Federal reserve admits total defeat

Typical name calling Hilly Billy in total denial .
US Declared Debt and debts marked as exceptional items ---- up to $140 trillion .
Do you imagine that borrowings titled as Exceptional , means that it's something special that is not owed ? OK . So you took Cooking and not Maths . But stop being numbers blind .
Even includes your Government scamming the Veterans Fund .
" Don't worry suckers . We are only borrowing what we can't pay back "

 

There is another factor that needs to be taken into account when judging how deep in the doo-doo various countries are, and that is how much of their disposable income the individual household saves. In other words, can they withstand sudden financial shock. Here is a table listing the % of disposable income (savings) - http://econ365.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/gross-savings-rate.pdf

As you can see, Canada, the US, Australia and the UK are alarmingly low. So are some surprising Scandinavian countries. But most of the EU households spend will within their disposable limit, including Greece, Italy and Spain. How bizarre that the individuals are prudent budgeters but not their governments.

 

Where, precisely, did I state that getting rid of ObamaCare would "save this country"? What I said is that it is one of the things that needs to get done in the near term - we can't keep piling multi-trillion dollar entitlements on top of the ones that are already headed for insolvency.

As for those existing entitlements, such as Medicare, that brings us to the second point I made - Obama has got to go. You know as well as I do that those entitlements will never get repealed and/or reformed as long as he remains in office...

 

maybe that they wont... but getting rid of Obama will not rid of them either... medicare part D is a republican boondoggle... so is the design of HR3200 (Obamacare) Obama had no real input on the design of that corporate giveaway to the healthcare industry. He merely pushed it through because thats what the health care/insurance industry wanted pushed through in order to stave off real change

 

I would add that it is an inevitable thing. The world is becoming an increasingly multi-polar place, and that is good for America and her people...

 

If Obama and his progressive friends in Washington had gotten their way, the government would be running our healthcare system. The corporate giveaways in ObamaCare were merely concessions to get the HC/HI industry on board the Democrats' Cloward-Piven approach to "solving" our nation's HC problems...

 

You don't see a downside to our supposedly free country, which fought hard for independence and the establishment of a republican government, being ruled by a dictatorship?

 

China owns America?

Please.

Anyone who thinks this is delusional in hoping to see the downfall of America and its economy.

Get a grip.

 

You're creating a strawman. I was just answering to the ownership of government debt, which is owned by the organization called government. There's no doubt that the attempt to default on the debt will be disastrous for Americans, as it has already proven to be in the last few years, but that does not mean that American citizens are liable for what the government owes.

 

In the end, it's just numbers. The US total liabilities, including unfunded liablities is about 10x GDP. The UK total is about 3.5 times UK GDP. Do you think that your governmen is any more likely to extract 3.5 years of GDP from the people than the US is to get 10? It's a hopeless hole for both countries, and the same problem applies to most, but not all, western nations.

 

Sorry, didnt realize "Brit" was such an offensive term.

Not sure I follow your pidgin english, but if you are referring to what our government checking accounts borrows from our SS and veterans savings accounts, I agree, its all just smoke and mirrors BUT if we are doing international comparisons to nations that dont have such savings accounts, you need to count both the savings and debt. UK collects $100 in revenue and puts it in their checking account. US collects $100 in revenie, puts $95 into the checking account and $5 into savings, then our checking account borrows that $5. The two countries are in identicsal financial situations but you would characterize the US as $5 in debt compared to $0 in the UK. And your aging population problem is a couple decades ahead of ours.

 

That's exactly what all these central banks have been headed for during the last ten years. They are flushing all the money into the equities stock markets where they can give everybody "haircuts" and destroy their wealth. They print worthless money and create worthless bonds. Then they borrow imaginary money to buy it all with. They should be rounded up and put up against a wall.

 

Is that what you think it is in the US, too?

 

Yea, cause the Euro is working out so well...

Its nearly impossible to share and economic system across so many varied social, political, and economic landscapes.

 

If they are not liable , then tell me how they will avoid the effects of being treated as though they were?
Be that by increased taxes , increased product costs and erosion of savings value as the currency is devalued .
They may not offer to pay , but my God they will pay and unless they riot and bring about a revolution of sorts ( not recommended) ,they will have no choice .
Whether you pay up front and voluntary , rather than because there is a gun pointing at you , does not matter .
You will have paid one way or the other .

