• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Legacy of poor Economics

Ether said:
I'm not trying to be amusing. Debt cancellation would be a far better policy if you really weigh it against the alternative of paying off the debt (and continuing to service it for God knows how long). At least, I can only justify that argument on economic grounds. There would be severe diplomatic consequences for the United States which must also be taken into consideration. That is for the foreign affairs analysts to comment on in another forum.

Worldwide economic depression seems like an economic issue to me. Perhaps the US can combine debt default with elimination of its currency and return to the barter system to really ensure chaos. ;)
 
Canuck, you seem to not offer a single solution yourself, and calling everyone the "nintendo generation" is frankly stupid...



No, I don't care about your rense links, they're not all that accurate.
 
Iriemon said:
Worldwide economic depression seems like an economic issue to me. Perhaps the US can combine debt default with elimination of its currency and return to the barter system to really ensure chaos. ;)

I don't deny that cancelling the debt would trigger a financial crisis and a severe, global recession. People who rely heavily on government bonds would no doubt be hurt by such a policy. But debt cancellation must be weighed against the consequences of the alternative - paying off the debt.

What do you think would happen, for instance, if the US Government suddenly decided to pay off the entire $7 trillion public debt, and raised enough taxes or printed enough money to do so? Certainly that would also trigger a worldwide depression and the chaos you speak of. This course will never be taken, and the public debt is paid off gradually year by year. The costs are dispersed among millions of people and spread out over time - but that doesn't make the costs any less real. Add to that the obligation to service the debt (an obligation that obviously disappears under a policy of debt cancellation), and you have a consistent burden on the economy that will extend for at least the next few decades.

Another benefit of debt cancellation is that the government will never be able to borrow again - or at least not until some distant point in the future. I realize a lot of Keynesians on this board do not see that as a benefit. I don't think you're one of them, but I could be wrong.
 
Ether said:
I don't deny that cancelling the debt would trigger a financial crisis and a severe, global recession. People who rely heavily on government bonds would no doubt be hurt by such a policy. But debt cancellation must be weighed against the consequences of the alternative - paying off the debt.

What do you think would happen, for instance, if the US Government suddenly decided to pay off the entire $7 trillion public debt, and raised enough taxes or printed enough money to do so? Certainly that would also trigger a worldwide depression and the chaos you speak of. This course will never be taken, and the public debt is paid off gradually year by year. The costs are dispersed among millions of people and spread out over time - but that doesn't make the costs any less real. Add to that the obligation to service the debt (an obligation that obviously disappears under a policy of debt cancellation), and you have a consistent burden on the economy that will extend for at least the next few decades.

Another benefit of debt cancellation is that the government will never be able to borrow again - or at least not until some distant point in the future. I realize a lot of Keynesians on this board do not see that as a benefit. I don't think you're one of them, but I could be wrong.


"My other piece of advice, Copperfield," said Mr. Micawber, "you know: Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditures nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery."

David Copperfield. Same holds true for governments.
 
What do you think would happen, for instance, if the US Government suddenly decided to pay off the entire $7 trillion public debt, and raised enough taxes or printed enough money to do so? Certainly that would also trigger a worldwide depression and the chaos you speak of. This course will never be taken, and the public debt is paid off gradually year by year. The costs are dispersed among millions of people and spread out over time - but that doesn't make the costs any less real. Add to that the obligation to service the debt (an obligation that obviously disappears under a policy of debt cancellation), and you have a consistent burden on the economy that will extend for at least the next few decades.






well printing more money means the $ 's value goes down
and inflation rises
raising taxes on the middle class would bury them like a stone in water
if coupled to inflation and lower $ value

"Canuck, you seem to not offer a single solution yourself, and calling everyone the "nintendo generation" is frankly stupid..."

I have no answers on how to fix this
Greenspan America's economic guru had the answer 6 years ago when
he said no more spending but that was when the debt was at 2 trilion $

these kinds of situations happened before
mexico and russia both reivaluated their currencies the US govt could declare the currency invallid and hand out new crisp us $ at a ratio of 10:1 this wouldnt be advisable as the world uses the US$ And now 8 trillion $ debt is underpinned on the $ value

WE could also do like the europeans and make a currency for all americans
call it the CAN TEX MEX
cans = 100 euros texs = 10 euros mexs = 1 euro

this allows for 1 border 1 currency and 1 union
Although we would still have our own autonomy

I do not have a real answer but among my guess''s there might be a salvation
I dont expect they would be that promising
should of listened to greenspan 6 years ago
that would of been the correct answer, if not the politically corect answer
 
Last edited:
Iriemon said:
"My other piece of advice, Copperfield," said Mr. Micawber, "you know: Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditures nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery."

