The Tax Rebate: W is a nub

[JohnXDoe]

I won't mind getting several hundred dollars, but I don't want it. I want this country to be great. I want us to get through so called "hard times" by being strong, not taking money from our government so we can give it back to them somehow. Because sooner or later it reaches the rich and powerful. They continue to rape this country, these conservatives. So called conservatives. I'll be glad to see them go.

You can call it a "tax cut" "rebate" or whatever you want, but at a time when we need things in place like better education, healthcare, and a strong military AT HOME, for it to all come down to a check in the mail, thats pretty sad. I won't be bribed. And I know this is another ploy to push through Bush's "permanent tax cuts" he wants to add to The Constitution. He must be off his rocker.

I've had it with these clowns. I pay my taxes, I don't want them back, but I would like a little bit to happen with my money that I need to happen. Not $800 to add to the end of my life. I won't be had you asshats.

So, for the economist out there who understand this crap, is this a sound way to run government? I think money aside, its shi.t. I think the fact its about money is shi.t. Don't get me wrong, I am about money. But the powers that be should put my money to better use. Instead I get welfare for the middle class. I can pay for my new computer myself, thank you.

Congratulations Michael Dell, George just cut you a check.


goddamn

[Danger Bird]

It's being done to combat the coming recession, although it won't help at all.

[thedeadwalk!]

Hilary and Barack were proposing the same thing. But, I've no clue on the economic soundness of it.

[Knifeboy]

Tax rebates are a waste of money, litterally

Think about all the bureacracy(sp?) that goes into sending money back to everyone

So you give them money, and they spend money on giving you money back?!

[Aaron]

So you give them money, and they spend money on giving you money back?!
Retail spending helps to assist economies from entering recessions. It's not the 50s anymore where there aren't multi-national companies. Stupid people spending money when they can't afford it can sometimes be a good thing.

[Hababi]

It's being done to combat the coming recession, although it won't help at all.

Bernanke says it will. Right now we need a boost in consumer spending, and this is the best way to get it.

On one hand, it'd be nice to also see an increase in home constructions and purchases, but this is the market adjusting itself after years of growth and inflating prices.

[beso negro]

another smart move by Bush tbh

[griftadan]

it's an attempted aggregate demand stimulation that won't work at all, it's just going to push us further into debt at a time of recession

[guitrguy]

I seem to remember SCHIP needing more money....

[Knifeboy]

Retail spending helps to assist economies from entering recessions. It's not the 50s anymore where there aren't multi-national companies. Stupid people spending money when they can't afford it can sometimes be a good thing.

I know why it's done.
But the sane way to do it would be to not have the money been sent back and forth

[Hababi]

it's an attempted aggregate demand stimulation that won't work at all, it's just going to push us further into debt at a time of recession

You spend your way out of recessions.

[Danish]

The US doesn't follow Keynesian economics at all anymore.

When I heard this, the first question that came to mind was "Where will they cut spending"? It'll inevitably follow, or at least a "perceived" shrinkage of some sort...

[Danger Bird]

Bernanke says it will. Right now we need a boost in consumer spending, and this is the best way to get it.
Yeah or it's a bad attempt at a quick fix that's too little, too late.

[Hababi]

Yeah or it's a bad attempt at a quick fix that's too little, too late.

This type of situation basically calls for a quick fix.

[JohnXDoe]

yeah. a quick fix that will leave whoever takes office next cleaning up the mess.

first the bozo gives the surplus back when he initially took office. real MONEY that could have done a lot to fund the war, help katrina victims, etc. it was like our nest egg.

and now he's pulling money out of his butt. money we really don't have.

what ever happened to toughening it out in this country? amreicans have spent and spent and spent themselves into tremendous debt, people are losing their homes, car sales are sluggish, and the answer is....more consuming spending?

how about showing some restraint? how about acknowledging that without a tax hike of some sort and effective leadership in office this country is in deep trouble? how about admitting your "trickle down" economic policies are a complete and utter failure? if they weren't why would people making up to $85,000 a year (higher for married couples) need $800 to drop in on them?

i'm no politician or economist, that is obvious. but i thought Bush and his ilk were against this sort of government aid? and thats what is i don't give a crap how you cut it. i guess when its for the poor or truly needy or healthcare or education, oh that is bad! "fend for yourselves, people." that is until the bottom nearly falls out of the precious economy thanks to mismanagement in Washington. then they'll throw us all a bone.

kiss my arse George.

