Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
and then

Will We Go Over the Cliff?

Over the Cliff?   31 members have voted

  1. 1. Will Obama and the Repubs allow the tax hikes and budget cuts to kick in on Jan 1?

    • Yes
      13
    • No
      9
    • Don't Care
      9

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

121 posts in this topic

I can't help thinking this is the slowest drive over a cliff in history

All theatre up to this point. But it's ugly and damaging(and not just to the US) and the credit ratings folks will have no choice but to downgrade us again if they are to be consistent. That means any savings found in negotiations will be lost in higher interest payments on debt. I've never seen the leaders of my country more divided and less capable in my lifetime. Seems that when the last of the adults left the building they forgot to turn off the lights and now we just have a bunch of children playing "politician".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All theatre up to this point. But it's ugly and damaging(and not just to the US) and the credit ratings folks will have no choice but to downgrade us again if they are to be consistent. That means any savings found in negotiations will be lost in higher interest payments on debt. I've never seen the leaders of my country more divided and less capable in my lifetime. Seems that when the last of the adults left the building they forgot to turn off the lights and now we just have a bunch of children playing "politician".

Why hasnt the US started Austerity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why hasnt the US started Austerity?

Just look at Europe... Austerity is not the answer. It may be part of the answer, but probably should not be the biggest part.

The North has been engulfed at last by the contractionary holocaust it imposed on the South. French car sales crashed 19pc last month, even before its fiscal shock therapy -- 2pc of GDP next year. The Bundesbank admitted on Friday tore up its forecast on Friday. Germany itself is in recession.

The youth jobless rate has reached 58pc in Greece, 55.8pc in Spain, 39.1pc in Portugal, 36.5pc in Italy, 30.1pc in Slovakia, and 25.5pc in France, with all the known damage this does to the life-trajectory of the victims and the productive dynamism of these economies.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/9733486/Europe-clings-to-scorched-earth-ideology-as-depression-deepens.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just look at Europe... Austerity is not the answer. It may be part of the answer, but probably should not be the biggest part.

http://www.telegraph...on-deepens.html

I believe it's not wise to already draw conclusions from the austerity in Europe. The program is in the beginning stages...the results are still out. For the results you'll have to wait until 2014 at the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe it's not wise to already draw conclusions from the austerity in Europe. The program is in the beginning stages...the results are still out. For the results you'll have to wait until 2014 at the least.

And that would make it the world record breaking slowest drive over a cliff in history :P

Seriously though, I can't picture some USA networks waiting twelve hours before ripping any decision to shreds, what they would do with something that needs a couple of years to mature and see real results does not bare thinking about.

But then, in the end that's all anyone will be thinking about if they ever heave this entropic House of Reps into something resembling action anyway, so predictable :sleepy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And that would make it the world record breaking slowest drive over a cliff in history :P

That’s interesting isn’t it? Or maybe, it’s not a cliff after all. I’ve given 5 reasons why it isn’t.

Seriously though, I can't picture some USA networks waiting twelve hours before ripping any decision to shreds, what they would do with something that needs a couple of years to mature and see real results does not bare thinking about.

It’s called experience. Having some insight on how things work. Knowing human nature, etc.

But then, in the end that's all anyone will be thinking about if they ever heave this entropic House of Reps into something resembling action anyway, so predictable :sleepy:

I would think that the House is performing admirably. There has to be some remnant of fiscal responsibility left in this government. As long as they remain an effective thorn in the side of this Socialist in Chief, I have great hope that his true agenda will become more apparent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe it's not wise to already draw conclusions from the austerity in Europe. The program is in the beginning stages...the results are still out. For the results you'll have to wait until 2014 at the least.

How many Greek bailouts need to happen first? Austerity has been going on for... 2 1/2 years??? That seems like enough time for Something to have started to show progress. But Greece is still in lots of trouble.

I'm not anti-austerity, but don't think it is the whole show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why hasnt the US started Austerity?

Because they:

1. Don't currently have a government in power either gullible enough to actually believe in the hypothesis of expansionary fiscal contraction, or one willing to deliberately sabotage the country's economy in order to reduce the size of government.

2. See 1.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw a "Family Circus" cartoon strip once where they are in a store, and the kid sees an expensive toy castle that she wants. She asks Mom to buy it for her, but Mom says that she doesn't have money to buy iy, so the kid replies, 'It's okay! You can just write a check!'

Congratulations, America, you have your castle. Now just wait for the check to bounce.

137570963586954138_dmJj6eYC_b.jpg

7b42a9aac7_40380208_o2.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Irans won.

If the oil gets cut off the US economy has so much debt it will collapse. In fact if Iran is intelligent it will strike first.

Don’t we get the lion’s share of our oil from Canada???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never seen the leaders of my country more divided and less capable in my lifetime.

I assume you’ve heard of the saying that goes that you don’t argue with an idiot because he will drag you down to his level and beat you up with experience? Something similar is going on here. There is no compromising with a Socialist because if you give an inch, they will take a mile AND on top of that, drag you down to their level and beat you up with experience. That’s why the Conservatives appear juvenile. But actually, they are exhibiting a quiet strength by not letting the Socialists hijack this government. They say that GOD answers all prayer, it’s just that sometimes the answer is no. Well, the GOP is standing their ground and saying no to a very destructive Socialist agenda.

Just look at Europe... Austerity is not the answer. It may be part of the answer, but probably should not be the biggest part.

This is very true. The tentacles of Socialism have wrapped around our system that austerity alone will not solve the problem. We need to get our ideological house in order first and that’s easier said than done. But until we do that, anything done to bring down the debt will not work. It is the perfect storm for total collapse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Don't currently have a government in power either gullible enough to actually believe in the hypothesis of expansionary fiscal contraction, or one willing to deliberately sabotage the country's economy in order to reduce the size of government.

