The Economic Populist
Speak Your Mind 2 Cents at a Time
Most Popular
User login
Recent comments
Poll
The Golden Rule
- 1826288 reads
Will the NY Attorney General Bring Doomsday Charges Against Wall Street? If So, How Long Will He Survive?
- 1216413 reads
New York Post Claims Census Falsifies Unemployment Figures
- 951130 reads
How Many Jobs Are Needed to Keep Up with Population Growth?
- 362145 reads
VAT or Value Added Tax is Getting a Look in D.C.
- 345773 reads
U3 and U6 Unemployment during the Great Depression
- 321232 reads
The war on the middle class
- 315871 reads
House discusses 401k/IRA confiscation
- 314762 reads
Tax Cuts for the Rich Do Not Generate Jobs
- 279796 reads
.
Why don't they just cut out the corporate welfare parts. i.e. money going offshore, bad contracts which give no deliverable, including U.S. jobs, some of those projects which won't create any U.S. jobs and the obvious thing is to stop feeding the Zombie banks.
What percentage of this debacle is going directly into the Zombie banks never to be seen again, i.e. derivatives, CDS payouts, etc.?
I gave both you and NDD a 5 because it's both a major concern but which one screws us worse, out of control deficits or putting the economy in a nose dive by cutting spending during a deflationary recession.
Here's another question: when it comes to the deflation statistics...just how much of that is home prices and how much is it weighting the rest?
Because on my own finances, everything is getting jacked up, health insurance costs, rent, insurance, food....
In a move to try to fend off calls for audits and more oversight, the fed is providing more disclosure about its very aggressive moves. It has provided a monthly report. Here is a link.
The thing that sticks out. The Fed continues to lose big money - like tens of billions on its Maiden Lane investments. Ouch. Check out Table 24.
about the situation. I was going to do a story on this but there are several already posted about the deficit: Link
I lived in California for 2 years during the internet boom. The best thing was the weather - that was it. I remember voting in an election that had several propositions on the ballot. You have to be someone trained in legalese to understand them. A well intentioned system that has been absolutely corrupted.
Anyway, here is an interesting point of view. This author scorches everybody: Link
what would happen right now with that but that's why I linked to the LA Times (the ultimate open border advocacy newspaper and they mention prop. 13.
I hear what you are saying, but at this rate the markets are going to force us to reign in our spending (or monetize like Weimar).
It's gone beyond the idea of a choice. We are running out of road. There isn't enough capital in the world (without Weimar-like printing) to fund these levels of deficits.
For the first time in American history, we are going to have external forces exert control over our federal spending. We can either prepare for it, or we can let it happen. Choosing not to reign in spending will not be a one of the choices.
Some one may argue a bit partisan but it is a good start.
Proposition 13.
It seems to be systemic. I just like to put that in because we have some major economic fiction when it comes to costs and labor economists facts...lots of just beyond belief spin claiming that unlimited migration/illegal immigration helps the economy.
Does anyone even really understand all of the structural problems, the gerrymandering, political, special interest gridlock, etc. in CA to even give us an overview?
I sure can't!. If you find an objective, insightful analysis on the California disaster big picture, please share.
California's problems are very structural. It takes practically acts of God to pass a budget or increase taxes (property and income).
Education, Environment and Health care that is it. Everything else especially funding for two wars gets the axe.
If we ever recovery from this Great Recession taxes will have to go up there is no avoiding it. I would start with short-term capital gains.
Got ya now.
consider quoting some relevant passage. You can also invite that person to cross post (but make sure it's credible!) by posting a comment on their blog.
But please the quality of EP content so far has been very high and let's keep it that way!
There are tons of sites devoted to "survival" of the impending x catastrophe and those are "CT" in my view, only people writing with well cited, referenced, insightful, original blogs please!
otherwise known as accounting magic tricks.
When we get into this realm of asset evaluation and accounting methods, etc. it's one dense forest and for the layperson they cannot see the trees to save their souls, much less experts.
Some of the more common methods to create Ponzi schemes, asset inflation, profits when there are losses, etc.
Maybe a "cookbook" of recipes on how the methods operate.
A cookbook on cooking the books.
I understand your concern with runaway deficit spending. But in the face of the most serious economic downturn in over 70 years, would a balanced budget be a better option?
If we cut $1 Trillion from the federal budget, how many more millions get laid off? What happens to prices? Do we go into a wage/price deflationary spiral? Would the Fed or Treasury be able to guarantee deposits in ordinary commercial banks? Do you believe in the "treasury view" that Krugman has derided?
As far as I can tell, the only thing worse than big deficit spending here, is NOT big deficit spending here.
But why do you think a balanced budget would be better?
Normally I kind of blow off seemingly corporate agenda centered, Republican Redstate blog, but I saw this:
H.R. 2346.
saying Obama is going to use U.S. taxpayer funds to bail out Europe through sending billions to the IMF (shouldn't the IMF be sending funds with draconian dictates to the U.S. at this point?).
Despite the fact that the price of gold has increased nearly 4 fold since 2001, gold production has slowly fallen .
click image to enlarge
[edit: RO, format your links and images ya all! the tools are here, use 'em, pls]
I'm just making a reference to the source.
That area has very strong union ties ... which may be the owners basis for discontent.
Please report back should you go panning. I would like to hear what your efforts gain.
a non-union shop. I have friends that work at non-union shops and they love their jobs. Pay is good, owners are great, etc.
So under the new world rule, in order to competent you must be union? What next.....I must be a certain nationality, sex or color?
Pages