[griftadan]

You spend your way out of recessions.

yes i know what they try to do unfortunately that only works if the main problem is consumer confidence, theres more to it here then that

[griftadan]

The US doesn't follow Keynesian economics at all anymore.

this is just keynes redressed

When I heard this, the first question that came to mind was "Where will they cut spending"? It'll inevitably follow, or at least a "perceived" shrinkage of some sort...

they'll just borrow it from china or someone, your welfare state will be fine

[Smokey D]

it's an attempted aggregate demand stimulation that won't work at all, it's just going to push us further into debt at a time of recession

Deficit spending is what you do in recession. According to Keynes, at least.

[Iskandar]

they'll just borrow it from china or someone, your welfare state will be fineThe US has a pretty crappy welfare state, honestly.

[griftadan]

Deficit spending is what you do in recession. According to Keynes, at least.

according to keynes...

[Smokey D]

One of the smartest and most influential thinkers of the 20th century. What's your point?

[Iskandar]

Back in the good ol' days, both left and right agreed on Keynesian ideas as a basis for the economy.

[DBoons Ghost]

JXD is getting an early tax break and goes on a rant.

It's your money you're getting back early. I don't get what's wrong with that.

Narrow-minded people who don't have a mortgage with an adjustable rate should let the people in charge try to solve the problem at hand. The problem at hand is the millions of Americans who will be foreclosed on and homeless.

Good rant though. I like a good rant. I'll be getting nothing back though. It's upsetting but we all know this money won't help squat.

Everyone should feel good knowing all the big banks who caused this mess are reporting losses the likes of which have never before seen. That's what they get for profiteering on the hopes and dreams of Americans who only wanted a house.

The government didn't even have anything to do with this one.

[JohnXDoe]

yeah its a bit ranty but i'm pissed off.

i could explain why but it would just be more rant.

i'm generally pissed off at the country right now. the government, the stupid republicans, the dumb democrats, and a nation under the thumb of the always ALMIGHTY DOLLAR.

sucks tbh

[DBoons Ghost]

yeah its a bit ranty but i'm pissed off.

i could explain why but it would just be more rant.

i'm generally pissed off at the country right now. the government, the stupid republicans, the dumb democrats, and a nation under the thumb of the always ALMIGHTY DOLLAR.

sucks tbh

I understand. I wish I could do something to help.

If we do enter a recession it will be because of the massive profit loss at the hands of the banks who misled people into debt. It's unlikely we will enter a real recession because people with money will spend it and people without won't.

Interest rates will come down and people will refinance their mortgages at a rate and pace this country has never seen. The banks suck it up, learn their lesson, and move on.

It's gonna get better. If things sucked always though, as they do for a lot of people, don't use this moment to point fingers.

[shaqadelic]

Most will use the tax rebate (or loan haha) to pay for credit cards. Then putting the leftovers into savings.

Not very good to stimulate the economy.

[1338 h4x0r]

i'm generally pissed off at the country right now. the government, the stupid republicans, the dumb democrats, and a nation under the thumb of the always ALMIGHTY DOLLAR.

sucks tbh

The almighty dollar? That's a debatable claim when you consider the value of the Euro, the pound sterling and Soviet Canuckistani dollar these days.

No mistake, there are definitely things I love about America, but I don't really want to stay here. It started out good but got ghey pretty quickly. The prez'nit doesn't believe science and neither does Mike Chuckleberry, a strong candidate for Republican presidential ticket in 2008. Nigga please. We can't have people like them running a superpower.

[guitrguy]

He was talking in a societal focus sense.

[McP3000]

Im confused on how people think that giving the government more money will help the economy

[griftadan]

One of the smartest and most influential thinkers of the 20th century. What's your point?

yeah but a lot of people disagree with him on matters of fiscal policy, his other contributions were fine

[Hababi]

yeah but a lot of people disagree with him on matters of fiscal policy, his other contributions were fine

WW2 proved him right.

[Smokey D]

yeah but a lot of people disagree with him on matters of fiscal policy, his other contributions were fine

Keynes and neoliberal economics are weird because they both appear to be right at different stages in economic cycles. Keynes seems to apply when the economy is moving left of long run aggregate supply and neoliberal stuff when it's moving right.

Obviously this is a really simplistic overview.

[Iskandar]

Im confused on how people think that giving the government more money will help the economyWhat?

It's economic orthodoxy to spend more in a recession to stimulate demand, and less in a period of growth. It's the principle of Demand Management.

[1338 h4x0r]

He was talking in a societal focus sense.

OK. Just like me, I took it too literally.

Money rules; you can do stuff with it.

One only needs so much though...

[McP3000]

What?

It's economic orthodoxy to spend more in a recession to stimulate demand, and less in a period of growth. It's the principle of Demand Management.
...

Because America will send the money back into the economy in a useful manner :rolleyes:

Edit:
"Ok, we got another 4 trillion in tax dollars this year, what do we use it on"
"The military...then the war against drugs...then welfare"
"Genius"

[shaqadelic]

The idea behind tax rebate in relation to Keynesianism is that once consumers get the cash, they will go on a spending spree, putting money into local businesses which then will stimulate investment and production, thus generating income for the consumers so they can repeat the process.

