Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Widely Cited-Debt Study Exposed


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#16 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 16,714 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 18 April 2013 - 07:59 AM

or maybe not..

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100558455


If your country can stomach getting all of the pain over with all at once, yeah, austerity can work.

The trouble is, how can the politicians and central bankers justify to the people who are starving/rioting/etc in the meantime.

In America, we're stuck with "simulate prosperity by injecting liquidity into the banks and stock market, and wait around hoping for the real thing to come around" mode.

Can't really say that works either.

Just hire me as the next fed chairman, I'll fix everything.

#17 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,810 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 18 April 2013 - 08:05 AM

But checkbook and home budget doesn't apply jase. You have to treat the money like it doesn't belong to you so you are like better at budgeting and you can think taxes and revenues are the same.
That's the beauty of politics. You get to convince yourself and others you can't be held accountable for math because its different yo.

#18 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 16,714 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 18 April 2013 - 08:46 AM

In the low-rate environment that the fed's created, amount of money borrowed doesn't really matter a whole lot. (for now)


Posted Image



But any recovery attempt seems to be destined to shoot itself in the foot, because recovery necessitates a return to halfway normal treasury rates. With treasury rates as damn close to zero as possible, just a move to 2000 rates will triple our interest outlays.

#19 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,076 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 06:40 PM

So if debts don't matter why has the new health care plan been touted as reducing it?


because voters are generally stupid

#20 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,482 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 07:06 PM

uhh, the government saving money while also improving stuff for citizens is actually a good thing (in theory, that was what the health care stuff was supposed to do :P), as opposed to the government saving money at the expense of citizens at a time when the economy may not be able to sustain that.

#21 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,810 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 18 April 2013 - 08:48 PM

govt's definition of saving money: Politican A goes, yeah, I voted AGAINST this idea that was proposed for 10 million. Instead I voted for the one that cost only 5 million. Therefore I "saved" you the taxpayer money.

#22 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,019 posts

Posted 21 April 2013 - 03:10 PM

uhh, the government saving money while also improving stuff for citizens is actually a good thing (in theory, that was what the health care stuff was supposed to do :P), as opposed to the government saving money at the expense of citizens at a time when the economy may not be able to sustain that.



Good stuff!


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.