Is this crisis almost the end of the US?
-
No. I've see this plenty of times before. Now is a really good time to buy stock in the DOW or S&P 500. Also, buy 3-4 houses if you can. Then just ride it out.
fat_boy wrote:
People have been saying for decades the US is bankrupt
Really? I remember not too long ago when Clinton wiped out the deficit.
My Blog: http://cynicalclots.blogspot.com
Dirk Higbee wrote:
when Clinton wiped out the deficit.
*cough* He what? Where was I? *cough* I seem to recall a hot economy (driven by the dotcom bubble) helping the deficit but the bubble burst well before the deficit was erased. What did Slick have to do with any of this?
-
Dirk Higbee wrote:
when Clinton wiped out the deficit.
*cough* He what? Where was I? *cough* I seem to recall a hot economy (driven by the dotcom bubble) helping the deficit but the bubble burst well before the deficit was erased. What did Slick have to do with any of this?
According to this: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy05/hist.html[^] This xls file ( http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy05/sheets/hist01z1.xls[^] ) has the following (from the Total group for Receipts, Outlays, and Surplus or Deficit).
Year Total
Receipts Outlays Surplus or Deficit(−)1988 909,303 1,064,455 -155,152
1989 991,190 1,143,646 -152,456
1990 1,031,969 1,253,165 -221,195
1991 1,055,041 1,324,369 -269,328
1992 1,091,279 1,381,655 -290,376
1993 1,154,401 1,409,489 -255,087
1994 1,258,627 1,461,877 -203,250
1995 1,351,830 1,515,802 -163,972
1996 1,453,062 1,560,535 -107,473
1997 1,579,292 1,601,250 -21,958
1998 1,721,798 1,652,585 69,213
1999 1,827,454 1,701,891 125,563
2000 2,025,218 1,788,773 236,445
2001 1,991,194 1,863,770 127,424
2002 1,853,173 2,010,970 -157,797
2003 1,782,342 2,157,637 -375,295¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
According to this: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy05/hist.html[^] This xls file ( http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy05/sheets/hist01z1.xls[^] ) has the following (from the Total group for Receipts, Outlays, and Surplus or Deficit).
Year Total
Receipts Outlays Surplus or Deficit(−)1988 909,303 1,064,455 -155,152
1989 991,190 1,143,646 -152,456
1990 1,031,969 1,253,165 -221,195
1991 1,055,041 1,324,369 -269,328
1992 1,091,279 1,381,655 -290,376
1993 1,154,401 1,409,489 -255,087
1994 1,258,627 1,461,877 -203,250
1995 1,351,830 1,515,802 -163,972
1996 1,453,062 1,560,535 -107,473
1997 1,579,292 1,601,250 -21,958
1998 1,721,798 1,652,585 69,213
1999 1,827,454 1,701,891 125,563
2000 2,025,218 1,788,773 236,445
2001 1,991,194 1,863,770 127,424
2002 1,853,173 2,010,970 -157,797
2003 1,782,342 2,157,637 -375,295¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
1. My bad - I read "deficit" but thought "national debt". :-O 2. The big bubble in receipts (1998 - 2000) despite the steadily increased outlays during the same period seems to match my theory about credit going to the tech bubble v. Clinton. No?
I would *guess* that's partly true. But honestly I don't know enough about how this stuff works to offer much of an opinion one way or the other. It would seem interesting to note that this was accomplished by a Democratic president but with a Republican dominated house and senate (at least after 1994, right?). And that the outlays (as you mentioned) *never* go down. Apparently *no one* can resist the temptation of the Federal cookie jar. Just eyeballing the data, outlays have gone up every single year, at least since the 1930s. So it seems to me that neither party can make much of a claim for fiscal prudence. In terms of national debt, http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/National-Debt-GDP.gif[^] According to the site, the graph is generated from http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2007/[^] So from 1950 to 1980, national debt decreased steadily, increased back up during the 80's and early 90s (i.e. through Reagan-Bush) and decreased again during Clinton. Yet we ran a deficit from the 1950's all the way till now (with the exception of 1998-2000)! And for a whopper of an increase check out 1981-1983 - the deficit was -78,968 and by 1983 was -207,802. Yikes!
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
I would *guess* that's partly true. But honestly I don't know enough about how this stuff works to offer much of an opinion one way or the other. It would seem interesting to note that this was accomplished by a Democratic president but with a Republican dominated house and senate (at least after 1994, right?). And that the outlays (as you mentioned) *never* go down. Apparently *no one* can resist the temptation of the Federal cookie jar. Just eyeballing the data, outlays have gone up every single year, at least since the 1930s. So it seems to me that neither party can make much of a claim for fiscal prudence. In terms of national debt, http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/National-Debt-GDP.gif[^] According to the site, the graph is generated from http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2007/[^] So from 1950 to 1980, national debt decreased steadily, increased back up during the 80's and early 90s (i.e. through Reagan-Bush) and decreased again during Clinton. Yet we ran a deficit from the 1950's all the way till now (with the exception of 1998-2000)! And for a whopper of an increase check out 1981-1983 - the deficit was -78,968 and by 1983 was -207,802. Yikes!