David Copperfield. Same holds true for governments.

Not totally true. There's nothing wrong with drawing down your cash balance or purchasing credit if the transaction is voluntary between two private individuals. Obviously, public debt cannot be characterized in that manner and definitely has different implications. Setting all that aside, what does this have to do with debt cancellation? I also agree the national debt is a negative burden on the economy, that's why I want to eliminate it in the best possible manner.
 
Ether said:
Not totally true. There's nothing wrong with drawing down your cash balance or purchasing credit if the transaction is voluntary between two private individuals. Obviously, public debt cannot be characterized in that manner and definitely has different implications. Setting all that aside, what does this have to do with debt cancellation? I also agree the national debt is a negative burden on the economy, that's why I want to eliminate it in the best possible manner.

IMO the best possible manner to eliminate the debt is by following Mr. Micawber's advice.
 
Ether said:
Not totally true. There's nothing wrong with drawing down your cash balance or purchasing credit if the transaction is voluntary between two private individuals. Obviously, public debt cannot be characterized in that manner and definitely has different implications. Setting all that aside, what does this have to do with debt cancellation? I also agree the national debt is a negative burden on the economy, that's why I want to eliminate it in the best possible manner.


I Agree
debt cancelation would also mean ,That the rest of the world would drop the US currency. That would make the dollar worth 10 cents !
 
Iriemon said:
IMO the best possible manner to eliminate the debt is by following Mr. Micawber's advice.

best way was to listen to greenspan 6 years go
now the only way out is the hard way and it isnt gona be nice
 
Canuck said:
best way was to listen to greenspan 6 years go
now the only way out is the hard way and it isnt gona be nice

cite, please?
 
cite?
you mean site
its all well documented if you look in the right places
 
cite?
you mean site

No, I think he means 'cite' as in 'citation'. For practical purposes here on this board, synonymous with url.

Greenspan America's economic guru had the answer 6 years ago when
he said no more spending but that was when the debt was at 2 trilion $
Have reviewed all Greenspan speeches in 1999, 2000. Cannot find any instance of his having said what you claim. Posted some of the things that he did say on...

http://debatepolitics.com/showthread.php?t=4546
 
washingtonpost.com
Inflation In Sept. Highest Since '80
Federal Benefits To Rise Up to 4.1%

By Nell Henderson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, October 15, 2005; A01



Hurricanes Katrina and Rita helped make energy prices soar in September at the fastest rate on record, contributing to the highest monthly consumer price inflation in 25 years, the government reported yesterday.

The inflation spike means payments to millions of Americans receiving Social Security and other federal benefits will rise next year by the largest amount since 1991, because of automatic cost-of-living adjustments.

However, average wages for most workers have risen more slowly than prices over the past 12 months, leaving workers with less spending power than a year earlier.

Energy prices have eased a bit this month and other prices show no sign of breaking out of control, analysts said. The worst monthly inflation increase in a generation does not signal a return to the economic turbulence of the 1970s and early '80s, with double-digit inflation and interest rates. Global competition and a vigilant Federal Reserve should prevent that, they said.

But consumers will probably have to live with higher prices and rising interest rates for months to come. That mixture, at a time when household debt is high and savings are low, is already slowing economic growth, several analysts said.

"I don't think these high energy prices are going away anytime soon," said Richard A. Yamarone, director of economic research at Argus Research Corp. That leaves households with less money to spend on other things, when many non-energy companies are trying to raise their prices, he said. "Consumers are pulling back."

Consumer prices rose 1.2 percent last month and 4.7 percent in the 12 months that ended in September, according to the Labor Department's consumer price index. That was the biggest monthly advance since March 1980, and the steepest annual rise since May 1991.

The CPI increase primarily reflected energy prices, which rose 12 percent last month -- the biggest monthly increase since the government began collecting such data in 1957.

Energy prices have been rising for more than two years as the global demand for oil has grown and supplies have remained tight. Prices spiked in September after the Gulf Coast hurricanes shut down and disabled oil rigs, refineries and pipelines. Much of the lost production has been restored. Meanwhile, the government warned last week that high natural gas prices will push household heating bills up this winter.

The federal government automatically adjusts many benefit payments to help recipients keep up with inflation. For example, Social Security payments to more than 50 million retired and disabled workers will rise 4.1 percent in January. For senior citizens enrolled in Medicare, part of their increase will be consumed by rising health insurance premiums, which are deducted from Social Security checks.

Millions of recipients of other federal benefits -- including military, Foreign Service and civilian federal retirees -- also will receive a cost-of-living adjustment, known as a COLA, in their monthly checks.

