Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
Replies to Msg. #772577
.
 Msg. #  Subject Posted by    Board    Date   
12066 Re: Sunday ramblings--The New Robber Barons!
   Fewer wars................? "The last century was the most murderou... 		faul   ALEA   03 Dec 2012
 7:13 PM
12065 Re: Sunday ramblings--The New Robber Barons!
   Hi Alea.... "when it comes to the value of money, both bernanke and... 		faul   ALEA   03 Dec 2012
 7:03 PM

The above list shows replies to the following message:

Re: Sunday ramblings--The New Robber Barons!

By: Cactus Flower in ALEA
Mon, 03 Dec 12 6:24 PM
Msg. 12064 of 54959
(This msg. is a reply to 12063 by faul)
Jump to msg. #  

hi doma

there's a rather different explanation of the increase in the debt that doesn't require a conspiracy.

the financial system collapsed.

let's not worry about the historical reasons. the effect this had on the economy was very clear.

the deficit grew because while tax revenues declined, many costs were fixed or had a long term character (eg the cost of two wars) and the variable ones (eg unemployment costs) increased.

the rich presumably also prefer it when the economy is growing. it's troubling to them when most asset categories decline in value.

obama's contribution to the deficit was around $1tn in stimulus money. this helped stem the slide into depression and therefore preserved revenue. not doing so would have meant a larger deficit as revenue collapsed.

otherwise, the deficit is mostly explained by two wars and bush's tax cuts. we both know obama has tried to end the two wars and increase taxes on the wealthy. surely we both understand these things aren't switches you can flip on and off. the decision-making process is set up to spread some choices around. o has succeeded in ending one war and is gradually trying to wind up the other.

so if you believe he is a tool of shadowy manipulators trying to ruin the middle class, he's doing a poor job.

cameron and o adopted very different policies. cameron chose austerity. o chose stimulus. these are measures designed to affect gdp growth and the balance between revenues and costs. stimulus resulted in a much more favourable outcome on most measures.

when it comes to the value of money, both bernanke and king recognised the importance of the zero lower bound and that qe was one of the only tools available to combat deflation. those who predicted hyperinflation turned out to be completely wrong - and therefore have little business complaining about something whose probable effects they did not understand then. qe worked wonderfully. but it will have to be unwound when the economy begins to grow strongly again.

but the return to a normalised economy is still a few years away at least, in my view. some green shoots in house prices increasing again.

actually, i think 5,000 years of history shows things like life expectancy increasing, fewer wars and famines, wealth increases for the mass of the working and middle class, the distribution of entertainment, utilities and travel to the masses and the gradual accretion of a stake in government.