The Current Crisis

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



KakashiKun
In the Economy. Are we going to have to create our own Hoovervilles again because companies are refusing to print more money?

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by KakashiKun
In the Economy. Are we going to have to create our own Hoovervilles again because companies are refusing to print more money?

Companies don't print money, the government does.

KidRock
...just got a lot worse.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/28/news/economy/house_vote_wednesday/index.htm?cnn=yes

House passes $819 billion stimulus bill

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by KidRock
...just got a lot worse.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/28/news/economy/house_vote_wednesday/index.htm?cnn=yes

House passes $819 billion stimulus bill

Full of evil evil tax cuts!

Robtard
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Full of evil evil tax cuts!

The tax cuts in the bill aren't evil fast enough for the Republicans; they're throwing a hissy.

KidRock
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Full of evil evil tax cuts!

How much good did the last stimulus package passed by Bush do?

But yeah, we can laugh at Obama crashing the country at an even faster pace..why not, who cares.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by KidRock
How much good did the last stimulus package passed by Bush do?

But yeah, we can laugh at Obama crashing the country at an even faster pace..why not, who cares.

You know a month a go you were bending over to let the government shove pinecones up your ass. What changed man? You used to be cool no

chithappens
Originally posted by KidRock
How much good did the last stimulus package passed by Bush do?

But yeah, we can laugh at Obama crashing the country at an even faster pace..why not, who cares.

Bush's "package" wasn't exactly in favor of most Americans if you get my drift.

Just out of curiosity, what's your idea to help put more jobs back out there?

I don't even agree with the bill, but I'm sure you have a brilliant plan I can't fathom since you are so opposed to it.

Red Nemesis
Originally posted by KidRock
...just got a lot worse.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/28/news/economy/house_vote_wednesday/index.htm?cnn=yes

House passes $819 billion stimulus bill
For starters, the economic crisis (sub-prime lending and difficulty obtaining credit) isn't the same as the Federal Deficit.


Also, I agree that Bush's 'package' gave the 'shaft' to most Americans.

Darth Jello
tax cuts to the wealthy and a lack of corporate tax enforcement partially caused this crisis. They should do the opposite, direct any tax incentives towards the middle and lower classes and small businesses and tax the rich till their balls bleed, eisenhower style. And to make sure this doesn't happen again, reintroduce all of the protection reagan destroyed and make far reaching corporate crimes and election fraud capital crimes.

jaden101
Originally posted by chithappens
Bush's "package" wasn't exactly in favor of most Americans if you get my drift.

Just out of curiosity, what's your idea to help put more jobs back out there?

I don't even agree with the bill, but I'm sure you have a brilliant plan I can't fathom since you are so opposed to it.

As much as i tend to disagree with George Galloway (Scottish politician) his idea was sound to help countries through the economic down turn.

Instead of using money to prop up the financial institutions (money which was actually supposed to increase lending and further fuel debt) why not solve unemployment problems by puting the money into huge infrastructure projects in order to future proof the country

completely revamp the internet infrastructure so that it is entirely the fastest possible fibre optic system.

rebuild highways so that they can handle the ever increasing amounts of traffic.

invest hugely in alternative energy so as both to create jobs in the development and building of these technologies as well as hitting vital emmissions targets

build or rebuild docklands areas to increase capacity for import and export

rebuild the railway network to allow faster trains to operate.

all these ideas would mean jobs being created as well as making the country more efficient and better prepared to be economically competitive in the future against rising countries like China and India

Not only would it have that affect but it would also mean training a lot more skilled workers instead of having unskilled service industry mcjobs.

liebe911
The economic conditions will be like this for nearly an estimate of a year or so, it may also go down to lowest levels. Then it has to come up back to heights.

chithappens
Originally posted by jaden101
As much as i tend to disagree with George Galloway (Scottish politician) his idea was sound to help countries through the economic down turn.

Instead of using money to prop up the financial institutions (money which was actually supposed to increase lending and further fuel debt) why not solve unemployment problems by puting the money into huge infrastructure projects in order to future proof the country

completely revamp the internet infrastructure so that it is entirely the fastest possible fibre optic system.

rebuild highways so that they can handle the ever increasing amounts of traffic.

invest hugely in alternative energy so as both to create jobs in the development and building of these technologies as well as hitting vital emmissions targets

build or rebuild docklands areas to increase capacity for import and export

rebuild the railway network to allow faster trains to operate.

all these ideas would mean jobs being created as well as making the country more efficient and better prepared to be economically competitive in the future against rising countries like China and India

Not only would it have that affect but it would also mean training a lot more skilled workers instead of having unskilled service industry mcjobs.

