I want inflation. I want debt. I want spending. It's the only way to get us booming!

So whos going to pay for another stimulus?
Oh,thats right,our kids and grandkids.
The first stimulus=failed
Second stimulus=failed
Now you want to try a 3rd?
Tell me how great did the last stimulus do to help our economy?What good did it do for jobs?Obozo said it would cut the unemployment ,but here we are at 9%.
And more inflation,really?Have you been to the grocery stores lately and seen the price of food?Will $10 for a loaf of bread and $20 for a gallon of milk satisfy you?How will higher prices make people want to spend money more?And more debt?Really?
Can you explain ?

 

Yes you do because that's what you are going to get with those policies.

That contradicts the statements made in the OP.

The Stimulus didn't work, the Bailouts didn't work. Printing money and shoving it in banks isn't working.

They are trying your way and it isn't producing results.

Believe it or not, your wrong. We have too many open window spending policies that don't add as much to the economy as they take out. If you don't have your eye on spending first, you don't have a grasp of this problem. In ten years our debt will double. Do you think we'll be better off?

 

here we go..blame Bush.Never fails

 

That may be your problem. The 'experts' say inflation is running around 2% now. Any trip out shopping says otherwise. The CPI is now not a true reflection of inflation. It has been reformulated to be gauged lower, beginning in the Carter administration. Who's the kooky Austrian economist, BTW?

Here's a copy and paste, FWIW.

"Telling the truth about inflation would require the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates and that would be bad for economic growth.

Besides, hundreds of billions of dollars in government entitlement payment outflows depend on the inflation number.

For instance, federal law mandates that Social Security checks increase thanks to "cost-of-living adjustments," or COLAs, that are supposed to compensate for inflation.

So, higher inflation numbers cost the federal government millions more in increased Social Security payments.

But when the Bureau of Labor Statistics intentionally rigs the Consumer Price Index calculations to low-ball the inflation rate, Social Security entitlement payments are kept level.

As a result, retirees quietly lose billions of dollars that should have been paid out, had the cost of living numbers been reported honestly. But the government saves the expense.

How does the federal government manipulate inflation numbers?

The Consumer Price Index, or CPI, is the central statistic the federal government uses to calculate inflation.

The CPI is a complex government statistic that was introduced in the 1920s to track the market cost of a "basket of goods and services."

Beginning during the Carter administration, federal economists cleverly redefined the CPI, with the goal of removing from the index expensive items, including food and energy, that would push the CPI higher.

Today, the Federal Reserve when setting interest rates focuses on a variation of the CPI that measures "core inflation."

According to the Forbes "Investopedia," core inflation excludes items such as food and energy because food and energy "face volatile price movements."

In other words, since food and energy prices can spike upwards, as they have this year, the Bureau of Labor Statistics calculates "core inflation" without food and energy prices, under the rationale that food and energy price spikes are merely temporary price shocks that would distort the measurement of underlying long-term inflation.

To a family faced with paying rising food costs to feed the kids and skyrocketing gas costs just get to work, the definition of "core inflation" at 2 percent is a joke, not at all reflective of the increased dollars the family has to shovel out just to get by.

Even more disturbing, the Bureau of Labor Statistics' calculation of "core inflation" is not limited merely to throwing food and energy prices out of the CPI.

The price of any good or service in the CPI market basket prone to spiking can be thrown out, under the rationale that the items with the largest price changes reflect passing market disequilibrium that would distort the measurement of long-term trends.

When removing expensive items from the CPI market basket of goods and services was not enough to depress inflation numbers, the Bureau of Labor Statistics innovated even more, changing the "weighted factors" used in calculating CPI statistics, so the results end up under-reporting the true inflation people experience in everyday living."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here's a graph showing real inflation vs current CPI formula.

 

I didn't blame anybody. I actually encourage what the Republican's did. Nice try though!

 

er, thats not even what they teach in mainstream college econ. sorry dude.

 

I suppose you havnt gotten to econ yet, ur still in college right? Take a few econ classes, it will do you wonders.

 

That's right. Everyone knows that shopping is the only cure for debt. And once Tao has his inflation and higher debt and outrageous spending he'l be back to blame it on "them".

 

You are absolutely correct Sir.

Those who oppose this PROVEN solution, are simply scared.
Scared of Arabs
Scared of Iraq
Scared of healthcare
Scared of taxes
Scared of Blackie McBlackman

They're scared of friggin' everything!

Q: Why are the ones constantly pushing for military solutions, always the ones who are scared of their own shadow?

 

​

 

Countries don't go broke from over spending and debt. I mean look at Japan. They are thriving yet their debt is over 100% of their GDP. There is nothing anyone can do about a country with high debt. They can't just repo their country. And as long as Japan continues to make good electronics people will continue to invest in the country.

No..Countries don't go broke from debt. They go broke from lack of money flow. Which shouldn't be too difficult to achieve since we are the most material hungry country on the planet..