Well, I don’t think we need to follow this hypothesis to just cut spending. There’s more going on here than trying to stimulate growth in the private sector. This government has enslaved millions on dependency and now when the government needs to be fiscally responsible, its obligations entrap it from functioning. The fact is, that in order to function properly, it must shed the non essential. That is those that are dependent on dole. This includes SS, Medicare, and pensions. But the thing is is that these will get hit now or later. The wealthy do not make enough to sustain this kind of support. The money will eventually run out. It’s interesting how the Socialists will claim that wealth is a limited resource and that it needs to be redistributed. Yet, when they want to raise taxes, it’s as if it’s an unlimited tap.

These obligations must be fulfilled and then replaced with something more fiscally responsible. This is the very reason that the government should never get into the Entitlement and welfare game, because there comes a time when cuts are needed or more simply, it will be out of money. The Socialists don’t want to give up their entitlements so they can’t see the path that their ignorance is leading us to. The Conservatives don’t want to be fiscally responsible because it will hurt the weakest among us and then the Socialists will vilify them. The GOP needs to make the case to fulfill and then replace entitlements. Make it clear and let the Socialists squirm. It’s hard to make the case against Santa Claus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I don't think we need to follow this hypothesis to just cut spending.

What do you think fiscal contraction means, exactly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you think fiscal contraction means, exactly?

The hypothesis is a little more than just cutting spending, as I said!!!!

The hypothesis describes that it lessens crowding out and encourages growth in the private sector. It also warns about inflation caused by the government printing money and that could devalue the currency. But none of these are a concern for us to cut spending. We need to cut spending simply because we are spending way too much. Beyond our means. We don’t need to worry about the private sector and if inflation is on the horizon, it’s better to take the hit now rather than a bigger hit later when we can’t ignore it any further. The more government is involved, the harder the hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The hypothesis is a little more than just cutting spending, as I said!!!!

Which hypothesis do you think that I'm referring to, exactly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which hypothesis do you think that I'm referring to, exactly?

Oh gee, that’s a hard one… I’ll take a guess and say the Hypothesis of Expansionary Fiscal Contraction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh gee, that's a hard one… I'll take a guess and say the Hypothesis of Expansionary Fiscal Contraction.

Then why are you talking about something completely different?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why are you talking about something completely different?

Well, if you had taken the time to read and understand what I said, that would be clear. Perhaps I was too terse. Didn’t think I needed a dissertation??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if you had taken the time to read and understand what I said, that would be clear. Perhaps I was too terse. Didn't think I needed a dissertation??

Then let's skip to the heart of the Hypothesis of Expansionary Fiscal Contraction:

Perhaps you'd like to explain to us all how cutting government spending will result in an increase in Government income?

Edited by Tiggs
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then let's skip to the heart of the Hypothesis of Expansionary Fiscal Contraction:

Perhaps you'd like to explain to us all how cutting government spending will result in an increase in Government income?

Let’s back up. You came in here spouting big words to sound impressive when that doesn’t work on this forum, but then the point I was making is that you don’t need Expansionary Fiscal Contraction to institute austerity.

But to get to your question, there is no problem with revenue so we really don’t need to increase government income, doh! We just need to cut spending. But I am sure that lessening crowding out according to EFC will stimulate the private sector and in doing so will broaden the tax base and in doing so will bring in more revenue. But if that is the case, then we can cut taxes even more. I could see forgoing cutting taxes in this case for a few years provided that this extra revenue is used to pay down the debt (only) and that this expenditure becomes the top expenditure the government has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's back up. You came in here spouting big words to sound impressive when that doesn't work on this forum,

If the words "expansionary", "fiscal" or "contraction" are big words for you, then perhaps economics really isn't your subject.

but then the point I was making is that you don't need Expansionary Fiscal Contraction to institute austerity.

You'll note that there's an OR in my post that you quoted.

But to get to your question, there is no problem with revenue so we really don't need to increase government income, doh!

Which is where we disagree. The issue is revenue.

Edited by Tiggs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the words "expansionary", "fiscal" or "contraction" are big words for you, then perhaps economics really isn't your subject.

Did I say they were big words for me or that your were just trying to sound impressive? Yeah, that’s what I thought.

You'll note that there's an OR in my post that you quoted.

That’s a real small ‘or’. It’s like hitting a vein of iron pyrite instead of striking the mother load.

Which is where we disagree. The issue is revenue.

Then we agree to disagree – that’s fine.

Let me ask you a straight forward question then. How much more do you want the government to spend?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ravenhawk stepped in and how he's going to get beaten up by experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw a "Family Circus" cartoon strip once where they are in a store, and the kid sees an expensive toy castle that she wants. She asks Mom to buy it for her, but Mom says that she doesn't have money to buy iy, so the kid replies, 'It's okay! You can just write a check!'

Congratulations, America, you have your castle. Now just wait for the check to bounce.

That reminds me of a friend of mine who went to the store and had their debt card rejected due to lack of funds. And their 6 year old daughter said, just go to the bank and get more money. Because you should never run out of money if you belong to a bank, right??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I say they were big words for me or that your were just trying to sound impressive? Yeah, that's what I thought.

You're the one that classified them as being "big words".

That's a real small 'or'. It's like hitting a vein of iron pyrite instead of striking the mother load.

Looks like a normal sized or, to me.

Then we agree to disagree – that's fine.

Let me ask you a straight forward question then. How much more do you want the government to spend?

I don't want the government to spend any more. I want it to get more in revenue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.