Obama has also emphasized similar plans in the next four years. I do agree with those.

Oh and it should always be kept in mind that the deficit is not "the economy" (as was mentioned just a moment ago). Even most of my peers in college get this very confused.

Bicnarok
All this pumping money into big holes is silly, the world creates too much stuff, cars etc. Let em go bust.

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by KakashiKun
In the Economy. Are we going to have to create our own Hoovervilles again because companies are refusing to print more money?

Crisis? What crisis?

dadudemon
Originally posted by Red Nemesis


How 'bout this one?


tomcat

Jack Daniels
how bout beer beer at that time beer wuz a type of luxury...from what I heard...no not that old wasnt there..lol..oh edit: I was talking about hooversville time

bogen
Originally posted by jaden101
As much as i tend to disagree with George Galloway (Scottish politician) his idea was sound to help countries through the economic down turn.

Instead of using money to prop up the financial institutions (money which was actually supposed to increase lending and further fuel debt) why not solve unemployment problems by puting the money into huge infrastructure projects in order to future proof the country

completely revamp the internet infrastructure so that it is entirely the fastest possible fibre optic system.

rebuild highways so that they can handle the ever increasing amounts of traffic.

invest hugely in alternative energy so as both to create jobs in the development and building of these technologies as well as hitting vital emmissions targets

build or rebuild docklands areas to increase capacity for import and export

rebuild the railway network to allow faster trains to operate.

all these ideas would mean jobs being created as well as making the country more efficient and better prepared to be economically competitive in the future against rising countries like China and India

Not only would it have that affect but it would also mean training a lot more skilled workers instead of having unskilled service industry mcjobs.



This is exactly what the Australian government has done/ is doing.

We so win. cool

Darth Jello
But what the American elites want is no middle class and most of the population earning $2.50 an hour and constantly sick and dying in order to reinstate a feudalistic system. How's doing any of that going to help them?

jaden101
Originally posted by Darth Jello
But what the American elites want is no middle class and most of the population earning $2.50 an hour and constantly sick and dying in order to reinstate a feudalistic system. How's doing any of that going to help them?

Because you can't pay skilled worker 2.50 an hour...skills such as those needed to rebuild infrastructure and in manufacturing are required all over the world...other countries are bending over backwards to let in skilled migrants.

So what you'll end up with is a completely unskilled country that relies totally on imports because it doesn't have any skilled workers to manufacture stuff for export...meaning that the US will completely crumble and the alleged "elite" will have effectively destroyed their own country and their own wealth.

Darth Jello
dude, i was being sarcastic.

jaden101
I know...I just wanted to head off the conspiracy loving idiots who reside in the forum before they started to rear their ugly heads.

Lycanthrope
We need to abolish Unions so that the what is produced is more affordable($45 for a Union person to bolt on a tail light) Change the Tax system to ,If Im not mistaken, "Flat" tax, The More money you have the more you pay , relative to the cost of the items purchased. I.E. If you are buying a Lear Jet you will pay more Taxes. If a person chooses not to buy luxury items and save it, then that money will be in the Banks circulation.
Put a cap on what C.E.O.s and Cooperate heads Pay themselves. Example: this is old news but its something relevant and close to home....Michael Eisner gives himself a 47 million dollar bonus at Disney while lowering the average wage of the worker. So Put a cap on Executives in order to put more money in wages so we can do with out Unions. People make a higher wage they will be more likely to "Consume" if not money is still there for Banks to invest and loan.
Finally Use some portion of the Gross Domestic Product for Education, Vocational schools ,College, in order to keep the skilled labor numbers up.

IM not an economist so im sure i will be jumped on for this opinion but it makes sense to me.

Symmetric Chaos
I'm pretty sure that isn't how flat tax works. I also doubt getting rid of unions would even be possible (let alone remotely legal).

