PDA

View Full Version : For every American



pooltchr
01-21-2011, 12:00 PM
Political alignment means nothing...if you are an AMERICAN, you need to watch this. It's not easy to watch...and it's pretty long...but we all need to know what is really going on with our economy.

I will give fair warning that this guy uses the video to set the viewer up for his investment planning services, so I will leave such decisions to the individual. But the research he has done on the global economy, and the US economy in particular, should at least cause everyone to watch Washington's actions in the next few months with a very careful eye. Your life, as you have come to know it, could be on the verge of tremendous changes.

http://www.stansberryresearch.com/pro/1011PSIENDVD/PPSILCCQ/PR

Steve

Soflasnapper
01-21-2011, 12:27 PM
I watched it a few days back when it was linked, I'm guessing as a paid ad, on top of the Drudge Report page.

And subscribed to the newsletter, as the ad intended.

Still not sure how right the historical analogies are, and whether they'll come to pass as he says. One thing almost everybody should have picked up on by now is that things that supposedly never could happen, have happened, and things that should have happened, didn't.

The hyperinflationary situation has already supposed to have occurred under these horrific deficit spending levels, and hasn't. (Glenn Beck said it would be starting some year or two ago, and just keeps saying it like a broken clock now, never explaining why his predictions of its imminence didn't turn out true, then.)

pooltchr
01-21-2011, 12:41 PM
The government can hold things together with smoke and mirrors, by printing more money. But the problem is, we don't know when the house of cards will tumble. What we do know is that at some point, as long as we keep adding more cards, it will tumble at some point.

Steve

Sev
01-21-2011, 05:27 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The government can hold things together with smoke and mirrors, by printing more money. But the problem is, we don't know when the house of cards will tumble. What we do know is that at some point, as long as we keep adding more cards, it will tumble at some point.

Steve </div></div>

I say within 6 years no matter who is in the White House if government spending is not reduced to 1/8 of GDP it is currently greater than 1/5 of GDP and increasing.

Qtec
01-22-2011, 02:02 AM
Really this is all old news.

For years China and others have been stepping into the markets to keep the $ high because they hold so much US currency. ie, if the $ fell 50%, China would lose 1/2 a trillion dollars in a day.

Its also amazing that the US, with such an advantage over the rest of the world, is in the sad position its at now....running deficit and a $14 Trillion Nat Debt around its neck.

Bush has a lot to answer for.

Q

Q

pooltchr
01-22-2011, 08:06 AM
You can't be serious, trying to pin $14 trillion on Bush. It has been increasing for decades. Bush certainly added to it, but consider that Obama has seen it increase at an even faster rate, I suspect that if he stay in office for 6 more years, you will see the US economy implode...and the effects will be felt around the world.

Contrary to the cries for more taxes from the left, we can not increase taxes enough to cover the debt. Even if we raised everyone's tax rate to 100%, there wouldn't be enough. (Not to mention that there would be no motivation for anyone to bother to go to work)

The only solution is to cut the size and scope of government. It's called living within your means. The claims of needing the government to spend our way out of a recession are nothing short of crazy. We need to make some very serious spending cuts if we are to address the long term issues with our economy.

Steve

Sev
01-22-2011, 09:57 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Really this is all old news.

For years China and others have been stepping into the markets to keep the $ high because they hold so much US currency. ie, if the $ fell 50%, China would lose 1/2 a trillion dollars in a day.

Its also amazing that the US, with such an advantage over the rest of the world, is in the sad position its at now....running deficit and a $14 Trillion Nat Debt around its neck.

Bush has a lot to answer for.

Q

Q </div></div>

Oh piffle.

We would not be in this position if taxation, unionization, regulation and environmentalism had not forced the deindustrialization of America.

Gayle in MD
01-22-2011, 01:10 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Really this is all old news.

For years China and others have been stepping into the markets to keep the $ high because they hold so much US currency. ie, if the $ fell 50%, China would lose 1/2 a trillion dollars in a day.

Its also amazing that the US, with such an advantage over the rest of the world, is in the sad position its at now....running deficit and a $14 Trillion Nat Debt around its neck.

Bush has a lot to answer for.

Q

Q </div></div>
Our real problem is that Republicans always block any progress, on any issue, with BS, that is nothing but anachronistic.

Some statements made by David Stockman, on Bill Maher's show, former Reagan Budget Director:

On Health Care....

"The question is not whether it's government run, it's whether it's run by the SICK CARE CARTEL, and that's really what we have in this country, the farming industry, the doctors, the hospitals, and we have a system that basically puts huge windfalls into their pockets, and not good health care for the American Public. I don't think Obama has solved the problem, and I don't think the Republicans have either, but we need to think through how we're going to pay for health care, and as long as it's third party, where no one's accountable, it's not going to work."


On the deficit:


"We won the cold war, mainly because the Solviet system was collapsing.

But instead of demobilizing our military establishment, after we won the war, like we did in 1919 and 1946, we kept it up we kept building it, looking for missions, pretty soon had Imperialism around the world, pretty soon we had wars of occupation, that have failed, miserably, and as a result we are now spending more for defense today, in 2010. when we have no enemies, no industrial enemies, in the world, than we did in 1980, when Reagan took office, and we were facing the Evil empire that had 10,000 war heads.