There are problems with this method in the current American situation.

The likely scenario is that people will use the rebate to pay off credit card debt. Then, the rest put into savings. Thus, you don't get any stimulation on local manufacturers.

Also, those who spend on goods will buy goods manufactured abroad (oh China) cause America's operation is extremely offshore nowadays. So you end up stimulating the wrong economy.

[Smokey D]

I spose paying back credit cards does open up disposable income to a certain extent.

[shaqadelic]

Will the rebate clear credit card debt entirely? I am thinking not. I reckon freed up disposable income will be used to get a better standing over debt. Or just to relieve one month of expenses.

Americans are in quite a spot, everyday expenses increasing added to being in debt for life.

[Smokey D]

That doesn't necessarily spell economic collapse, as long as someone is willing to provide the credit.

[shaqadelic]

Of course economic collapse is not in the horizon. I never said that.

Who will provide the credit exactly?

[Smokey D]

I dunno. Probably China.

[g°®†]

I won't mind getting several hundred dollars, but I don't want it. I want this country to be great. I want us to get through so called "hard times" by being strong, not taking money from our government so we can give it back to them somehow. Because sooner or later it reaches the rich and powerful. They continue to rape this country, these conservatives. So called conservatives. I'll be glad to see them go.

You can call it a "tax cut" "rebate" or whatever you want, but at a time when we need things in place like better education, healthcare, and a strong military AT HOME, for it to all come down to a check in the mail, thats pretty sad. I won't be bribed. And I know this is another ploy to push through Bush's "permanent tax cuts" he wants to add to The Constitution. He must be off his rocker.

I've had it with these clowns. I pay my taxes, I don't want them back, but I would like a little bit to happen with my money that I need to happen. Not $800 to add to the end of my life. I won't be had you asshats.

So, for the economist out there who understand this crap, is this a sound way to run government? I think money aside, its shi.t. I think the fact its about money is shi.t. Don't get me wrong, I am about money. But the powers that be should put my money to better use. Instead I get welfare for the middle class. I can pay for my new computer myself, thank you.

Congratulations Michael Dell, George just cut you a check.


goddamn




This post does not make any sense.


You get a refund because over the course of the fiscal year, with you paying your weekly (or bi-weekly) dues, you paid the goverment more than required. HENCE A TAX REFUND! It's not free money; it's money due.


I'll take a check from the goverment any day and won't feel bad or guilty about; not for a second.



edit: and with our goverment in debt up to the trillions, what's it matter anyway.

[shaqadelic]

I dunno. Probably China.

I recall Premier Wen Jiabao alluded that China will slow down giving American consumer credits.

[g°®†]

I'll take a check from the goverment any day and won't feel bad or guilty about; not for a second.




I would just like to add that when I said "taking a check from the gov't", I meant my tax refund.


**** WELFARE! :mad:

[JohnXDoe]

This post does not make any sense.


You get a refund because over the course of the fiscal year, with you paying your weekly (or bi-weekly) dues, you paid the goverment more than required. HENCE A TAX REFUND! It's not free money; it's money due.


I'll take a check from the goverment any day and won't feel bad or guilty about; not for a second.



edit: and with our goverment in debt up to the trillions, what's it matter anyway.

this is not the yearly tax refund we always get. i'll take that. this is simply the government going into more debt to try and bolster the slagging economy. and chances are it won't even do that.

i'm no economist, obviously. i have no solutions to this countries problems, fiscal or otherwise. but i would like to count on those in position of power and influence to have some.

getting several hundred dollars thrown at me doesn't help me. chances are it won't help the millions who also qualify. and if it does we're in a sorrier state then i even thought...
I would just like to add that when I said "taking a check from the gov't", I meant my tax refund.
**** WELFARE! :mad:
well welfare is what this is.

welfare for the middle class. where nothing ever "trickles down." so this is what we get in the end.

but you can bet with billions of dollars being forced into the economy with these "rebates" it will most definitely trickle up....

[g°®†]

this is not the yearly tax refund we always get. i'll take that. this is simply the government going into more debt simply to bolster the slagging economy. and chances are it won't even do that.

i'm no economist, obviously. i have no solutions to this countries problems, fiscal or otherwise. but i would like to count on those in position of power and influence to have some.

getting several hundred dollars thrown at me doesn't help me. chances are it won't help the millions who also qualify. and if it does we're in a sorrier state then i even thought...




wait, we're getting more than a tax refund now?

[JohnXDoe]

yes.

for those making up to $85,000 for singles, somewhat more for married couples.

happy days are here again.....

