User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 60

  1. #31
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    3,187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Udog View Post
    When I hear news like this I think about Rome.

    For it's entire existence, there were probably people that would cry "The end is here!", and they likely had crazy and paranoid theories as to why Rome will soon be ruined. For it's entirety, these people were wrong.

    That is, until they were finally right. Eventually, a day came when people who knew what they were talking about joined the voices in crying that Rome is falling.

    I have to wonder, when do we pass the line from sensational economic fear to legitimate economic fear?
    When they passed the line from stupid to insanity. You can point out a person's actions as being regressive and harmful to themselves Udog, but often times it doesn't come to fruition and they will not reap what they sew, until well down the line when one day they find themselves out of options and in a rut they cannot escape from, particularly when they keep making the same bad choices over and over again and expect different results (definition of insanity). This is America's problem...

    On another note, the CBO has released a new report today. It's not surprising.

    CBO to Project 2009 Deficit Will Reach $1.9 Trillion (Update2) - Bloomberg.com

    CBO to Project 2009 Deficit Will Reach $1.9 Trillion (Update2)
    Share | Email | Print | A A A

    By Brian Faler

    March 20 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama’s budget will generate a $1.9 trillion deficit this year, $100 billion more than the administration projected, according to a person familiar with a Congressional Budget Office report to be released today.

    The White House projected this year’s deficit will reach $1.75 trillion.

    The person said next year’s shortfall will also be larger than projected, totaling $1.4 trillion. The administration said in its budget request to Congress last month that next year’s deficit would total $1.17 trillion.

    The agency, Congress’s official scorekeeper, is slated to provide lawmakers today with an independent assessment of how Obama’s budget plan would affect the government’s checkbook. The darkened outlook may make it harder to approve big-ticket items on Obama’s legislative agenda such as his plans to expand health-care coverage or rein in greenhouse gas emissions.

    In January, CBO projected this year’s deficit would total at least $1.18 trillion.

    The estimate comes as lawmakers prepare their budget plans for the coming fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1. The House Budget Committee is slated to consider its tax-and-spending plan March 25 with floor action likely the following week. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, said yesterday her colleagues wouldn’t alter their priorities even if CBO reported gloomier numbers than the White House.

    “Our priorities are the same,” Pelosi said. “Education, a change in energy policy and health-care reform are what will turn the economy around, bring money to the Treasury, make America healthier, make us competitive internationally through innovation and do what we need to put the economy on a much more stable footing.”
    CBO vs. OMB

    An annual budget ritual: The Congressional Budget Office projects substantially higher deficits than the White House.

    From -- (insult to injury!) Peter Orszag's old blog:

    Our estimates of deficits under the President’s budget exceed those anticipated by the Administration by $2.3 trillion over the 2010-2019 period. The differences arise largely because of differing projections of baseline revenues and outlays. CBO’s projection of baseline deficits exceeds the Administration’s estimate (prepared on a comparable basis) by $1.6 trillion.

    Orszag is holding a conference call now to respond.

    UPDATE: He attributes the gap to "technical differences," like the rate at which economic growth is projected.

  2. #32
    Babylon Candle Venom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Risen View Post
    Pelosi said. “Education, a change in energy policy and health-care reform are what will turn the economy around, bring money to the Treasury, make America healthier, make us competitive internationally through innovation and do what we need to put the economy on a much more stable footing.”
    Pelosi so now we are taking economic advice from the people that have ruined california in less than a decade?

    Isnt it enough that the democrats already bankrupted the California government with all these stupid social issues?! its not a false analogy: California is somewhere near the 5th largest economy in the world!

    Capitalism hasnt failed, but the politic have.

    WHERE ARE YOU MILTON FRIEDMAN!

  3. #33
    Seriously Delirious Udog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INfp
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INFp None
    Posts
    5,295

    Default

    Risen, I think I meant to ask 'how do you tell the difference between normal paranoia that the sky is falling and legitimate warnings that the sky is falling?' I'm fairly convinced there is something genuinely horrible going on, but I can't get a good feel as to how much damage this will leave behind.

    Also, does anyone subscribe to Glenn Beck's newsletter? I'd love to see the best arguments for and against this printing of a trillion dollars.

  4. #34
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Udog View Post
    When I hear news like this I think about Rome.

