Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: Financial Crisis - Page 52







Post#1276 at 06-21-2005 05:17 PM by Deb C [at joined Aug 2004 #posts 6,099]
---
06-21-2005, 05:17 PM #1276
Join Date
Aug 2004
Posts
6,099

Quote from Zenwizard's post:

{My favorite quotes from this article: "...the aging of the baby-boomers creates unique financial stresses. America's most pampered and self-obsessed generation hasn't prepared itself for retirement and, as usual, expects someone else to bail it out. Trouble is, succeeding generations aren't big enough or rich enough to handle the job.}

My response:

One of the main lines from the article you submitted was: "Living beyond our means hasn't caught up with us .....at least not yet." My experience is that no matter what generation, there are those who spend and consume as if there is no tomorrow and do not save. We are all responsible. But the number one culprit who is living beyond its means, is our own government.

I just finished reading "After The Empire." by Emmanuel Todd. In a review of his book, it reads, "In his concluding chapter, Todd writes, "The United States is unable to live on its own economic activity and must be subsidized to maintain its level of consumption -- at its present cruising speed that subsidy amounts to 1.4 billion dollars per day." (snip)

"In "The Fragility of Tribute" chapter, Todd suggests the world won't -- or can't -- long continue to support our "parasitic" lifestyle by loaning us money to sell us goods, while we export our manufacturing industries and hollow out our internal productivity. "The most likely scenario" he sees as a result of this "is a stock market crash larger than any we have experienced thus far that will be followed by a meltdown of the dollar -- a one-two punch that will put an end to any further delusions of 'empire' when it comes to the US economy." "

The bottom line is that he sees the US losing credibility with the rest of the world. True power is economic power and we are losing that at top notch speed.

Looks like we are all in the same boat and it's starting to sink. :shock:
"The only Good America is a Just America." .... pbrower2a







Post#1277 at 06-21-2005 11:26 PM by Steven McTowelie [at Cary, NC joined Jun 2002 #posts 535]
---
06-21-2005, 11:26 PM #1277
Join Date
Jun 2002
Location
Cary, NC
Posts
535

health care worries steadily worsening

Health Care Spending Races Ahead of Income Increases

AccountingWEB.com - Jun-22-2005 - Spending on health care rose by 8.2 percent last year, outpacing spending increases in other areas and outstripping average growth in income, a new study says.
The spending increase was slower than in past years - it peaked at 11.3 percent in 2001, for example - but it outpaced gross domestic product, which increased by 5.6 percent, Forbes.com reported. In the most recent 12-month period, prices for health care rose by 4.3 percent, compared with 2.8 percent for prices overall, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.







Post#1278 at 06-22-2005 02:30 AM by Finch [at In the belly of the Beast joined Feb 2004 #posts 1,734]
---
06-22-2005, 02:30 AM #1278
Join Date
Feb 2004
Location
In the belly of the Beast
Posts
1,734

Hey, the forums are back (and so am I!)

Unfortunately, the search function still doesn't seem to be working very well, so can somebody tell me if there's been a discussion of Big Al's "conundrum"? It seems that we're approaching some sort of tipping point. Anybody? Mike?

Oh, and back to the thread:

Quote Originally Posted by AccountingWeb
Spending on health care rose by 8.2 percent last year, outpacing spending increases in other areas and outstripping average growth in income, a new study says.
One word: "Rationing."
Yes we did!







Post#1279 at 06-22-2005 10:28 AM by Pink Splice [at St. Louis MO (They Built An Entire Country Around Us) joined Apr 2005 #posts 5,439]
---
06-22-2005, 10:28 AM #1279
Join Date
Apr 2005
Location
St. Louis MO (They Built An Entire Country Around Us)
Posts
5,439

Quote Originally Posted by Rick Hirst
Hey, the forums are back (and so am I!)

Unfortunately, the search function still doesn't seem to be working very well, so can somebody tell me if there's been a discussion of Big Al's "conundrum"? It seems that we're approaching some sort of tipping point. Anybody? Mike?

Oh, and back to the thread:

Quote Originally Posted by AccountingWeb
Spending on health care rose by 8.2 percent last year, outpacing spending increases in other areas and outstripping average growth in income, a new study says.
One word: "Rationing."
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/bus...9?OpenDocument

This includes my employer's plan. Don't get sick or hurt for a while...







Post#1280 at 06-22-2005 10:29 AM by Child of Socrates [at Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort joined Sep 2001 #posts 14,092]
---
06-22-2005, 10:29 AM #1280
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort
Posts
14,092

Hey there, Rick!!

How's the new job going? Everything OK with you?







Post#1281 at 06-22-2005 10:53 AM by antichrist [at I'm in the Big City now, boy! joined Sep 2003 #posts 1,655]
---
06-22-2005, 10:53 AM #1281
Join Date
Sep 2003
Location
I'm in the Big City now, boy!
Posts
1,655

My job just eliminated post-retirement health care benefits entirely. It was pretty good. In March, everyone was told that if they were eligible to retire, and did so this school year (by June), they could retain health insurance for themselves and their spouse. They had two years to retire if they wanted insurance for only themselves. Everybody else was SOL. This nice benefit was used to excuse a lower salary than average. Not anymore I guess.

The ppl most screwed by this are the over 50s. There are some who are 60, but can't retire yet, for whom this was their retirement medical plans. Now they are going to be spending 10k or more per year for health care. The benefits director himself, maybe 45, has a wife with MS. Completely uninsurable. Many of these ppl really don't have the option to find other jobs. They made the mistake of loyalty. And now they're stuck.

Edit to add: That's ok though, the trustees have assured us that losing 5 million per year on athletics is reasonable. We are a sports club with a college attached. But so is everyone else I guess.







Post#1282 at 06-22-2005 06:17 PM by Finch [at In the belly of the Beast joined Feb 2004 #posts 1,734]
---
06-22-2005, 06:17 PM #1282
Join Date
Feb 2004
Location
In the belly of the Beast
Posts
1,734

Quote Originally Posted by Kiff 1961
Hey there, Rick!!

How's the new job going? Everything OK with you?
Going pretty good. I'm now a full-time employee of Microsoft (the gig I mentioned in my last post at the beginning of the year was a short-term contract.) The biggest benefit by far is their extremely generous health-care package: I pay ZERO for coverage for my whole family -- no premiums, no copay, nothing! It's golden handcuffs to be sure (that and the stock awards); I'll have to make sure to stay here for the rest of my life...
Yes we did!







Post#1283 at 06-22-2005 11:19 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
06-22-2005, 11:19 PM #1283
Guest

Re: health care worries steadily worsening

Quote Originally Posted by Steve Barrera
No question about it, Hillarycare is coming. Then, we'll be just like the old Europe; Marxist womb to the tomb, government subsidized, mind-numbed zombies, waiting for the next entitled handout. Hey, take it from the rich and give to the aging, um, baby boomer, er, middle class en masse.

We are, after all, the greatest of the very greatest entitled generation: Gimmee! gimmee! gimmee! 8)







Post#1284 at 06-23-2005 05:16 AM by L Leavell [at joined Sep 2001 #posts 79]
---
06-23-2005, 05:16 AM #1284
Join Date
Sep 2001
Posts
79

Re: health care worries steadily worsening

Quote Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate
Quote Originally Posted by Steve Barrera
No question about it, Hillarycare is coming. Then, we'll be just like the old Europe; Marxist womb to the tomb, government subsidized, mind-numbed zombies, waiting for the next entitled handout. Hey, take it from the rich and give to the aging, um, baby boomer, er, middle class en masse.

We are, after all, the greatest of the very greatest entitled generation: Gimmee! gimmee! gimmee! 8)
As long as I can take it away from the rich and the Republicans, I'm cool with it. Hillary, '08! :-D







Post#1285 at 06-23-2005 08:16 AM by Virgil K. Saari [at '49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains joined Jun 2001 #posts 7,835]
---
06-23-2005, 08:16 AM #1285
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
'49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains
Posts
7,835

Frist-Care™

Quote Originally Posted by L Leavell
Quote Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate
Quote Originally Posted by Steve Barrera
No question about it, Hillarycare is coming. Then, we'll be just like the old Europe; Marxist womb to the tomb, government subsidized, mind-numbed zombies, waiting for the next entitled handout. Hey, take it from the rich and give to the aging, um, baby boomer, er, middle class en masse.

We are, after all, the greatest of the very greatest entitled generation: Gimmee! gimmee! gimmee! 8)
As long as I can take it away from the rich and the Republicans, I'm cool with it. Hillary, '08! :-D
Can't afford your meds:

Dubya Doles Out Drugs just mix in some Kool-Aid to make it all go down.