[g°®†]

THIS IS MADNESS

[JohnXDoe]

lol

[Danish]

The US has a pretty crappy welfare state, honestly.

The crappiest in the industrialized world, in fact.

[Smokey D]

this is not the yearly tax refund we always get. i'll take that. this is simply the government going into more debt to try and bolster the slagging economy. and chances are it won't even do that.


That's what it's meant to do...

[Against Miik!]

This tax rebate is crap. We are already in crazy debt, and just spending a few more billion dollars won't help that. And throwing a couple hundred dollars at people won't help either.

If you do what you've always done, you will get what you've always got. And yet here we are. We think we can control the economy, but we really can't. Inflation continues to grow, and we can only control things relative to that growth.

[Smokey D]

Yeah, inflation is pretty difficult to get rid of.

Zero-inflation growth is hypothetically possible but requires, if I recall, a crazy amount of perfect information in the market.

[McP3000]

Hey guys

have yall ever heard of a cyclical economy?

[Iskandar]

Hey guys

have yall ever heard of a cyclical economy?I don't think you understand the standard Keynesian measures used to ameliorate the effects of the business cycle.

Like deficit spending.

[McP3000]

I don't think you understand the standard Keynesian measures used to ameliorate the effects of the business cycle.

Like deficit spending.
I wasn't addressing the Keynesian concept
but ok

Edit: Keynesian is a tongue-twister

[Iskandar]

I wasn't addressing the Keynesian concept
but ok

Edit: Keynesian is a tongue-twisterThen what the hell are you talking about?

[McP3000]

Then what the hell are you talking about?
I was talking about people who act like this next recession will lead to the apocalypse.
Itll last for a few years and then we'll turn into a bull market again. Woopee

[Iskandar]

I was talking about people who act like this next recession will lead to the apocalypse.
Itll last for a few years and then we'll turn into a bull market again. WoopeeMarkets are cyclical, but there are measures that can be taken to stabilize the cycle.

[McP3000]

Markets are cyclical, but there are measures that can be taken to stabilize the cycle.
Yes, i understand this.
Like making sure 1929 doesn't happen again

whats your point

[Iskandar]

Yes, i understand this.
Like making sure 1929 doesn't happen again

whats your pointGuess there's nothing to discuss.

I love you.

[McP3000]

Guess there's nothing to discuss.

I love you.
I love you too

hugs and kisses

[Iskandar]

I love you too

hugs and kissesConservative hugs and kisses. A man and woman (no exception) approach no closer than three inches and, without any other physical contact, kiss briefly. Tongue is absolutely forbidden. Following this is a hug of duration no more than three seconds and with no contact below the waist. Breasts may not be felt.

[McP3000]

Conservative hugs and kisses. A man and woman (no exception) approach no closer than three inches and, without any other physical contact, kiss briefly. Tongue is absolutely forbidden. Following this is a hug of duration no more than three seconds and with no contact below the waist. Breasts may not be felt.
I got a sex change within the last three minutes

lets **** like english people

so we can have tea before the half hour

[Iskandar]

I got a sex change within the last three minutes

lets **** like english people

so we can have tea before the half hourShh, conservatives don't talk about sex. Only liberals do. The frightful immorality!!

[Smokey D]

I recall Premier Wen Jiabao alluded that China will slow down giving American consumer credits.

I reckon he'd be willing to do it if the alternative was a recessionary US economy, since China's stability relies so much on export driven growth.

[McP3000]

Shh, conservatives don't talk about sex. Only liberals do. The frightful immorality!!
Conservatives aren't too conservative in bed

if you know what i mean :naughty:

[Mr. Ron]

They don't cum?

[McP3000]

They don't cum?
what

that's not what i implied at all

I implied that conservatives were freaky naughty and agree with bondage
I like my wife to scream

[1338 h4x0r]

Conservative hugs and kisses. A man and woman (no exception) approach no closer than three inches and, without any other physical contact, kiss briefly. Tongue is absolutely forbidden. Following this is a hug of duration no more than three seconds and with no contact below the waist. Breasts may not be felt.

You forgot the steaming closet-homosexual escapades with a meth-addicted male prosititute or, alternatively, fuсking around on your wife with at least three call girls, then vehemently denouncing the marital infidelity of Bill Clinton.

[1338 h4x0r]

what

that's not what i implied at all

I implied that conservatives were freaky naughty and agree with bondage


Especially with children, gay people and extramarital partners.

[Mr. Ron]

what

that's not what i implied at all

I implied that conservatives were freaky naughty and agree with bondage
I like my wife to scream

do you pull your pee pee through the opening in the front of your PJ's????