We shouldn't have a missile defense system. I think the big issue is why do we need a missile defense, against whom?

Russia is the greatest plutacracy in history. They're most interested in stealing from each other, and plundering their own resources, than they are aggressing against us.

China? Are they going to bomb three thousand Walmart Stores in the United States? Thereby destroy their export machine?

The point is that we have a defense establishmennt, that looks to a world that doesn't exist, and if we're going to deal with the real problem we have, this massive deficit, we need a big reduction in defense."

About Guns:

"I think this constant battle between the gun lobby and the legislators, it never gets very far, we have these arguments...what we really need is education.

What we need is leadership. We need people who are from positions to say 'Guns aren't necessary, they're not needed, they're not part of everyday life, in the twenty first century!

And they are to be condemned, not constantly argued for, as they (Republicans) constantly do!

We will get farther that way, than we will fighting another legislative battle!"



In another statement, Stockman stated, on 7/31/10 in the NY Times:

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine, that deficits don't matter if they result from TAX CUTS!"</span>

Again, ABOUT GUNS:

"Well, I think we have to start with our values. In other words, I would say about guns, what Keynes said about gold. 'It's a barbarous relic that has no place in the twenty first century civilization.'

And they ought to be scorned, they ought to be condemned, and they ought to be driven out of the land in terms of what we do in this society today.

The number one source of gun violence in America, is the fact that illegal drugs drive this massive culture of violence, so if we want to deal with gun violence, then lets legalize, illegal drugs."


(Ninety nine percent of the gun deaths today, do not come from self-defense, they come from homicide, they come from suiide, and they come from accidental gun death.)

G.

pooltchr
01-22-2011, 01:38 PM
Did you even watch the video?
Do you even know what the thread is about?

Or did you just decide to jump in with your usual rantings?

Steve

Sev
01-23-2011, 10:05 AM
I vote for ranting!!!

Soflasnapper
01-23-2011, 03:32 PM
We would not be in this position if taxation, unionization, regulation and environmentalism had not forced the deindustrialization of America.

Please explain why Germany is doing so much better, considering its higher level of taxation, unionization, regulation and environmentalism. (Yes, I know they kept their manufacturing base, but HOW did they do it, if these factors mean they should have had to deindustrialize?)

Explain how despite no particular increase along any of those parameters since Clinton's era, the fiscal results were so different for his 8 years than the 8 years that followed it.

Sev
01-23-2011, 04:28 PM
First and foremost the demographics between America and the US are quite different and you can not make an apples to apple comparison. Then you have the Geographical and population differences as well as the size and scope of each countries GDP.
Finally you have the cultural differences between the countries. You can not do an apples to apples comparison between the 2 countries.

How did germany remain germany? They continued being Germans.
It would appear that some in America do not wish America to remain America but rather metastasize into something different.


As far as your question about Clinton goes remember there is always a lag time in the effects of policy enacted by every administration. It took almost 35 years for the Community Reinvestment Act to finally bring the nation to its knees.

Here is a list of environmental legislation for Clinton.
http://clinton4.nara.gov/CEQ/earthday/ch13.html

However my point to my statement covers all administrations. The united states has become progressively hostile to manufacturing over the course of the last 50 years.

I would as note that the most unionized states are worse shape than those that have far less union control.
The first 4 points of my statement have lead to the final point.

llotter
01-23-2011, 05:16 PM
Germany's economy is doing substantially better than other European countries for one very good reason, the strong leadership in the conservative direction of Angela Merkel, the Iron Frau, similar to Margaret Thatcher. While such a leader can have a very positive influence, Germany's problems are very deep routed and I don't expect that they will be able to overcome them in longer run.

Soflasnapper
01-23-2011, 07:40 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: llotter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Germany's economy is doing substantially better than other European countries for one very good reason, the strong leadership in the conservative direction of Angela Merkel, the Iron Frau, similar to Margaret Thatcher. While such a leader can have a very positive influence, Germany's problems are very deep routed and I don't expect that they will be able to overcome them in longer run. </div></div>

That's an interesting theory, and one I've not heard before.

Is it some policy shifts she's put in place (kicking unions to the curb, rolling back the cradle-to-grave welfare state, things like that?), or more rallying the animal spirits in an inspiring nationalistic way (without any significant policy changes).

Sev
01-24-2011, 07:20 AM
I think you would agree that every administration and congress is in some manner responsible for the current state of affairs in this country.

The government is the problem. Not the solution.

Unless you believe the solution is that everybody should suffer equally.

Qtec
01-24-2011, 07:26 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The government is the problem. </div></div>

That's pretty vague, can you be more specific?

Q

Sev
01-24-2011, 07:46 AM
Not vague at all.
Every time the government inserts itself into the free market to make what it considers fair and equitable adjustments for all problems always follow because they have no understanding of the free market and how it operates.

Goes hand and hand with having litigators rather than business people in the government.