

The major difference from that time and this one is that instead of capital flight away from America during the "Great Recession" capital flight was towards America in the "Panic of 1873."

America is now taking place of the British Empire of that time with its capital leaving, as the DNI 2025 Global Trends put it, at an "unprecedented" level.

Anyways, the economic turmoil of 2007 up until now is in no way nearly as bad as it was with the 1873 "Long Depression."

Last edited by BigJon3475; 06-07-2014 at 11:56 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2014, 12:01 PM
 
Location: Alameda, CA
7,605 posts, read 4,845,391 times
Reputation: 1438
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
Since the term "bubble" seems to escape you.
Economic bubble Definition - NASDAQ.com
I understand perfectly the term "bubble". I also understand the problem determining the "fundamental value of an asset".

None of which makes a bit of difference to the reality of what happens to the growth prospects of an economy if at one point people are behaving as if the have wealth valued at 66 trillion and then a short time later they have wealth valued at 50 trillion. The drag on the economy is compounded when a lot of the wealth was generated with borrowed money, because the debts remain even if the value of the assets decline.

The last recession was anything but "mild"; it had significant and lasting impact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2014, 12:23 PM
 
Location: Alameda, CA
7,605 posts, read 4,845,391 times
Reputation: 1438
Quote:
Originally Posted by sargentodiaz View Post
More absolutely male bovine excrement!!!


Zero New Jobs in May 2014


We certainly are in the midst of an economic recovery. These figures prove it.





Read more @ Prison Planet.com » More Phantom Jobs Created
Actually the non-seasonally adjusted numbers for May are much larger than the 217,000 seasonally adjusted number.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2014, 03:42 PM
 
Location: Fort Worth Texas
12,481 posts, read 10,222,878 times
Reputation: 2536
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk View Post
Yep. NAFTA dates back to 94, can't blame Republicans too much for that.



We also have much more people entering the labor force by age (anyone who includes kids and retirees in unemployment rates is flawed.) Let's remember there are a lot of millenials looking for work once they exit college. Let's remember that those underemployed are not included in the U-3, it's about double the unemployment rate.
The dems will blame the republicans regardless of facts. They will ever claim the Economy has had anything to do with them
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2014, 04:00 PM
 
Location: right here
4,160 posts, read 5,620,914 times
Reputation: 4929
Quote:
Originally Posted by CravingMountains View Post
I'm very liberal. I have never voted for a Republican in my life. Yet, even I see something is not right here. The nonsense going on with our stock market, the odd job reports showing job growth but still sky high unemployment barely budging, our economy shrinking during the first quarter.

This is not a healthy economy. This is something just downright strange.


I agree...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2014, 05:03 PM
 
Location: Texas
37,949 posts, read 17,865,154 times
Reputation: 10371
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
The major difference from that time and this one is that instead of capital flight away from America during the "Great Recession" capital flight was towards America in the "Panic of 1873."
Capital flight away, you mean gold coming in and dollars going out? Panic of 1873 capital towards, you mean the House of Cook?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2014, 05:21 PM
Status: "everybody getting reported now.." (set 23 days ago)
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,556 posts, read 16,542,682 times
Reputation: 6041
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
Here, for the not so well informed...

http://csinvesting.org/wp-content/up...3-and-2008.pdf

You'll have to read the rest because I don't have the time or the patience to teach you history. Ultimately the Panic of 1873 led to two world wars, the Soviet Union and communism, the rise of the Ku Klux Klan, the Federal Reserve along with too many other things to even go in to at this point.



The Panic of 1873 . U.S. Grant: Warrior . WGBH American Experience | PBS

There is a reason why this was called the Gilded Age.

The major difference from that time and this one is that instead of capital flight away from America during the "Great Recession" capital flight was towards America in the "Panic of 1873."

America is now taking place of the British Empire of that time with its capital leaving, as the DNI 2025 Global Trends put it, at an "unprecedented" level.

Anyways, the economic turmoil of 2007 up until now is in no way nearly as bad as it was with the 1873 "Long Depression."
Thats a lot of information, but none of refutes my argument. The very reason why we call it the "Panic of 1873" is because of the over exaggeration that happened at the time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2014, 05:43 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,468,904 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveshiscountry View Post
Capital flight away, you mean gold coming in and dollars going out? Panic of 1873 capital towards, you mean the House of Cook?
The House of Cooke. The industrialization of grains/agriculture in America undercutting grain/agriculture production in Russia and C. Europe. That froze credit markets, inter-bank lending and the stock market (which closed for 10 days at one point).

Anyways, the point is America was gaining economic power at a tremendous rate. Now the opposite is occurring with us playing the role of Britain and China, currently, playing the role of the US. Next up will be the rest of Asia/India spreading into the ME and then into Africa. There's also one other major difference and that's the billions of people moving into the middle class which puts a huge constraint on resources and supply which will cause prices on pretty much everything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2014, 05:45 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,468,904 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
Thats a lot of information, but none of refutes my argument. The very reason why we call it the "Panic of 1873" is because of the over exaggeration that happened at the time.
The over exaggeration? Really? The world's economies went into deflationary period with some lasting until 1895.

100,000 people were unemployed in NY alone. That was 25% of the working population.

The "Great Recession" was just that and that's why it's not called a depression. Mircea calls it the "silent depression" (if I recall correctly) and he's right because the decline will continue for decades on end.
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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:37 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top