Post#1286 at 06-23-2005 09:02 AM by Roadbldr '59 [at Vancouver, Washington joined Jul 2001 #posts 8,275]
---
06-23-2005, 09:02 AM #1286
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Vancouver, Washington
Posts
8,275

Quote Originally Posted by Rick Hirst
Quote Originally Posted by Kiff 1961
Hey there, Rick!!

How's the new job going? Everything OK with you?
Going pretty good. I'm now a full-time employee of Microsoft (the gig I mentioned in my last post at the beginning of the year was a short-term contract.) The biggest benefit by far is their extremely generous health-care package: I pay ZERO for coverage for my whole family -- no premiums, no copay, nothing! It's golden handcuffs to be sure (that and the stock awards); I'll have to make sure to stay here for the rest of my life...
That's about how I feel about my current employer too... even if there are (possibly) creepy things going on behind the scenes. Hopefully by the time they all come to fruition I'll be offered a golden parachute .







Post#1287 at 06-23-2005 05:34 PM by Finch [at In the belly of the Beast joined Feb 2004 #posts 1,734]
---
06-23-2005, 05:34 PM #1287
Join Date
Feb 2004
Location
In the belly of the Beast
Posts
1,734

Quote Originally Posted by Roadbldr '59
Quote Originally Posted by Rick Hirst
Quote Originally Posted by Kiff 1961
Hey there, Rick!!

How's the new job going? Everything OK with you?
Going pretty good. I'm now a full-time employee of Microsoft (the gig I mentioned in my last post at the beginning of the year was a short-term contract.) The biggest benefit by far is their extremely generous health-care package: I pay ZERO for coverage for my whole family -- no premiums, no copay, nothing! It's golden handcuffs to be sure (that and the stock awards); I'll have to make sure to stay here for the rest of my life...
That's about how I feel about my current employer too... even if there are (possibly) creepy things going on behind the scenes. Hopefully by the time they all come to fruition I'll be offered a golden parachute .
Creepy :?: :!:

Don't you work for whiz-dot? What kind of creepiness do they have in mind -- have they finally decided to implement that plan for using the interstate highways for the upcoming military and/or alien invasion? Do tell. :wink:
Yes we did!







Post#1288 at 07-13-2005 08:37 AM by [at joined #posts ]
---
07-13-2005, 08:37 AM #1288
Guest

Tax cuts don't work.

From Bloomberg News:
  • With tax revenue running $1 billion a day ahead of the 2004 pace in late April and May, the deficit will likely decline to about $325 billion from $412 billion last year, according to the Congressional Budget Office and private forecasters such as Stephen Stanley, chief economist at RBS Greenwich Capital in Greenwich, Connecticut.

    ``An expanding economy, creating more receipts, is putting us on a very good path to deal with our deficit,'' Treasury Secretary John Snow said at a press conference in Calgary on July 8. ``It's pretty clear now the path we are on will take us below the president's initial target.''

    Bush promised during his election campaign last year that he would pare the annual deficit to about 2.25 percent of the nation's gross domestic product by 2009.

    As recently as February, the government was projecting the deficit would rise this year to $427 billion, or about 3.5 percent of the nation's gross domestic product. Some economists, including Mike Englund of Boulder, Colorado, research firm Action Economics LLC, now predict the shortfall will drop to 2.5 percent of GDP this year and as low as 2.0 percent next year. That would mean a deficit next year as low as about $250 billion.
Looks like tax cuts are going to take the country down the toilet, again.

What, me worry?







Post#1289 at 07-13-2005 11:47 AM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
07-13-2005, 11:47 AM #1289
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Re: Tax cuts don't work.

Quote Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate
From Bloomberg News:
  • With tax revenue running $1 billion a day ahead of the 2004 pace in late April and May, the deficit will likely decline to about $325 billion from $412 billion last year, according to the Congressional Budget Office and private forecasters such as Stephen Stanley, chief economist at RBS Greenwich Capital in Greenwich, Connecticut.

    ``An expanding economy, creating more receipts, is putting us on a very good path to deal with our deficit,'' Treasury Secretary John Snow said at a press conference in Calgary on July 8. ``It's pretty clear now the path we are on will take us below the president's initial target.''