[McP3000]

Especially with children, gay people and extramarital partners.
i refuse to take you seriously because you misspelled 1337

do you pull your pee pee through the opening in the front of your PJ's????
How is that relevant to me humping my wife into oblivion

[Mr. Ron]

i refuse to take you seriously because you misspelled 1337


How is that relevant to me humping my wife into oblivion

well, that something I just think a conservative would do.

[McP3000]

well, that something I just think a conservative would do.
Well i think liberals are all gay pedophiles

whats your point

[1338 h4x0r]

Well i think liberals are all gay pedophiles


Care to support that assertion?

Here's my end of the bargain:

http://www.armchairsubversive.org/

[Mr. Ron]

Well i think liberals are all gay pedophiles

whats your point

no see whatever I say is fact

[McP3000]

no see whatever I say is fact
Did Dei hijack Mr Ron's account

[Mr. Ron]

Did Dei hijack Mr Ron's account

No.

[McP3000]

No.
okcooljustcheckin

[shaqadelic]

WTH are you guys talking about?


I reckon he'd be willing to do it if the alternative was a recessionary US economy, since China's stability relies so much on export driven growth.

I see they will look to diversify its export roots than hand out more loans to American consumers. This is especially when they found out they were not as insulated from the sub prime loan crisis as previously thought.

Just recently Gordon Brown visited China to bolster trade ties. So I see the actions; less loans to America, more trade ties with other economies, particular EU.

[Smokey D]

In the long term, I bet that'd happen. But if the US is poised to go into recession, I think China would rather open the proverbial floodgates than risk the instability caused by a faltering US economy. But I could be wrong. I haven't really followed what China thinks of the American economy.

[Shell]

If I get an $800 check from the government, I'm going to use it to buy some stocks. Plenty of them are lower than they've been in a while, and the economy is bound to recover, and the stocks will go back up. Cha-ching!

(someone please correct me if I'm wrong here)

[shaqadelic]

In the long term, I bet that'd happen. But if the US is poised to go into recession, I think China would rather open the proverbial floodgates than risk the instability caused by a faltering US economy. But I could be wrong. I haven't really followed what China thinks of the American economy.

I know China wants to cool down its economic growth. A smooth transition in and out recession for a major trade partner is an ideal situation to achieve economic cool down.

In that light, giving more loan to a country that may not be very solvent in the future is not a better choice.

If I get an $800 check from the government, I'm going to use it to buy some stocks. Plenty of them are lower than they've been in a while, and the economy is bound to recover, and the stocks will go back up. Cha-ching!

Are you employed? Do you have savings that can meet your everyday expenses (esp meeting debt payment) in case you are fired or your earner is fired?

If yes, then you can invest some money in stocks.

If not, meet your credit card debt and save up!

[Smokey D]

I know China wants to cool down its economic growth. A smooth transition in and out recession for a major trade partner is an ideal situation to achieve economic cool down.


The CCP states that China needs economic growth to continue between 7% and 10% in order to create the jobs necessary to stave off public unrest in the countryside (even today China has an unemployment rate of 10%, or around 100million people). A recessionary US economy and its effects on other major economies (particularly in Europe) would jeopardise that growth target. That is, a worldwide recession would be more detrimental to China's stability than even its inflationary pressures.


In that light, giving more loan to a country that may not be very solvent in the future is not a better choice.

Nah, I reckon a US recession would be more terrifying for China than internal inflation. Although China is definitely aiming for diversification in the future.

[Shell]

Are you employed? Do you have savings that can meet your everyday expenses (esp meeting debt payment) in case you are fired or your earner is fired?

If yes, then you can invest some money in stocks.

If not, meet your credit card debt and save up!

I work in healthcare, and I just got a promotion - I won't be fired or laid off. :)

I figure, as it is now, I don't have the extra money and I'm doing fine... so I can just act like I never had it, but meanwhile, it will be invested and making me money.

[shaqadelic]

The CCP states that China needs economic growth to continue between 7% and 10% in order to create the jobs necessary to stave off public unrest in the countryside (even today China has an unemployment rate of 10%, or around 100million people).

If so, then China is well on track. It is estimated that China GDP growth this year will 10.4%. And even that is too high growth rate, recession in the US can do them good. Especially that this year internal consumption is expected to increase due to the Olympics.

A recessionary US economy and its effects on other major economies (particularly in Europe) would jeopardise that growth target. That is, a worldwide recession would be more detrimental to China's stability than even its inflationary pressures.

I dunno if worldwide recession is on the horizon since the world is less dependent on the US economy.

Lets take EU for example. Its GDP 2007 is estimated by IMF to be $11.9 trillion. US import from Euro is totaled $267 billion (less than 3% of total GDP). Even in import goes down by 10%. The ill effect on GDP growth is decrease of 0.2%. That is not enough to send EU to a recession.

