Playing Chicken With Our Future

Damocles said:
Yup. The only difference? Libertarian thinkers are still saying, "quit doing this and THINK" the left has moved to "voteforitnoworwe'llalldietomorrowespeciallythe childrenandif it wouldonlysaveonechild.." and the right is now saying, "Look at all the PORK!"
Click to expand...

I'm of the school - and I am not alone - that if the 1st bailout had passed on the 1st vote, the market might still be up around 10K, and we might have about a million more jobs that have been lost.

Immediacy IS important when things are spiraling. The market tanked after the bailout failed the 1st time, and more foreign investors bailed for the long term.

And the assumption seems to be that "the bailout didn't work." Again, color me as someone who disagrees. The banks have stabilized to a degree (that doesn't mean there are problems ahead, but stabilization is no small thing right now).

Now, give me your best "rubbish".
 
Onceler said:
The right in America is in some weird state of denial; even worse than usual.

Is it that they're afraid Bush will have a Hoover-esque legacy? Because he will. There really isn't any way around it.

Strange...
Click to expand...

The Damo right wants further disaster on Obama's watch so they can revise history and get bush off.

The RS right is just lost in Austria as usual.
 
Onceler said:
That's foolish. Unsurprising, but foolish.

There is almost no economist who doesn't agree that at least some sort of stimulus is needed right now.

See, here's how it works: there is an initial collapse, like we had in the fall. That's followed by companies laying people off, and more people losing their homes. As this happens, and even people who are still employed start to wonder about their own job security, spending dries up. Companies stop spending because of the uncertain future, and consumers stop spending because they've either lost their job, are afraid for it or have seen their home value plummet, if they haven't lost it. Since they don't spend, companies lose more, and lay more people off.

And so on.

Without anyone spending, the gov't has to, or it will continue.

Get it?
Click to expand...


If consumer spending decreases from the insane levels it was previously, great! It needs to. Anybody arguing otherwise is a fucking retard who believes the economy runs on magic and fairy dust.

If investment goes down, then that is not a good thing. People stop investing because they don't trust the prices. The government propping up false prices will not help. It lengthens recovery at best and could well deepen the problem if more capital is wasted in malinvestment.
 
Darla said:
The Damo right wants further disaster on Obama's watch so they can revise history and get bush off.

The RS right is just lost in Austria as usual.
Click to expand...

Out in Austria we knew the shit was nearing the fan while Barny Frank and the rest of you Dems were cheering the rising problem.
 
The pudgy sweaty Krugman is both right and wrong.

WE are going to have a prolonged downturn. How bad it gets depends on what we do for the most part.
We will see double digit unemployment.

Krugman strongly supported the first Big bailout which was rushed and mostly a waste of money.
Krugman still has too much programming in the school of outdated economics.
 
Darla said:
If Krugman is right though, and Obama goes along with any of this nonsense being peddled by these "centrists' like snow and Nelson, and this bill passes but it's been castrated and won't work, our lives will never be the same. It's pretty scary. Plus, the most vulnerable are going to die.
Click to expand...

That's alarmist and sounds like Bush pre Iraq invasion....i.e. big mushroom cloud.

Our problems are steep but alarmism does not help.
 
RStringfield said:
He's not right. He's an idiot. This sort of fearmongering is no better than when the Repubs do it on terrorism.
Click to expand...

I don't know that he's not right but I agree with you on the fear mongering. It is counterproductive. However, what ya gonna do to light the fire under peoples ass in DC to get something done fast?
 
Damocles said:
Somebody told me that I should react the same way to him as I did to Bush's inane "voteforitnownownow" bailout plan. I find that I have, it is only people who can't remember being against "fearmongering" that seem to have built a memory barrier around their psyche. The depth and importance of such legislation should demand that Congress take time to think before voting, the very reason for fearmongering is to get crap passed that otherwise would never pass the smell test.

The idea that if it isn't passed "todaynownownownow" rather than oh, say, tomorrow or Tuesday means that we will be eating our pets by next week and incapable of returning from such a state forever and ever is very much a bit of fearmongering.
Click to expand...

and why do they get a pass? I'm expeacted on my job to think, do it quickly and do it right the first time (and God knows in my work the consequences are pretty severe when you're wrong). If I can do it, why can't legislatures do it right and do it quickly?
 
RStringfield said:
If consumer spending decreases from the insane levels it was previously, great! It needs to. Anybody arguing otherwise is a fucking retard who believes the economy runs on magic and fairy dust.

If investment goes down, then that is not a good thing. People stop investing because they don't trust the prices. The government propping up false prices will not help. It lengthens recovery at best and could well deepen the problem if more capital is wasted in malinvestment.
Click to expand...

You have a good point there. I have the ability and notion to buy a new home but my thinking for the last two years is that houses are grossly over priced. Homes that were $120,000 tens years ago are going for over $200,000 now. It's insane.

I'm not sure on the math but I'd rather buy a house at $150,000 and 10% interest then the same home at $250,000 and 6% interest.

Im banking housing prices are going to drop dramatically and that the market will have to adjust to that deflation and until that happens, things will be rough.

Question is, can we keep the whole ball of wax from collapsing into a deflationary spiral?
 
Mottleydude said:
and why do they get a pass? I'm expeacted on my job to think, do it quickly and do it right the first time (and God knows in my work the consequences are pretty severe when you're wrong). If I can do it, why can't legislatures do it right and do it quickly?
Click to expand...
Because the consequences of the decisions you make will never be as far reaching as those they are making today.
 
what kind of penalty does krugman have to pay if this bailout fails? do the rich politicians suffer if this bailout fails?

what you morons should be thinking about is where will YOU be if this bailout does nothing but enrich the CEOs and investors?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
what kind of penalty does krugman have to pay if this bailout fails? do the rich politicians suffer if this bailout fails?

what you morons should be thinking about is where will YOU be if this bailout does nothing but enrich the CEOs and investors?
Click to expand...

We corrected you on this yesterday. THIS ISN'T A BAILOUT YOU FUCKING MORON. This isn't a massive influx of cash to banks or CEOs or failing industries. It's mostly tax cuts with spending allotted for PRIVATE SECTOR (mostly) jobs. It's a stimulus package. This is nothing like the TARP package.
 
RStringfield said:
If consumer spending decreases from the insane levels it was previously, great! It needs to. Anybody arguing otherwise is a fucking retard who believes the economy runs on magic and fairy dust.

If investment goes down, then that is not a good thing. People stop investing because they don't trust the prices. The government propping up false prices will not help. It lengthens recovery at best and could well deepen the problem if more capital is wasted in malinvestment.
Click to expand...

Ah, Austrian delusions.

It will be harder to get out of debt in the future if our economy crashes for a decade, RS.
 
If it's nothing more that a bitch slap turo-lib pork filled pill for the cons to swaloow.
They made that bed, time to go to sleep boner.
 
ib1yysguy said:
We corrected you on this yesterday. THIS ISN'T A BAILOUT YOU FUCKING MORON. This isn't a massive influx of cash to banks or CEOs or failing industries. It's mostly tax cuts with spending allotted for PRIVATE SECTOR (mostly) jobs. It's a stimulus package. This is nothing like the TARP package.
Click to expand...

OH, and this worked so FUCKING WELL in the early 1930s??????

what kind of stupid moronic retarded dumbfucking brainless idiots would actually approve of this totally ignorant garbage???

beside you that is.

ib1yysguy is a stupid asshead.
 
Word, Bush's buddy's got a trillion, what too a few thousand bankers.
Now your bitching about a trillion spent over the rest of the hundred million taxpayers.
Are you and Ashcroft lover?
 
Damocles said:
Yup. The only difference? Libertarian thinkers are still saying, "quit doing this and THINK" the left has moved to "voteforitnoworwe'llalldietomorrowespeciallythe childrenandif it wouldonlysaveonechild.." and the right is now saying, "Look at all the PORK!" instead of getting out the barbecues.
Click to expand...

So according to past performance by Mitch Mcconnel bank and finiancial pork is fine but pork for working classes is bad?

How many republicans supported Bush's other big bailout?
Do we even know where that money went?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top