    Bush promised during his election campaign last year that he would pare the annual deficit to about 2.25 percent of the nation's gross domestic product by 2009.

    As recently as February, the government was projecting the deficit would rise this year to $427 billion, or about 3.5 percent of the nation's gross domestic product. Some economists, including Mike Englund of Boulder, Colorado, research firm Action Economics LLC, now predict the shortfall will drop to 2.5 percent of GDP this year and as low as 2.0 percent next year. That would mean a deficit next year as low as about $250 billion.
Looks like tax cuts are going to take the country down the toilet, again.

What, me worry?
Now, for the non-Kool-Aid version (provided, as always, for discussion purposes only):

Quote Originally Posted by In the July 11, 2005 edition of the NY Times, Paul Krugman
Un-spin the Budget

Later this week the White House budget director plans to put on an aviator costume, march up to a microphone and declare Mission Accomplished in the war on deficits. O.K., I'm not sure about the costume bit.

Seriously, the administration is poised to do the same thing on the budget that it has done again and again in Iraq: claim that a modest, probably temporary lull in the flow of bad news shows that victory is around the corner and that its policies have been vindicated.

So let me do some pre-emptive de-spinning and debunking.

To understand where the budget deficit came from, you can't do better than the Jan. 18, 2001, issue of the satirical newspaper The Onion, which predicted the future with eerie precision. "We must squander our nation's hard-won budget surplus on tax breaks for the wealthiest 15 percent," the magazine's spoof had the president-elect declare. "And, on the foreign front, we must find an enemy and defeat it."

And so it has turned out. President Bush has presided over the transformation of a budget surplus into a large deficit, which threatens the government's long-run solvency. The principal cause of that reversal was Mr. Bush's unprecedented decision to cut taxes, especially on the wealthiest Americans, while taking the nation into an expensive war.

Where's the good news? Well, for the past four years actual tax receipts have consistently come in below expectations, so that the deficit is even bigger than one might have predicted given the administration's don't-tax-but-spend-anyway policies. Recent tax numbers, however, finally offer a positive surprise. The Congressional Budget Office suggests in its latest monthly budget review that the deficit in fiscal 2005 will be "significantly less than $350 billion, perhaps below $325 billion." Last year the deficit was $412 billion.

The usual suspects on the right are already declaring victory over the deficit, and proclaiming vindication for the Laffer Curve - the claim that tax cuts pay for themselves, because they have such a miraculous effect on the economy that revenue actually goes up.

But the fact is that revenue remains far lower than anyone would have predicted before the tax cuts began. In January 2001 the budget office forecast revenues of $2.57 trillion in fiscal 2005. Even with the recent increase in receipts, the actual number will be at least $400 billion less.

And nonpartisan budget experts, such as Ed McKelvey of Goldman Sachs, believe that even the limited good news on the budget is a temporary blip, not a turning point. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, the director of the Congressional Budget Office, warns us to take the new revenue figures with a "grain of salt," and declares that "if you take yourself to 2008, 2009 or 2010, that vision is the same today as it was two months ago."

A close look at the tax data explains why these experts believe that we're seeing a temporary uptick in revenues, not a sustained change in the trend. Taxes that are closely tied to the number of jobs and the average wage, such as payroll taxes and income taxes automatically withheld from paychecks, aren't showing any big pickup. This confirms other data showing that the economy as a whole is, if anything, doing worse than one would expect at this stage of an economic recovery.

It turns out that all of the upside surprise in tax receipts is coming from two sources. One is tax payments from corporations, up both because last year corporate profits grew much more rapidly than the rest of the economy and because the effective tax rate on corporations went up when a temporary tax break, introduced in 2002, expired. Both are one-time events

The other source of increased revenue is nonwithheld income taxes - taxes that aren't deducted from paychecks but are instead paid by people receiving additional, nonsalary income. The bounce in nonwithheld taxes probably reflects mainly capital gains on stocks and real estate, together with bonuses paid in the finance and real estate industries. Again, this revenue boost looks like a temporary blip driven by rising stocks and the housing bubble.

In other words, we're still deep in the fiscal quagmire, with federal revenues far below what's needed to pay for federal programs. And we won't get out of that quagmire until a future president admits that the Bush tax cuts were a mistake, and must be reversed
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#1290 at 07-13-2005 01:29 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
07-13-2005, 01:29 PM #1290
Guest

Re: Tax cuts don't work.

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon
Now, for the non-Kool-Aid version (provided, as always, for discussion purposes only):

Quote Originally Posted by NY Times, Paul Krugman
The usual suspects on the right are already declaring victory over the deficit, and proclaiming vindication for the Laffer Curve - the claim that tax cuts pay for themselves, because they have such a miraculous effect on the economy that revenue actually goes up.

But the fact is that revenue remains far lower than anyone would have predicted before the tax cuts began. In January 2001 the budget office forecast revenues of $2.57 trillion in fiscal 2005. Even with the recent increase in receipts, the actual number will be at least $400 billion less... In other words, we're still deep in the fiscal quagmire.
Notice that nowhere does Krugman debunk the mystery of how tax revenues have increased in the aftermath of tax cuts. Instead, he merely concludes that we have failed to meet a "forecast" made in January of 2001, two months before Bush was sworn in as President.

Duh. Krugman has apparently been living a hole since the recession began in March of 2001. He completely missed the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center towers, and the ensuing increased government spending on security and defense as a result. Krugman missed all those dire predictions of a "Great Depression" on the front pages of the Wall Stree Journal in March of 2002, or the same woeful tunes sung by the New York Times during the Worldcomm et al scandals in the summer of that year. And he obviously missed the Iraq War and it's aftermath effects on the economy, and ...

It is as if Mr. Krugman suddenly awoke yesterday from little nap he took just before Bush took office in 2001... and he now demands to know why "revenue remains far lower than anyone would have predicted" when he fell asleep.

That's pretty funny. :wink:







Post#1291 at 07-13-2005 01:58 PM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
07-13-2005, 01:58 PM #1291
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Re: Tax cuts don't work.

Quote Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate
Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon
Now, for the non-Kool-Aid version (provided, as always, for discussion purposes only):

Quote Originally Posted by NY Times, Paul Krugman
The usual suspects on the right are already declaring victory over the deficit, and proclaiming vindication for the Laffer Curve - the claim that tax cuts pay for themselves, because they have such a miraculous effect on the economy that revenue actually goes up.

But the fact is that revenue remains far lower than anyone would have predicted before the tax cuts began. In January 2001 the budget office forecast revenues of $2.57 trillion in fiscal 2005. Even with the recent increase in receipts, the actual number will be at least $400 billion less... In other words, we're still deep in the fiscal quagmire.
Notice that nowhere does Krugman debunk the mystery of how tax revenues have increased in the aftermath of tax cuts. Instead, he merely concludes that we have failed to meet a "forecast" made in January of 2001, two months before Bush was sworn in as President.

Duh. Krugman has apparently been living a hole since the recession began in March of 2001. He completely missed the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center towers, and the ensuing increased government spending on security and defense as a result. Krugman missed all those dire predictions of a "Great Depression" on the front pages of the Wall Stree Journal in March of 2002, or the same woeful tunes sung by the New York Times during the Worldcomm et al scandals in the summer of that year. And he obviously missed the Iraq War and it's aftermath effects on the economy, and ...

It is as if Mr. Krugman suddenly awoke yesterday from little nap he took just before Bush took office in 2001... and he now demands to know why "revenue remains far lower than anyone would have predicted" when he fell asleep.

That's pretty funny. :wink:
Isn't it odd that you snipped:

"A close look at the tax data explains why these experts believe that we're seeing a temporary uptick in revenues, not a sustained change in the trend. Taxes that are closely tied to the number of jobs and the average wage, such as payroll taxes and income taxes automatically withheld from paychecks, aren't showing any big pickup. This confirms other data showing that the economy as a whole is, if anything, doing worse than one would expect at this stage of an economic recovery.

It turns out that all of the upside surprise in tax receipts is coming from two sources. One is tax payments from corporations, up both because last year corporate profits grew much more rapidly than the rest of the economy and because the effective tax rate on corporations went up when a temporary tax break, introduced in 2002, expired. Both are one-time events

The other source of increased revenue is nonwithheld income taxes - taxes that aren't deducted from paychecks but are instead paid by people receiving additional, nonsalary income. The bounce in nonwithheld taxes probably reflects mainly capital gains on stocks and real estate, together with bonuses paid in the finance and real estate industries. Again, this revenue boost looks like a temporary blip driven by rising stocks and the housing bubble."


I think you made Krugman's point for him. If you're going to spend like a drunken sailor, you'd better find the money to spend. Bush did the exact opposite.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#1292 at 07-13-2005 02:44 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
07-13-2005, 02:44 PM #1292
Guest

Re: Admit that Tax cuts work.

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon
I think you made Krugman's point for him. If you're going to spend like a drunken sailor, you'd better find the money to spend. Bush did the exact opposite.
Right, when the spending is for socialist giveaway programs, then it can never be enough for liberals. But when the spending is on defense it can never be too little for liberals.

And whazzup with the silly "temporary uptick in revenues" business? Yeah, everybody knows that somewhere down the road the economy will recede again. It always does. And the Krugman Keyensians will scream bloody murder for increased social spending to fix it, on the backs of the evil rich (ie., anyone who makes more than Mr Horn does).

Of course that fails everytime, unlike "tax cuts for the evil rich" which work everytime.







Post#1293 at 07-13-2005 03:14 PM by jeffw [at Orange County, CA--dob 1961 joined Jul 2001 #posts 417]
---
07-13-2005, 03:14 PM #1293
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Orange County, CA--dob 1961
Posts
417

Re: Admit that Tax cuts work.

Quote Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate
Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon
I think you made Krugman's point for him. If you're going to spend like a drunken sailor, you'd better find the money to spend. Bush did the exact opposite.
Right, when the spending is for socialist giveaway programs, then it can never be enough for liberals. But when the spending is on defense it can never be too little for liberals.
You should get that knee looked at, that's quite a jerk.
Jeff '61







Post#1294 at 07-13-2005 08:45 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
07-13-2005, 08:45 PM #1294
Guest

Re: Admit that Tax cuts work.

Quote Originally Posted by jeffw
Quote Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate
Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon
I think you made Krugman's point for him. If you're going to spend like a drunken sailor, you'd better find the money to spend. Bush did the exact opposite.
Right, when the spending is for socialist giveaway programs, then it can never be enough for liberals. But when the spending is on defense it can never be too little for liberals.
You should get that knee looked at, that's quite a jerk.
Thanks. At least I have a knee to be looked at, jer :wink:







Post#1295 at 08-01-2005 11:17 AM by Tom Mazanec [at NE Ohio 1958 joined Sep 2001 #posts 1,511]
---
08-01-2005, 11:17 AM #1295
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
NE Ohio 1958
Posts
1,511

BTW, I just read an article about how housing prices have dropped sharply in my old home town recently. Looks like I may have sold just in time:
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/July05/Whitney0727.htm







Post#1296 at 08-03-2005 08:27 PM by Virgil K. Saari [at '49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains joined Jun 2001 #posts 7,835]
---
08-03-2005, 08:27 PM #1296
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
'49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains
Posts
7,835

Forever Building Bubbles

Quote Originally Posted by Mr. S. J. Masty
...But The Economist ["In come the waves", The Economist, 18th June 2005, pp 73-75] let the cat out of the bag. On 18th June they reported that housing prices have since 1997 risen by 225% in South Africa, 192% in Ireland, 154% in Britain, 145% in Spain, 114% in Australia, around 73% for America and about the same everywhere that is developed enough to have flush-toilets, apart from Germany, Japan and Hong Kong.


...Our(UK) Baby-Boomer greedy gits mortgaged their homes to buy second properties then mortgaged those to move up or to buy even more. This drove prices higher, forcing youngsters to pay more than they can afford in order to climb onto the so-called "property wagon". For different reasons, each became indebted to the hilt, over-mortgaged and "maxed out" on their credit cards – the Boomers out of avarice, and the kids out of cruel necessity.



... The Laws of Gravity had been repealed, money was free and it would remain so forever, while the politicians were as giddy as the fools that they purported to represent. Being in government, the nominal Left shut up and kept spending, while supporters of the much stupider Right (one cannot call such imprudent, gullible people conservatives) decided that debt, over-consumption and sheer vulgarity were perhaps virtues after all.



.. What mercy should paunchy BMW drivers and sagging Starbucks moms expect from today's sullen 20-somethings, once we have made the bankrupt young stockbrokers lose their tiny, overpriced flats and the hooded chavs queue for soup?

One hates to think. But we are vastly different than our pre-war elders, less aware of our traditional rights, less interested in our responsibilities, and less chary of granting extraordinary powers to a state with increasingly few compunctions. Now, around the corner bounces the biggest economic bubble in history..