I figure, as it is now, I don't have the extra money and I'm doing fine... so I can just act like I never had it, but meanwhile, it will be invested and making me money.

Alright. good luck then.

[Smokey D]

If so, then China is well on track. It is estimated that China GDP growth this year will 10.4%. And even that is too high growth rate, recession in the US can do them good. Especially that this year internal consumption is expected to increase due to the Olympics.

But that growth depends entirely on America continuing to buy cheap products. And that won't happen if it goes into recession.

And the CCP is kind of scared of promoting internal consumption because that too is seen as destabilising.

I dunno if worldwide recession is on the horizon since the world is less dependent on the US economy.


It's dependent enough that if the US stops consuming/investing, everyone will feel it. Have you not been watching stocks fall in markets worldwide? In every major stock exchange, the indices have fallen between 15 and 30% since their highs last year.


Lets take EU for example. Its GDP 2007 is estimated by IMF to be $11.9 trillion. US import from Euro is totaled $267 billion (less than 3% of total GDP). Even in import goes down by 10%. The ill effect on GDP growth is decrease of 0.2%. That is not enough to send EU to a recession.

You only need a small decline for things to spiral into a wide problem. The fact that investors in London and Hamburg are shitting themselves at the prospect of a US recession suggests that a worldwide recession is very possible.

And besides, investors worldwide are still reacting to the sub-prime lending thing, which means this credit crunch which is threatening to drive the US into recession is doing the same elsewhere.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7202998.stm

[shaqadelic]

But that growth depends entirely on America continuing to buy cheap products. And that won't happen if it goes into recession.


I believe entirely is an overstatement. I say demand other markets and China's own market can account for consumption.

And the CCP is kind of scared of promoting internal consumption because that too is seen as destabilising.

Are you sure? China's 2006 - 2010 economic plan is to increase domestic consumption and shift away from reliance on export.

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200510/25/eng20051025_216612.html



It's dependent enough that if the US stops consuming/investing, everyone will feel it. Have you not been watching stocks fall in markets worldwide? In every major stock exchange, the indices have fallen between 15 and 30% since their highs last year.

I have.

One gotta give the global stock market a couple more weeks before we can really know whether it is as vulnerable or not because now there is so much speculation and panic reaction.

They are are definitely in for a wild ride. However, the panic has been subdued somewhat. Asians stocks are recovering. The sell off is nearing the bottom according to analysts and buying opportunity will kick in. Already rounds of bargain hunting are happening today.

EU financial market has not fared so well but I reckon if the positive trend from the Asian side continues (instead of being the dreaded dead cat bounce), we may see European investors gain more confidence as well.

The fact that investors in London and Hamburg are poopting themselves at the prospect of a US recession suggests that a worldwide recession is very possible.

And fact that Asian investors optimism has translated to their stock market see some positive movement after the previous meltdown suggest just as much that may not be the case.

Oh well.

We both have had our say on the issue. In the coming weeks we will see how things develop.

[Smokey D]

I believe entirely is an overstatement. I say demand other markets and China's own market can account for consumption.


China exports 21% of exports to the US. No market can make up for a significant drop in that.


Are you sure? China's 2006 - 2010 economic plan is to increase domestic consumption and shift away from reliance on export.

Well, China is reluctant to increase the quality of domestic production since it was associated with political destablisation in other Asian countries. It's why it won't float the yuan.


One gotta give the global stock market a couple more weeks before we can really know whether it is as vulnerable or not because now there is so much speculation and panic reaction.

Speculation and panic reactions make things vulnerable, though. And lots of investors are or think they are exposed to the credit crunch, so they withdraw and wait to see what's happening, which has the cyclical effect of exacerbating the crunch.


They are are definitely in for a wild ride. However, the panic has been subdued somewhat. Asians stocks are recovering. The sell off is nearing the bottom according to analysts and buying opportunity will kick in. Already rounds of bargain hunting are happening today.

Only because the Fed cut rates by .75%, which just highlights how much global markets depend on the US. Europe is still in free fall.

The coming weeks will be interesting, if somewhat scary.

[ringworm]

all over talk radio, (at least locally) I hear we aren't in a recession, although, sometimes recessions aren't recognized until after they have happened or recovered (at least from my limited knowledge in this area), are they blind or just trying to subdue the panic?

shouldn't the knee jerk reaction by the Fed be a pretty big sign that we are? Or was it a measure to try and deflect it early?

[Smokey D]

It's trying to stop it, but it's debatable if it will work.