Bardock42
Why would you abolish Unions. It should be every free man's right to organize themselves in any group they want, unions being one of them (an essential one in a free market, too, I believe). What shouldn't happen is favourable legislation for one group over another. But unions themselves, are mint (if they don't break the law, which they have been known to do at times).

jaden101
Abolishing unions wouldn't increase the money in the pockets of the workers....quite the opposite...more money would go up the chain to the top and be kept rather than circulating and stimulating the economy...terrible idea

Although i do agree that union power, in some circumstances, can be limiting to a company's ability to remain competitive particularly in regards to manufacturing whereby the jobs can be moved abroad to places with little or no union or minimum wage restrictions.

the other method is to use Keynesian economics and artificially devalue the dollar temporarily to allow US/UK companies to export more and combine it with higher deficit spending...It works in the short term to stimulate economies with struggling but relatively large manufacturing bases (so it might not work in the UK anymore)

Lycanthrope
You are right SC i meant "Fair Tax" only taxed on what you purchase.

lord xyz
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Companies don't print money, the government does. The government doesn't print money.

The central bank does.

Lycanthrope
Originally posted by jaden101
Abolishing unions would increase the money in the pockets of the workers....quite the opposite...more money would go up the chain to the top and be kept rather than circulating and stimulating the economy...terrible idea



Hence my saying, put a "Cap" on what the C.E.O.s can allot themselves.
I do realize this means more Govt. , of which im not for. I just know that The Manufacturers could not use the excuse that the average car is $25,000 because of there wage expenditures. I use Auto industry as an example. It would apply anywhere.

Lycanthrope
Originally posted by lord xyz
The government doesn't print money.

The central bank does.

Yes! of which the Govt. barrows from at interest.

jaden101
Originally posted by Lycanthrope
Hence my saying, put a "Cap" on what the C.E.O.s can allot themselves.
I do realize this means more Govt. , of which im not for. I just know that The Manufacturers could not use the excuse that the average car is $25,000 because of there wage expenditures. I use Auto industry as an example. It would apply anywhere.

Then the argument applies that you might not attract the best people to run your company. If a highly talented senior executive with a great track record of rescuing and rebuilding ailing companies gets told that he is being limited to X amount of money per year in the US....he'll just move to a country when a company will pay him more.

Darth Jello
Originally posted by jaden101
I know...I just wanted to head off the conspiracy loving idiots who reside in the forum before they started to rear their ugly heads.

conspiracy or not, every post-enlightenment society has elements whom consciously or not push back against modernization trying to establish their moronic old ways be they feudalism, theocracy, totalitarianism, or totalitarian monarchy. In the east they have names like Putin, Khomeini, zherenovsky, Feisal, Bin Laden, Pol Pot, and Nayasov. In the west they have names like Norquist, Cheney, Dobson, Freidman, Kisinger, Bush, and Wildmon. And when people with antiquated ideas of economics, social orders, morality, etc. start ****ing around with economics, what you get, intentionally or unintentionally is either a catatrophe like we are having, or pits full of dead bodies, or both.

Sadako of Girth
Oh my god theres something wrong with the current too....? sad
















































































stick out tongue

jaden101
Originally posted by Darth Jello
conspiracy or not, every post-enlightenment society has elements whom consciously or not push back against modernization trying to establish their moronic old ways be they feudalism, theocracy, totalitarianism, or totalitarian monarchy. In the east they have names like Putin, Khomeini, zherenovsky, Feisal, Bin Laden, Pol Pot, and Nayasov. In the west they have names like Norquist, Cheney, Dobson, Freidman, Kisinger, Bush, and Wildmon. And when people with antiquated ideas of economics, social orders, morality, etc. start ****ing around with economics, what you get, intentionally or unintentionally is either a catatrophe like we are having, or pits full of dead bodies, or both.

I would say the problem didn't stem from Antiquated economic policies this time and certainly not from social orders or morality.

Quite the opposite...Hence the reason people are harking back to old economic policies to try and stabilise the situation...i.e...investment in infrastructure just like in the industrial revolution.

We obviously can't go down the route that brought the US out of the great depression in the 1930's because the economy was stimulated by war politics...mass manufacturing of weapons meant massive job creation as well the the killing of many people who would otherwise be a burden on society (horrible way of looking at it i know)

global war economics wouldn't work nowadays because it would simply result in global destruction.

Darth Jello
There's nothing new about this. Reagan reversed policies and destroyed the protection of the new deal which began this whole cycle. Why does human nature seem to dictate that once it's become prosperous and stable, a government will not listen or do anything drastic for it's peoples until it remembers Robsepierre and realizes that angry poor people are called a "mob" when they're in groups for a reason? I mean isn't the entire purpose of rex 84, the establishment of of NORTHCOM, and the generally higher state of alert and expectation that this crisis may lead to outright revolution once a majority of americans get fed up?

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.