    For it's entire existence, there were probably people that would cry "The end is here!", and they likely had crazy and paranoid theories as to why Rome will soon be ruined. For it's entirety, these people were wrong.

    That is, until they were finally right. Eventually, a day came when people who knew what they were talking about joined the voices in crying that Rome is falling.

    I have to wonder, when do we pass the line from sensational economic fear to legitimate economic fear?
    Were they really right? What exactly did they predict? The Holy roman empire? Or just the loss of Rome? What about the eastern parts? History isn't neat, and predictions are... often vague at best. It's not like one day the empire was there, and the next it was gone. It sort of faded away. We could use a great many periods of time - generations, even - to denote the 'fall of the empire'.

    Am I really right to say that the US dollar being used as a universal currency is going to end? Probably. Eventually it will change - I mean, saying that the roman empire will eventually fall isn't exactly a novel idea... not popular, for sure, but not exactly predictive. In cases where there is "something" and you say eventually there won't be "something", given enough time, you will always be right.

    Right is not the same as meaningful.

    Economic problems... sure. That's going to continue to happen. It doesn't take a lot of history to know just how easily bubbles happen... and they are relatively easy to see and understand. And they hurt. But things tend to go on.

    There are exceptions. Lots of them. The problem is that we draw relevance from the events (ie: fall of Rome - 1500 years+ of technological and social change, plus nebulous times, plus external factors, plus a thousand other differences) that may or may not apply - in part or as a whole. This leads to every situation being 'the end of...' rather than just another blip. It's basic market psychology - greed to fear. And it's so regular and predictable... scratch that. The reason it is so predictable is because it overwhelms any sense of proportion and reason. We can't even see when we are being influenced by it.

    It's one of those strange things - when we finally get to say "this time is different", people's certainty of outcomes increases, when it should decrease. If it truly is different, we have no idea what the outcome will be with any degree of certainty. And if it isn't that different, the closest correlations are not the extreme conclusions that come out of it. And that happens with greed or fear, up or down, bubble or depression.

    So, when is it that sensational economic fears become legitimate? Pretty much never, because the rule for sensational is that it is... sensational. Sensational is almost always tail-end events... unlikely but dramatic events. So the crossover is progressive... if everything goes back, one after the other, then eventually sensational becomes fact. Certainly can happen, but generally very unlikely. For example, last week the 'progression' was that the DJIA was in the mid 6000s. A dramatic fall. So that was the 'collapse' evidence. But the probability of that continuing remains low, and today it is at 7200 or so. And that leads to the selective bias, too.

    Another reason for that is that there are a multitude of factors that create the probability of an outcome. To generate sensational reports, you focus on those that support tail end, ignoring that the other factors are the reason why those outcomes are unlikely. No one can have a full picture of what is going to happen...

    --

    Having said all that, it's not necessarily hard to predict outcomes. The bubble bursting in the Nasdaq, or the real estate one... that's relatively easy. But even given a near absolute chance of it happening, timing it is ridiculously hard. I managed to sell my apartment at the peak; it was partially luck, and I know it.

    If you truly believe that the markets will continue to crash, you can earn a great deal of money by dealing in options or other derivatives.

    It's a lot harder to keep guessing when you are putting up a significant amount of your net worth.

  5. #35
    Babylon Candle Venom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Udog View Post
    Risen, I think I meant to ask 'how do you tell the difference between normal paranoia that the sky is falling and legitimate warnings that the sky is falling?' I'm fairly convinced there is something genuinely horrible going on, but I can't get a good feel as to how much damage this will leave behind.

    Also, does anyone subscribe to Glenn Beck's newsletter? I'd love to see the best arguments for and against this printing of a trillion dollars.
    there are much better places to get your news than fox news...no offense to Risen. I mean the Beck he posted was fine, but that guy has some other fucking insane moments on air.

    Peter Schiff has been spot on in his predictions so far since about 2006 (not his temporal predictions, but in predicting the "what"). Fox news laughed at him in 07.

  6. #36
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    3,187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Udog View Post
    Risen, I think I meant to ask 'how do you tell the difference between normal paranoia that the sky is falling and legitimate warnings that the sky is falling?' I'm fairly convinced there is something genuinely horrible going on, but I can't get a good feel as to how much damage this will leave behind.