[McP3000]

I think the buzz of the media saying "OUR MARKETS ABOUT TO IMPLODE EVERYONE PANIC" hurts the economy worse than a month of bear stocks

[Smokey D]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7204368.stm

[McP3000]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7204368.stm
Wow
words and text

[Smokey D]

That wasn't meant as a reply to you, that was meant as an update on a developing story, and to highlight the effects of the US on other economies.

Though denying the economy is in a precarious position when pretty much every economist out there thinks it is is pretty hubristic.

[shaqadelic]

If you recall my original statement, I didn't say that the world economy has decoupled from the US' and will feel no effects from the slowdown. What I said is that I don't think a global recession will happen and the panelists not only agree but affirmed it.

[McP3000]

That wasn't meant as a reply to you, that was meant as an update on a developing story, and to highlight the effects of the US on other economies.

Though denying the economy is in a precarious position when pretty much every economist out there thinks it is is pretty hubristic.
Im not denying the position of the economy, im denying the severity of it. If the media wasn't screaming DEPRESSION every 15 mins then this recession would probably be routine and cyclical.

[Aaron]

Im not denying the position of the economy, im denying the severity of it. If the media wasn't screaming DEPRESSION every 15 mins then this recession would probably be routine and cyclical.
Aren't recessions severe?

[Smokey D]

Depressions are severe recessions, which are held to be normal parts of the business cycles. Recessions are periods of depressed growth, not periods of economic contraction.

Im not denying the position of the economy, im denying the severity of it. If the media wasn't screaming DEPRESSION every 15 mins then this recession would probably be routine and cyclical.

It's been 20 years since the last major correction. Recessions are no longer normal or cyclical. And no one's saying depression where I am.


Though denying the economy is in a precarious position when pretty much every economist out there thinks it is is pretty hubristic.

Some of them, but most agreed Europe and China would be affected.

[Iscariot]

It's being done to combat the coming recession, although it won't help at all.

I don't see it having anything but the opposite effect, really. We're combating a recession by printing and releasing more money in hopes that it will circulate back into the economy, but at the same time we're taking on a huge job reduction in the manufacturing industry and most of the people who receive this money are not going to spend it, but instead put it away in preparation for the coming collapse.

We're just digging a bigger hole tbh.

[thedeadwalk!]

From what I gathered on NPR today, the last recession in 2001 was given tax rebates as well, which probably had a hand in ending it earlier than it could have lasted. The important thing he noted was that people spend the money on domestic items and not foreign goods.

Seems to me the rebate will have at least some positive affect, but other issues are more prominent and need to be dealt with.

[Smokey D]

I don't see it having anything but the opposite effect, really. We're combating a recession by printing and releasing more money in hopes that it will circulate back into the economy, but at the same time we're taking on a huge job reduction in the manufacturing industry and most of the people who receive this money are not going to spend it, but instead put it away in preparation for the coming collapse.

We're just digging a bigger hole tbh.

They're not devaluing the dollar, they're giving money that already exists back to the consumers. The huge reduction in manufacturing in large part comes from depressed consumer spending, so that's an issue.

By not spending money or giving money to be spent, the government risks deepening the crisis to a far greater extent. 1929 was bad because the government contracted spending and ran a balanced budget.

[griftadan]

well i would have put it more as a failure of monetary policy

[Smokey D]

It was a failure of everything. The government stopped spending at the same time the Fed contracted money supply.

[Iscariot]

They're not devaluing the dollar, they're giving money that already exists back to the consumers. The huge reduction in manufacturing in large part comes from depressed consumer spending, so that's an issue.

By not spending money or giving money to be spent, the government risks deepening the crisis to a far greater extent. 1929 was bad because the government contracted spending and ran a balanced budget.

I just don't think concluding this recession will be as easy as redistributing funds because like I said, a lot of that money isn't going to be cycled back into the economy through domestic purchases. I'm just going off of what I have seen first-hand, but I don't know a single person that's going to blow that check when they could put it away and save the cash because everyone is terrified of things to come. We're already poor and the thought of things getting worse is a frightening one.

[Smokey D]

Quite possibly, but the government hoarding its cash would almost undoubtedly be worse.

[McP3000]

Quite possibly, but the government hoarding its cash would almost undoubtedly be worse.
Reagan would have been a great person to be in power during a depression

"SPEND UNTIL MY HANDS BLEED FROM CHECK WRITING"

[Reaganista]

what's wrong with that

[Iscariot]

what's wrong with that

Hard to believe you used to have intelligent opinions.

[Iskandar]

well i would have put it more as a failure of monetary policyOnly silly libertarians think that.

[gregulus]

Only silly libertarians think that.
ron paul '08. gold standard whoooooooo. college business school students in polo shirts. whooooooooo.

[Iskandar]

ron paul '08. gold standard whoooooooo. college business school students in polo shirts. whooooooooo.Lol.