Gitterdammerung (The Twilight of the Gits) - Or the coming cataclysmic property crash - and its even more cataclysmic consequences







Post#1297 at 08-03-2005 08:54 PM by Mikebert [at Kalamazoo MI joined Jul 2001 #posts 4,502]
---
08-03-2005, 08:54 PM #1297
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Kalamazoo MI
Posts
4,502

Re: Tax cuts don't work.

Quote Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate
Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon
Now, for the non-Kool-Aid version (provided, as always, for discussion purposes only):

Quote Originally Posted by NY Times, Paul Krugman
The usual suspects on the right are already declaring victory over the deficit, and proclaiming vindication for the Laffer Curve - the claim that tax cuts pay for themselves, because they have such a miraculous effect on the economy that revenue actually goes up.

But the fact is that revenue remains far lower than anyone would have predicted before the tax cuts began. In January 2001 the budget office forecast revenues of $2.57 trillion in fiscal 2005. Even with the recent increase in receipts, the actual number will be at least $400 billion less... In other words, we're still deep in the fiscal quagmire.
Notice that nowhere does Krugman debunk the mystery of how tax revenues have increased in the aftermath of tax cuts.
Quote Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate
Quote Originally Posted by Mike Alexander '59
*****************************************
I will note in advance that Marc probably won't respond to this post with an on-topic reasoned response. You can all judge the quality of his response (or lack of response) for yourself.
*****************************************
Why did you say that?
See above







Post#1298 at 08-03-2005 10:04 PM by Zarathustra [at Where the Northwest meets the Southwest joined Mar 2003 #posts 9,198]
---
08-03-2005, 10:04 PM #1298
Join Date
Mar 2003
Location
Where the Northwest meets the Southwest
Posts
9,198

Re: Forever Building Bubbles

Quote Originally Posted by Virgil K. Saari
Quote Originally Posted by Mr. S. J. Masty
... and less chary of granting extraordinary powers to a state with increasingly few compunctions . . .
I never remember seeing the word "chary" before. Popped it into Onelook.com and got: "Adjective: Characterized by great cautious and wariness ". Cool.
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.







Post#1299 at 11-29-2005 11:35 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
11-29-2005, 11:35 PM #1299
Guest

From tomorrow's fornt page headline story in the New York Times...
  • Gasoline is cheaper than it was before Hurricane Katrina slammed into New Orleans. Consumer confidence jumped last month and new home sales hit a record. The stock market has been rising. Even the nation's beleaguered factories appear to be headed for a happy holiday season.

    By most measures, the economy appears to be doing just fine. No, scratch that, it appears to be booming.

    But as always with the United States economy... Bush sucks, the rich are gettin' richer and the Democrats ain't running the show, so what the hell else is new in Amerika, huh?


Quite a fourth turning we're having, huh, folks? Yep, doom and gloom are surely "just around the corner," now! Hang on, Democrats, the big disaster-dam in the sky is gonna break any day now... :cry:

p.s. Anybody seen Robert around in this thread, in the last couple of years? I wonder what happened to that big bear anyways?







Post#1300 at 11-30-2005 05:26 AM by albatross '82 [at Portland, OR joined Sep 2005 #posts 248]
---
11-30-2005, 05:26 AM #1300
Join Date
Sep 2005
Location
Portland, OR
Posts
248

Quote Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate
From tomorrow's fornt page headline story in the New York Times...
  • Gasoline is cheaper than it was before Hurricane Katrina slammed into New Orleans. Consumer confidence jumped last month and new home sales hit a record. The stock market has been rising. Even the nation's beleaguered factories appear to be headed for a happy holiday season.

    By most measures, the economy appears to be doing just fine. No, scratch that, it appears to be booming.

    But as always with the United States economy... Bush sucks, the rich are gettin' richer and the Democrats ain't running the show, so what the hell else is new in Amerika, huh?


Quite a fourth turning we're having, huh, folks? Yep, doom and gloom are surely "just around the corner," now! Hang on, Democrats, the big disaster-dam in the sky is gonna break any day now... :cry:

p.s. Anybody seen Robert around in this thread, in the last couple of years? I wonder what happened to that big bear anyways?
Everyone is preaching the end of the world, even the far right. They think the end times are just around the corner as well. Things are ever changing, and things will not be safe and tidy forever.
-----------------------------------------