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
Jim Crafton wrote:
It would seem interesting to note that this was accomplished by a Democratic president but with a Republican dominated house and senate (at least after 1994, right?).
Given that the congress holds the purse strings couldn't one also say "accomplished by a Republican dominated house and senate with a Democratic president"? Sorry, my dislike of Bill Clinton is showing.
Jim Crafton wrote:
Apparently *no one* can resist the temptation of the Federal cookie jar. Just eyeballing the data, outlays have gone up every single year, at least since the 1930s. So it seems to me that neither party can make much of a claim for fiscal prudence.
Absolutely! The current administration and congress is spending like drunken sailors.
-
Jim Crafton wrote:
It would seem interesting to note that this was accomplished by a Democratic president but with a Republican dominated house and senate (at least after 1994, right?).
Given that the congress holds the purse strings couldn't one also say "accomplished by a Republican dominated house and senate with a Democratic president"? Sorry, my dislike of Bill Clinton is showing.
Jim Crafton wrote:
Apparently *no one* can resist the temptation of the Federal cookie jar. Just eyeballing the data, outlays have gone up every single year, at least since the 1930s. So it seems to me that neither party can make much of a claim for fiscal prudence.
Absolutely! The current administration and congress is spending like drunken sailors.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
The current administration and congress is spending like drunken sailors.
You are being unfair to sailors, drunken or otherwise, as they generally stop spending when their pockets run out of money, unlike Congress which just borrows some more. If only we could cancel their credit cards...
-
fat_boy wrote:
Anyone fancy a Dodge Viper for 15,000 euros?
Thanks, but no thanks. Nice car, but the gas mileage is not good at all.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon "Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
-
fat_boy wrote:
what it stood for 40 years ago
Free market capitalism and christianity?
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Free market capitalism
Bullshit. We had tariffs like we'd bought them at a fire sale. It was only when economic liberals like you started tearing them down and shipping our jobs overseas, that we started printing monopoly money to hide what was happening to our economy.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Paul Conrad wrote:
Nice car, but the gas mileage is not good at all.
If gas gets back above $4.00 @ gallon prices on the guzzlers may drop to that level just to clear inventory.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
That could happen. But why feed some guzzler 4 bucks/gallon gas when it only gets 9 miles to the gallon. Some people can be rich enough to drive these guzzlers and afford the gas price that comes with them, but even with a good amount of money, you'd think people would be a bit wiser in conserving the money. Especially after Wall Street yesterday.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon "Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
-
Mike Mullikin wrote:
The current administration and congress is spending like drunken sailors.
You are being unfair to sailors, drunken or otherwise, as they generally stop spending when their pockets run out of money, unlike Congress which just borrows some more. If only we could cancel their credit cards...
-
That could happen. But why feed some guzzler 4 bucks/gallon gas when it only gets 9 miles to the gallon. Some people can be rich enough to drive these guzzlers and afford the gas price that comes with them, but even with a good amount of money, you'd think people would be a bit wiser in conserving the money. Especially after Wall Street yesterday.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon "Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
Paul Conrad wrote:
you'd think people would be a bit wiser in conserving the money. Especially after Wall Street yesterday.
Two groups of people guaranteed to continue driving them: Congresscritters and Senior Management.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Paul Conrad wrote:
you'd think people would be a bit wiser in conserving the money. Especially after Wall Street yesterday.
Two groups of people guaranteed to continue driving them: Congresscritters and Senior Management.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
Congresscritters
Is there a hunting season for those?
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon "Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
-
Oakman wrote:
Congresscritters
Is there a hunting season for those?
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon "Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
It's a short season. November 4th, this year.
BW
Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand.
Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand.
-- Neil Peart -
Stan Shannon wrote:
Free market capitalism
Bullshit. We had tariffs like we'd bought them at a fire sale. It was only when economic liberals like you started tearing them down and shipping our jobs overseas, that we started printing monopoly money to hide what was happening to our economy.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
It was only when economic liberals like you started tearing them down and shipping our jobs overseas, that we started printing monopoly money to hide what was happening to our economy.
Southerners such Thomas Jefferson and I have always been opposed to tariffs. All true Jeffersonians are, of course. Also, it was reliance upon tariffs under Hoover that caused the entire great depression and started us down the road to socialism under FDR. Finally, tariffs are not anti-free market, they are anti free trade - two concepts only tangentially related.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
Ha! I don't need protection, I AM INVINCIBLE!
Seen GoldenEye? You sound like Boris.
Cheers, Vıkram.
"if abusing me makes you a credible then i better give u the chance which didnt get in real" - Adnan Siddiqi.
Boris is doing just fine. Hi is now in a deep hibernation and princess Lea will save him after several decades.
The narrow specialist in the broad sense of the word is a complete idiot in the narrow sense of the word. Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
-
Ohh, we know where you are - trust me, we know all about you. Paranoid? You'd better be...:suss:
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
Paranoid? You'd better be...Suspicious
Oh Ja?