[Smokey D]

Only silly libertarians think that.

There's Chicago school neoliberals who blame the Fed for failing to react to the Depression and expand monetary policy, which caused a series of banks to collapse and left a serious shortage in funds for investment, let alone consumer spending.

Austrian school economists (like Ron Paul) believe the Fed irresponsibly expanded the money supply throughout the 1920s, and failed to contract it in time (they did tighten in 1928, but this was considered too late), leading to a speculative bubble that could virtually do nothing but collapse by 1929.

It's possible that both of these effects played some role in the Depression, and it's also true that the Keynesian model and response could have been correct.

[Iskandar]

There's Chicago school neoliberals who blame the Fed for failing to react to the Depression and expand monetary policy, which caused a series of banks to collapse and left a serious shortage in funds for investment, let alone consumer spending.

Austrian school economists (like Ron Paul) believe the Fed irresponsibly expanded the money supply throughout the 1920s, and failed to contract it in time (they did tighten in 1928, but this was considered too late), leading to a speculative bubble that could virtually do nothing but collapse by 1929.

It's possible that both of these effects played some role in the Depression, and it's also true that the Keynesian model and response could have been correct.The Chicago school and the Austrian school are ideologically the same thing, pretty much (extremely right-wing). They totally overstate the importance of monetary policy. The government, rightfully, plays a far more active role in the modern mixed economy. You can't reduce everything to the money supply.

[Smokey D]

It's too simplistic to say Chicago = Austrian.

And you can't say government intervention is important is more important than monetary policy, because monetary policy is a form of intervention. I don't think either school was saying it was purely a result of monetary policy, but it certainly played a major role.

Monetarism and Keynesian economics are both demand side models, so I don't understand your hostility to the idea.

[Iskandar]

It's too simplistic to say Chicago = Austrian.

And you can't say government intervention is important is more important than monetary policy, because monetary policy is a form of intervention. I don't think either school was saying it was purely a result of monetary policy, but it certainly played a major role.

Monetarism and Keynesian economics are both demand side models, so I don't understand your hostility to the idea.They aren't the same, but they share a similar ideology.

What I'm opposed to is overstating the role of monetary policy. It's but one facet of intervention, and I don't see how it's more important than anything else.

[Reaganista]

Hard to believe you used to have intelligent opinions.

spending in recession isnt intelligent this is news to me

[McP3000]

spending in recession isnt intelligent this is news to me
it is intelligent

my post wasn't sarcastic...it was the truth with some humor on the side

The Chicago school and the Austrian school are ideologically the same thing, pretty much (extremely right-wing). They totally overstate the importance of monetary policy. The government, rightfully, plays a far more active role in the modern mixed economy. You can't reduce everything to the money supply.
So you think the depression happened because of the lack of government involvement?
IF THE GOVERNMENT WAS RUNNING EVERYTHING EVERYONE WOULD BE HAPPY

MOAR 5 YEAR PLANS

[Iskandar]

So you think the depression happened because of the lack of government involvement?
IF THE GOVERNMENT WAS RUNNING EVERYTHING EVERYONE WOULD BE HAPPY

MOAR 5 YEAR PLANSRight-wingers love to set up this ridiculous strawman, that politics is a dichotomy between capitalism and totalitarian state socialism. They only demonstrate their ignorance by doing this. Politics is infinitely more complex than that.

Has the idea occurred to you that maybe depressions are a natural consequence of the business cycle inherent to a a market economy?

[McP3000]

Has the idea occurred to you that maybe depressions are a natural consequence of the business cycle inherent to a a market economy?
Yes

ive said this many times during the thread...whats your point

[Iskandar]

Well,
IF THE GOVERNMENT WAS RUNNING EVERYTHING EVERYONE WOULD BE HAPPY

MOAR 5 YEAR PLANSNothing more than that this post was pretty idiotic, honestly.

[McP3000]

Well,
Nothing more than that this post was pretty idiotic, honestly.
ok

i was just mocking the idea that the government should have complete control over the economy.

[Iskandar]

ok

i was just mocking the idea that the government should have complete control over the economy.The left doesn't think that. Nobody does, except like neo-Stalinists and who the hell cares what they think?

[McP3000]

The left doesn't think that. Nobody does, except like neo-Stalinists and who the hell cares what they think?
neo stalinists?
wouldn't it be hardcore neo-marxists?

[Iskandar]

neo stalinists?
wouldn't it be hardcore neo-marxists?Marxists and Communists are not the same thing.

[McP3000]

Marxists and Communists are not the same thing.
well, they do have different names

[Iskandar]

well, they do have different namesAnd different ideologies.

[Reaganista]

some communists are marxists
like marx

[McP3000]

some communists are marxists
like marx
very well put

would read again