 

You understand my Post exactly . Just stop being puerile .And if that is your nature , grow up .
The subject is US debt . That other countries are in the same or worse positions is another Topic .
America can never meet its present obligations , and the moment that a major lender pulls the plug , you are Bankrupt .
For many reasons , and partly to avoid China forcing you to a Default position , the US has had to start the process of handing over key parts of its financial policy to them
So , as examples , Bejing will deal direct with the Treasury over further loans and Wall Street is banned from any involvement . Unprecedented .
Also the Public Bank of China is now allowed to make Take Over bids for US banks .
That is defeat , and it is unsurprising that this position is apparently unknown or disbelieved by the vast majority of US citizens . It is as though there has been a discussion embargo .
And yesterday we see Moodys downgrade major US banks again along with other EU banking giants .
It is no use repeatedly returning to the UK as though our weakness somehow validates and justifies your own .
The subject is the debt position of the US , not some other small piece of the jigsaw that can be used to deflect from the key problem --- that the biggest piece has come up with a party trick , it is disappearing down the toilet .

 

Nonsense, Identify even one key part of its financial policy handed over.

Made up nonsense. Why would Wall Street ever be involved in purchases of Federal treasuries? They arent involved when I buy mine and not unprecedented.

 

It must suck to wrong on such a fundamental level.. especially when all that you hold dear hinges on your illusion.

 

Im not a central bank and wasnt aware that central banks do need to go through brokers. But, where is the financial policy handed over to the Chinese? Financial policy hasnt been handed over to the individuals because they can purchase treasuries direct from the US.It hasnt been handed over to the Chinese because they can buy them direct

 

The Chinese are successful because they are reinvesting their money back into their country instead of cutting taxes and letting corporations do whatever they want based on the absolutely ludicrous assumption that private interests left to their own devices will do things that benefit the country. They understand, perfectly, perhaps from observing the US and other western capitalist societies, that allowing private interests to control your economy is not a good idea. They are succeeding because they are subsidizing the growth in their own economy. They realize that you have to have the underlying infrastructure and be on a relatively stable economic path before you can compete with other more developed countries. That's one reason why they are the leaders in many of the alternative energy markets.

Unfortunately, they exert too much control over their population, which is why civil liberties are practically non-existent. But that overly controlling influence of their government is not necessary for monetary reinvestment in their country, it's more for civil control and to ensure that the party in power cannot lose that power.

If we reinvested our resources in our own country, instead of pretending that giving millionaires an extra million bucks in tax breaks and expecting that to make things better, we would not be in the position we are in, and would be better equipped to deal with the other burgeoning economies in the world.

 

There are surely advantages to the Chinese approach in terms of growth, but I'd argue that Scandinavia has a better model.

Countries like Norway and Sweden have government-run education and healthcare, but beyond that, most other things are private. They invest heavily in their labor force, but they let the market actually determine growth.

That seems to be the ideal.

China still has a heavy hand in controlling the business sector. That might be effective for organizational purposes and rapid short term growth, but honestly, they can only manipulate their currency so much. They've artificially extended their period of cheap labor about as far as they can. Already, we're seeing a lot of industry move to poorer countries.

China has to eventually acknowledge that comparative advantage will force them to rise in skill level as a labor force. Eventually, they won't be able to compete for the cheapest and lowest skill industries.

 

Good points.

I definitely like the models of some of the European countries. I think those places have a perfect mix of capitalism and socialism, something I'd like to see us try and achieve here in this country. I don't want a system tipped too far to either side though. I believe in balance, and that achieving a balance is the best pathway to success.

 

I agree. Although, after seeing how a lot of Europe has started going bankrupt, I lean further in the capitalistic direction than I used to.

As far as I can tell, the larger and more diverse your country is, the harder it is to run like Norway.

I think a nice compromise would be to socialize medicine, phase out SS, and streamline our education systems into more practical fields of study. If we made it easier for people to attain higher levels of education in technical, science, and engineering fields, we'd have a better paid workforce that wouldn't have to compete with migrant labor or have any worries of outsourcing.

 

Absolutely. Education and specialized training is essential, especially in our technological world.

Also agree about population size, and I had meant to include that in my previous post.

I also think we should nationalize our energy industry. I only believe in nationalizing something if it's vital to pretty much every aspect of your country, and energy certainly is to ours. You could even keep the existing energy companies the way they are, but remove the profit incentive, and all that money spent on advertising and lobbying, and the savings will extend to all of us, which will benefit the economy. Job losses through something like that would be minimal, and the savings on energy costs would probably allow some companies to increase their workforce, especially companies who use a lot of electricity(and therefore have higher bills) like manufacturing companies.

I know the government is not as efficient as private industry, but I don't see any reason why that has to be true. Run the energy companies the same way you are now, just minus shareholder dividends, bonus packages, advertising, and lobbying costs.

 

I like your idea, but it's not going to happen. The energy sector has some of the strongest lobbying power of any industry.

It's like how I wish we had nationalized our telecommunications grid. South Korea has the best internet infrastructure in the world, but the way they did it was by nationalizing the infrastructure itself and opening up the ISP market to any company with a little bit of capital. The end result is far more competition than our own markets.