People are scared so they are pinching pennies. This leads to lack of demand which leads to lack of jobs. All we need is a significant boost. A stimulus amounting to a massive 1.5-2 trillion dollars. Debt be (*)(*)(*)(*)ed. We're in a lack of spending crisis. And spending is the only way out. Cutting spending is only going to prolong the recovery and possibly send us to a double dip.

 

In the long run, a trade surplus allows for more sustainable growth than a trade deficit.

The worst thing about our current consumption-hungry economy is that foreign investment keeps us afloat, yet foreign investment is the first thing to take a hit when markets destabilize.

More government spending and more consumer spending aren't the answer right now. Countries do go broke from debt, but it's not just the debt alone that causes it.

For example, the USSR did go broke from debt. We essentially tricked them into spending far more than they could borrow via the arms race, although we damaged our own economy in the process.

Nowadays, Russia has a very low amount of debt, but that's only because of the vast economic realignment they went through towards semi-privatization. There are several problems with their current approach, but that's another discussion unto itself.

America's debt burden is a real concern at this point because of our position in the global economy. The last time America truly engaged in massive government spending to boost the economy, we were a manufacturing giant with very little Third World competition (the WW2 era).

As soon as the developing world industrialized somewhat, we lost most of our comparative advantage in manufacturing. We simply can't expect what worked for FDR to work for us due to the vast differences in the global economy then vs. today's economy.

Socializing certain public amenities could help us advance economically, but overall government spending should decrease now, not increase.

Inflation is not very desirable past a certain point, which is why interest rates should rise now to prevent even faster devaluation of our currency.

 

Inflation can't happen when people are not spending money. It just can't. Not possible In fact the bigger threat right now is deflation.

I agree debt is a concern. But not when unemployment is not high. After we recover we need to take a serious look at our debt and our spending and our revenues. But now is not the time. Worrying about it now will destroy our recovery.

 

Inflation happens in relation to the size of the money supply. We've currently increased the money supply to an absurd degree, which is part of why the dollar has fallen in value with respect to a lot of other currencies.

The effects of currency devaluation in exchange markets are doubly felt in import-heavy economies like ours. This equals inflation.

Deflation is a remote possibility by comparison, because the money supply remains rather high. It's only that the money itself is concentrated in the hands of relatively few.

Some deflation can occur as a result of consumers buying less (and demand falling overall), but it's a very minor concern as long as other currencies continue to trade higher than ours.

Recovery does depend on government spending in certain areas, but it's not as much a matter of amount.

If we immediately pulled out of all the foreign conflicts we're in, cut the military budget in half, and implemented major reforms in SS and Medicare, we could recover much faster through more spending in education and workfare. This would still be an overall decrease in government spending if done right, however.

 

I heard Michigan is repealing the Food Stamps for College Students program. Could this be why you are so angry? I think so.

 

So the apparent solution to everyone's problem is if America intentionally gives up it's leadership role, downgrades itself from a World Superpower, to regional power, if that and allow the world to just go to (*)(*)(*)(*) in a handbasket and hope it doesn't (*)(*)(*)(*) up our completely and totally globalized economy to much?

You realize that when a butterfly farts in Beijing these days the Dow drops 500 points right? What would happen if North Korea when to war with South Korea?

 

The world is more economically interdependent than before, but it's not quite as dire of a situation as you're implying.

Even though I've expressed reluctance to go this route in the past, I'd be ok with more domestic drilling here if we actually became less interventionist in return.

While conflicts in the Middle East disrupt the oil supply and can result in price fluctuations, this becomes less of a concern if we become more energy independent.

In short, our world police role has run its course. We just can't afford it anymore, and so it's time to hand over the torch just like the U.K. did a long time ago.

We live in a world that is better managed in a multilateral way at this point.

 

That happened last April.

 

Tell that to Greece. It's not so much a matter of "going broke" but being downgraded, defaulting and collapsing the currency with inflation.

 

Recessions cost money. Way more money than a stimulus. Our grandkids are already paying for it. They're paying for it every day we spend above 7% unemployment. We are losing money because of our failure to act. Half the reason our deficits are so high in the first place is because of the recession. If we spent one year spending just one extra year's worth of deficit our unemployment would plummet and so too would our deficit. In the long run we'd save money.

 

Hey, you're massive stimulus didn't work the first time.

Gotta love ******* logic, if it doesn't work the first time, do it again but only bigger.


People like you need to be ignored.

 

How stupid are *******s? well look at this, lets say we borrow $5 trillion and inject it into the economy.
No matter how you inject it into the economy the people and companies will work for it and earn it, and the
GDP may only grow by $5 trillion, but we still owe $5 trillion + interest. What did we gain? more debt.
We earned something that we still owe. sounds stupid to me.


...

 

Problem is we're not injecting it into the US economy. As soon as it comes off the press or whatever the moment the fiat dollars are spent they move right into the globalized market place where it's effect is spread over an entire planet.

Globalization to this level is something Keynes could never have envisioned. Every dollar of Stimulus spending probably has a few cents worth of actual value in our own domestic economy, the rest is pissed away in Europe, China, Africa, and South America.

 

There is no way the US can ever repay it's national debt. It would be wiser to default now and get it over. The US would then revive stronger.