-
As a young teenager, your parents should be able to protect you from the worst of the present ravages. So hopefully by the time you turn adult the matter should be history. But learn from history. When you become an adult do ... Don't spend what you don't own. Don't buy on credit unless it is an affordable mortgage. Save what you can. Invest in a Pensions scheme for your old age (yep I know it is a very long way off but you need to think about it sooner rather than later).
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
Don't spend what you don't own
Even spending what I do (have) own has been lesson enough, don't confuse the laatjie! :)
-
Oakman wrote:
It was only when economic liberals like you started tearing them down and shipping our jobs overseas, that we started printing monopoly money to hide what was happening to our economy.
Southerners such Thomas Jefferson and I have always been opposed to tariffs. All true Jeffersonians are, of course. Also, it was reliance upon tariffs under Hoover that caused the entire great depression and started us down the road to socialism under FDR. Finally, tariffs are not anti-free market, they are anti free trade - two concepts only tangentially related.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Southerners such Thomas Jefferson and I have always been opposed to tariffs.
Well, there is certainly no need to place tariffs on goods that you have embargoed. Are you like Jefferson in that you think we should simply stop importing goods from countries we are not getting along with? I could get behind that.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Also, it was reliance upon tariffs under Hoover that caused the entire great depression and started us down the road to socialism under FDR.
Only free traders make this silly argument. The best case in this regard is that the Smoot-Hawley act deepened the world-wide recession. My feeling is that we needed to worry about ourselves and if Germany became a little worse off as we protected our manufacturing - so what?
Stan Shannon wrote:
Finally, tariffs are not anti-free market
tariffs are part of a managed economy - antithetical to a free market, by definition.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Southerners such Thomas Jefferson and I have always been opposed to tariffs.
Well, there is certainly no need to place tariffs on goods that you have embargoed. Are you like Jefferson in that you think we should simply stop importing goods from countries we are not getting along with? I could get behind that.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Also, it was reliance upon tariffs under Hoover that caused the entire great depression and started us down the road to socialism under FDR.
Only free traders make this silly argument. The best case in this regard is that the Smoot-Hawley act deepened the world-wide recession. My feeling is that we needed to worry about ourselves and if Germany became a little worse off as we protected our manufacturing - so what?
Stan Shannon wrote:
Finally, tariffs are not anti-free market
tariffs are part of a managed economy - antithetical to a free market, by definition.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
Are you like Jefferson in that you think we should simply stop importing goods from countries we are not getting along with?
I would support it, but I think it would be difficult to implement in a democracy. If we stopped importing from China, for example, consumers would be negatively impacted by it and would not be inclined to support politicians who promoted it. It would actually be a quite regressive tax.
Oakman wrote:
Only free traders make this silly argument. The best case in this regard is that the Smoot-Hawley act deepened the world-wide recession. My feeling is that we needed to worry about ourselves and if Germany became a little worse off as we protected our manufacturing - so what?
Yet our manufacturing suffered tremendously anyway. There is an intenational economy that is beyond the control of any national government. Regardless of what you do, you run a very real risk of having it come back to hurt you in some other way.
Oakman wrote:
tariffs are part of a managed economy - antithetical to a free market, by definition.
No more so than any other form of taxation.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Oakman wrote:
Are you like Jefferson in that you think we should simply stop importing goods from countries we are not getting along with?
I would support it, but I think it would be difficult to implement in a democracy. If we stopped importing from China, for example, consumers would be negatively impacted by it and would not be inclined to support politicians who promoted it. It would actually be a quite regressive tax.
Oakman wrote:
Only free traders make this silly argument. The best case in this regard is that the Smoot-Hawley act deepened the world-wide recession. My feeling is that we needed to worry about ourselves and if Germany became a little worse off as we protected our manufacturing - so what?
Yet our manufacturing suffered tremendously anyway. There is an intenational economy that is beyond the control of any national government. Regardless of what you do, you run a very real risk of having it come back to hurt you in some other way.
Oakman wrote:
tariffs are part of a managed economy - antithetical to a free market, by definition.
No more so than any other form of taxation.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
I would support it, but I think it would be difficult to implement in a democracy. If we stopped importing from China, for example, consumers would be negatively impacted by it and would not be inclined to support politicians who promoted it. It would actually be a quite regressive tax.
So you agree that Jefferson used the embargo and you like the idea, too. Quite a change from claiming the two of you were free traders. Guess you didn't know as much about Jefferson as you thought in this regard either?
Stan Shannon wrote:
Yet our manufacturing suffered tremendously anyway.
Our manufacturing was better off each year in the years after Smoot-Hawley than before. It continued to improve until 1937 when it was crippled by strikes, not by anything to do with overseas trade. Guess you didn't know as much about tariffs during the Depression as you thought either?
Stan Shannon wrote:
No more so than any other form of taxation.
Meaningless noise. Unresponsive and not to the point. Guess you didn't know as much about free markets as you thought either?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