The annual COLA is one of the foundations of the Washington-area economy. More than 327,000 civil service retirees and spouses of deceased retirees and more than 174,400 military retirees live in the District, Maryland and Virginia. Nationwide, there are about 2.4 million civil service retirees and about 1.9 million military retirees.

The size of the annual COLA is based on the change in a variation of the CPI over the federal fiscal year, which ended Sept. 30.

But most U.S. workers don't get automatic cost-of-living adjustments to their pay. After taking inflation into account, average weekly wages for production and non-managerial workers -- who make up more than 80 percent of the workforce -- fell 1.2 percent last month, the Labor Department said in a separate report. Those earnings bought 2.7 percent less than they did a year earlier, after adjusting for price increases.

The figures released yesterday revealed the steepest annual decline in average hourly and weekly wages, adjusted for inflation, since the early 1990s, said Jared Bernstein, senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute.

"We are in the midst of a protracted wage slump," Bernstein said, noting that pay increases are not pushing up inflation now as they did in past decades.

In the 1970s, when more workers belonged to unions and had COLA clauses in their contracts, higher oil prices did cause wages to rise, which propelled more price increases. But since the early 1980s, there has been "no evidence of pass-through" from energy prices to prices other than those for food and energy, Janet L. Yellen, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, said in a recent speech.

"Unacceptably high inflation remains just a risk, not the most likely outcome," she said.

So far, most businesses are not passing on their energy costs by raising other prices, the CPI report showed. The so-called core-CPI, which excludes food and energy prices, rose just 0.1 percent for the month and 2 percent over the past year.

Prices rose in September for food, housing, medical care, new cars and education, while declining for clothing, hotel rooms, personal computers and rental housing.

But several companies, including consumer-product giants Clorox Co., Procter & Gamble Co. and Kimberly-Clark Corp., have announced plans to raise prices next year, Yamarone said.

And consumer expectations of future inflation rose again this month, the University of Michigan reported yesterday. Fed policymakers worry that higher inflation expectations might cause shoppers to accept higher prices, allowing them to take off.

The Fed cannot "let the inflation virus infect the blood supply and poison the system," Richard W. Fisher, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, said in a speech last week.

Fed officials have said they probably will keep raising interest rates in coming months to keep inflation down. Higher rates dampen borrowing and spending, slowing economic growth and making it harder for businesses to raise prices.

The central bank raised its benchmark short-term rate to 3.75 percent last month. Fed officials have not said how high the rate will go, but many analysts and investors think it will rise to around 4.5 percent early next year.

Yamarone said he doesn't think inflation will rise out of control. But, he said, "if we have a very cold winter, we're in for very stormy economic times."

© 2005 The Washington Post Company

this report from the washington post describes a very poor situation coming up in dec.
one that will need quite a bit of borrowing so I doubt the debt cancelation would help
It looks like consumers are pulling back is a poignant remark.
meanwhile Defense spending isnt suffering none

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/14/AR2005101400510_pf.html
 

Attachments

  • Jingo.JPG
    Jingo.JPG
    15.8 KB · Views: 0
  • saddamBush.jpg
    saddamBush.jpg
    23.2 KB · Views: 0
  • stillaliveandwell.jpg
    stillaliveandwell.jpg
    48.9 KB · Views: 1
  • real4.JPG
    real4.JPG
    21.6 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Canuck said:
cite?
you mean site
its all well documented if you look in the right places

That is your job. Back up what you say or it's BS.
 
Iriemon said:
That is your job. Back up what you say or it's BS.[/QUOTE

do your home work I have already told you

his exact words are "any more borrowing would be troubling"


whiich is obvoius as since he has appeared in france to ease it to the world
out of control

well chosen words for servicing the debt will be troubling
America has to borrow to service the debt
it is indeed past the dont borrow no more stage

With the PETRO EURO heading for a reality
I would imagine troublsome times are in full blown swing as well

watch it all unfold in the next couple of years
 
Canuck said:
Iriemon said:
That is your job. Back up what you say or it's BS.[/QUOTE

do your home work I have already told you

his exact words are "any more borrowing would be troubling"


whiich is obvoius as since he has appeared in france to ease it to the world
out of control

well chosen words for servicing the debt will be troubling
America has to borrow to service the debt
it is indeed past the dont borrow no more stage

With the PETRO EURO heading for a reality
I would imagine troublsome times are in full blown swing as well

watch it all unfold in the next couple of years

sure thing
 
CanDuck,

any more borrowing would be troubling

Have used the search features at the Fed website for the words that you say were Greenspan's exact words and found 3 documents containing those words. Unfortunately, they were all FOMC transcripts from 1981, 1986, 1987 and referred to entirely different subjects.

Perhaps you are mistaken.
 
Back
Top Bottom