    Also, does anyone subscribe to Glenn Beck's newsletter? I'd love to see the best arguments for and against this printing of a trillion dollars.
    I subscribe. I'll post that info whenever it comes. As for the difference between the sky is falling and normal paranoia, let me say this: Certain actions and ways of living will yield CERTAIN results. As I said earlier, these things may not come to fruition immediately, but if they continue they will build up until it collapses. This is the same as when people say "Borrowing money and not producing will lead our economy to ruin." Well of course, we went many years with that model and we did not collapse. That doesn't, however, mean that what we were doing made sense or was sustainable. Anybody with common sense who didn't buy into all the smoke and mirrors formed in our economy knew that. You can't put a time on when the actions of people will drive them off the cliff, but you can surely predict that they will go off the cliff if they don't change direction. EVERY ACTION HAS A MEASURABLE RESULT. Having the sense to know the repercussions of our actions is the only thing that allows us to make good choices. When we ignore that, we make BAD choices. Ignoring (or not knowing in the first place) it is what got us where we are today.

    This isn't a case of the sky is falling vs. normal paranoia, it's about the logical results of continuing a certain course of action. It just so happens that we have not changed our behavior, and we are acting out our worse case scenarios for some reason that is well beyond my inkling, as I don't have the mind of an insane retard. There is no other driving force besides the choices we have made.

    Quote Originally Posted by Babylon Candle View Post
    there are much better places to get your news than fox news...no offense to Risen. I mean the Beck he posted was fine, but that guy has some other fucking insane moments on air.

    Peter Schiff has been spot on in his predictions so far since about 2006 (not his temporal predictions, but in predicting the "what"). Fox news laughed at him in 07.
    Yea, Peter Schiff is really good. He has a nice spot in my accurate voices of the economy thread :P .

  7. #37
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    3,187

    Default

    Here are the little pros and cons of the treasury thing. It's basically a collection of various articles from different perspectives.

    Glenn Beck - Current Events & Politics - Glenn Beck: $2 trillion argument

  8. #38
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Little Linguist View Post
    And before you all call me a traitor just because we have a crisis, I have thought this way since I was 12 years old...just no one listened to me back then. No one listened when I said globalism has negative side effects. No one listened when I said our national debt was a big problem. No one listened when I said we need to get at the root of the problem and not the symptoms. Dumb-ass politicians. :steam: Dumb-ass students. Dumb-ass people.
    Eh welcome to my world missy.

  9. #39
    Striving for balance Little Linguist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    xNFP
    Posts
    6,885

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    Eh welcome to my world missy.
    Tja, this was back in the day when I was Ni dom before I got fed up, said "Screw it" and relied more on my Ne because it's more interesting for people.

    Nah, just kidding. But I distinctly remember being 1 of 2 people in a class of over 20 who was actually against NAFTA when it came out in either 93 or 94...can't remember which. By the end our group had increased to 4. I'm sure if I had had enough time, I would have convinced all of them that they had their heads stuck up their asses.

    In sixth grade we had a debate about globalization. Again, I was one of the few against it.

    In twelfth grade we had to make a list of the most pressing issues. When 'national deficit' and 'economy' and 'education' were my top three, respectively, everyone made fun of me.

    Throughout college I was an avid supporter of non-interventionism and well a mild form of well, not isolationism per se, but just minding our own bloody business. I was always a minority....

    *sigh* When you bite your own tail long enough, things are going to get bloody...
    If you are interested in language, words, linguistics, or foreign languages, check out my blog and read, post, and/or share.

  10. #40
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,529

    Default

    How surprising to discover it is all the fault of the greedy bankers.

    Not long ago it was the greedy usurers.

    And we all know who the usurers are.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 55
    Last Post: 10-03-2017, 10:43 PM
  2. Some people say that you are unlikely to vote in the next election. Is this true?
    By ygolo in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 07-26-2012, 04:31 PM
  3. Replies: 30
    Last Post: 10-02-2010, 12:43 AM
  4. The fact that you will be dead soon for the second time
    By Virtual ghost in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 12-12-2008, 04:44 PM
  5. Why is it so hard to not feed the trolls?
    By Zergling in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-15-2007, 05:23 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO