Market Down, Again

[Thump553]

See, now you're just making up numbers to pretend to be smart.

Republicans wanted spending cuts. There are no spending cuts of any significance, nor any limits on government spending.

There is a 12-man committee being formed, 6 Dems & 6 Repubs, to reduce the deficit. None of the Republicans will vote to increase taxes, none of the Democrats will vote to cut spending or benefits. Nothing will be accomplished. Is that what Republicans wanted?

Good catch. Actually Boehner said the GOP got 98% of what they wanted.

As far as the committee process goes, everyone anticipates deadlock and specific cuts are triggered if that happened-presumedly worse cuts than either party wants.

On another point, its pathetic how spideyboy ALWAYS blames the economy on Obama-I guess he is becoming senile and has totally forgotten the pre-election economic meltdown of 2008. Either that or he is such a simpleton that he expects an immediate turnaround to a fuckup of epic proportions.

 

[cubby1223]

Like I was beginning to say earlier - first of all, the "GOP" is not a unified block. To say "the GOP got 98% of what they wanted" is inherently flawed on pretty much every level you say it.

The primary goal for the GOP is to restore the federal government to a balanced budget through mostly spending cuts. This debt deal does nothing to achieve this goal. Boehner's remark is political spin and little more.

You're acting like a partisan hack cherry-picking select quotes that "prove" you right, even when the truth is something much different. Try learning a little harder on how to interpret things correctly.

 

[HendrixFan]

Little too much purple haze around you?

Seriously, how dumb does this forum get?

The debt deal forms a bipartisan committee to decide on spending cuts. Certain Republicans have already come out declaring that no Republican selected to the committee will vote for any tax increases. And certain Democrats have already come out declaring that no Democrat selected to the committee will vote for any benefits decreases. And you do know that the next congress in power could pass a budget that completely overwrites this "debt deal", right? Where are the spending cuts? Where are they?

They phase in gradually over the next decade as both sides aren't stupid enough (despite public proclamations to the contrary) to drastically cut spending during a recession.

The deal requires spending cuts. It does not require tax increases, so I have no idea why you bring that up as if it is some sort of equivalency.

Lets start from the beginning. Obama wanted the debt ceiling raised (as did any other rational being). Republicans refused to vote for it unless there was something done to start to balance the budget. Remember? Which side do you think the debt deal landed on?

So the Democrats offered tax increases to start towards balancing the budget while the other side offered spending cuts. Remember? Which side do you think the debt deal landed on?

 

[HendrixFan]

The biggest drive for the GOP is to restore the federal government to a balanced budget primarily through spending cuts.

Do you really believe this? Honestly?

 

[Thump553]

Like I was beginning to say earlier - first of all, the "GOP" is not a unified block. To say "the GOP got 98% of what they wanted" is inherently flawed on pretty much every level you say it.

The primary goal for the GOP is to restore the federal government to a balanced budget through mostly spending cuts. This debt deal does nothing to achieve this goal. Boehner's remark is political spin and little more.

You're acting like a partisan hack cherry-picking select quotes that "prove" you right, even when the truth is something much different. Try learning a little harder on how to interpret things correctly.

So your position is that Boehner was wrong, lying or not a member of the GOP? Your rapid spinning has me dizzy.

The primary goal of the GOP is to cut taxes and it has been that for my entire life. Balancing the budget is just window dressing to attract supporters-like the flag amendment, ban gay marriage and gays in the military, and law and order were the rallying points de jour in the recent past.

 

[Doppel]

That's why the government should be spending directly, not waiting people to start spending. People who are afraid of inflation spend their money as fast as they can, so nope, that's not the reason.

The government has no money to spend.

China:

http://www.france24.com/en/20110805-china-says-debt-financing-unlikely-save-us-eu

The only way the Americans have come up with to improve economic growth has been to take on new loans to repay the old ones

 

[werepossum]

They aren't spending their money because of fear of inflation otherwise no one would spend even in "good" times. And its logical to put your unspent money, i.e., savings, into investments that will match or beat inflation in good times and bad times.

But if they are going to spend, they either buy it now when its price is lower than later when its price is higher due to inflation. People will hold onto cash and not invest and wait if they think its price is going to go down in the future due to deflation. Because people aren't buying, this leads to more deflation.

Just to clarify, I am not claiming that people are either spending money or holding money because of fear of inflation. I was responding specifically to a claim that if people feared inflation, they would be spending their money as quickly as possible. It should be axiomatic that if you fear inflation will decrease the value of your savings, you DON'T spend those savings; that just leaves you even more broke. You might speed up some purchases, but you would also defer other purchases rather than wind up without sufficient buying power to weather a storm.

As to deflation, we may still be having some deflation in a few areas, such as government bonds, housing in some areas, maybe electronics. But in general we're having inflation, as anyone who regularly buys food, petroleum, etc. can attest. Artificially providing inflation is merely going to make this worse.

That is because you only cohort with partisan hacks. Obama just signed off on the debt deal that was 95% of what the Republicans wanted, yet somehow Obama is to blame. He has folded faster than superman on laundry day on just about any issue going against the Republicans yet you somehow cling to the thought that once Republicans take the WH things will be different.

Obama's problem is that he is acting like a foolish Republican. Business loves Obama, as is evidenced by their overwhelming campaign donations to him. Look at their profits, why wouldn't they be excited to keep him around?

Obama too is claiming he got most of what he wanted. Both sides regularly polish the turd when they have to compromise, and this is no different. But Obama came out ahead in my opinion. He got more money to spend, in return for vague promises of future cuts in the rate of spending growth and yet another commission. (I believe this is Obama's third debt commission and maybe the twelfth overall. The definition of insanity . . .)

 

[wuliheron]

So your position is that Boehner was wrong, lying or not a member of the GOP? Your rapid spinning has me dizzy.

The primary goal of the GOP is to cut taxes and it has been that for my entire life. Balancing the budget is just window dressing to attract supporters-like the flag amendment, ban gay marriage and gays in the military, and law and order were the rallying points de jour in the recent past.

Cutting taxes is just the latest rallying point for them arrived at by default because they don't have a hope in hell of achieving anything else. Its the last leg they have to stand on in a party that is deeply divided and almost as disgusted with themselves as they are the competition.

 

[thraashman]

So, we all agree the market tanked. We all agree the debt deal was significantly more in line with what Republicans wanted than what Democrats wanted. So ... we all agree that Republican fiscal mantra doesn't work, right? Wait, the crazy right still won't accept that they are the ones causing all these economic woes? Well shit, I don't know what to do anymore.

These Republican circle jerk threads are hilarious. It's like watching a room full of retarded rhesus monkeys fling poo at the walls and laugh.

 

[wuliheron]

So, we all agree the market tanked. We all agree the debt deal was significantly more in line with what Republicans wanted than what Democrats wanted. So ... we all agree that Republican fiscal mantra doesn't work, right? Wait, the crazy right still won't accept that they are the ones causing all these economic woes? Well shit, I don't know what to do anymore.

These Republican circle jerk threads are hilarious. It's like watching a room full of retarded rhesus monkeys fling poo at the walls and laugh.

Its new and improved! Faster then a speeding bullet, more powerful then a locomotive, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound! Look, up in the sky, its a bird, its a plane, its Republican man!

 

[theeedude]

The government has no money to spend.

China:

http://www.france24.com/en/20110805-china-says-debt-financing-unlikely-save-us-eu

The Fed is willing to lend the government all the money it wants for next to nothing. Of course China doesn't like that, since it wants a strong dollar to protect it's exports. And whose side do Republicans take, America's or China's? China's, of course.

 

[theeedude]

Wow.

People who fear the future don't spend their money on consumables.

People who fear the future and don't have much money, cut their budgets.

People who fear the future and have a lot of money, find ways to amass more wealth for themselves and little else.


You don't have a magic economy wand that fixes all our problems. So stop pretending you do.

You've never seen a country where people fear inflation. They don't sit on their money, they spend it as fast as they can. The American people aren't afraid there will be too much money chasing too few goods. They are afraid of the exact opposite. The right has a wrong diagnosis, and a wrong cure that will make the economy worse.
Republican policies are worse than a monkey flipping a coin, they ALWAYS do the wrong thing. During 2000s, they fiscally stimulated and blew bubbles when we should have been running a surplus to save for a rainy day. Now they are contracting and causing an economic collapse when we should be stimulating. These people are completely out of phase with the economic cycle.

 

[werepossum]

So, we all agree the market tanked. We all agree the debt deal was significantly more in line with what Republicans wanted than what Democrats wanted. So ... we all agree that Republican fiscal mantra doesn't work, right? Wait, the crazy right still won't accept that they are the ones causing all these economic woes? Well shit, I don't know what to do anymore.

These Republican circle jerk threads are hilarious. It's like watching a room full of retarded rhesus monkeys fling poo at the walls and laugh.

Only the far left believes that the debt deal is significantly more in line with what Republicans wanted than what Democrats wanted. You may remember another thread here where Obama too was claiming victory.

The Tea Party Republicans wanted NO debt limit increase; government should learn to live within its means immediately. The Country Club Republicans wanted a debt limit increase, but with real spending cuts. The Democrats wanted a clean debt limit increase with no real spending cuts, preferably with a side of tax the rich. We got a debt limit increase with no real spending cuts, yet another debt commission, and yet another promise that will "require" future spending cuts. Hey, anybody remember Pay-Go? We got it a friend!

So the Democrats got half of what they wanted with the opportunity to lobby for higher taxes while spending the new loot, the Country Club Republicans got half of what they wanted with the opportunity to lobby for less higher spending (NOT lower spending!) while spending the new loot, and the Tea Party Republicans got the cold shoulder. And yet when the market inevitably tanked as we merrily borrowed our way past GDP in the manner of a giant Greece, you somehow see this as a repudiation of the Tea Party Republicans' policies?

You should really see a doctor about that extreme cognitive dysfunction. The attendant rage isn't good for your heart.

 

[Engineer]

Only the far left believes that the debt deal is significantly more in line with what Republicans wanted than what Democrats wanted. You may remember another thread here where Obama too was claiming victory.

Must be pretty middle of the road bill (either that or it didn't do a damn thing) as both sides seem to hate it, lol!

 

[yours truly]

Can someone explain something to me. I'm not very clued up on stocks and shares etc.

When they say $2-3 trillion was lost today, it's not like money is magically getting pulled out of peoples pockets and sucked into a black hole. I'm guessing it just means the value of the stocks have decreased (and guessing again) - that no one is going to be silly and start selling their shares at a huge loss now, instead they'll just wait it out until the markets stabilize again.

So next week the value of shares could go back up, and the money 'lost' could be regained?

Is that how it works?

Sorry I feel a little stupid asking the questions.

 

[werepossum]

Must be pretty middle of the road bill (either that or it didn't do a damn thing) as both sides seem to hate it, lol!

Agreed, it's a pretty middle of the road bill that doesn't do much, but it DID keep us from a default. We may have earned only a couple weeks or a few months before being downgraded, but every little bit helps. As long as we haven't yet actually gone completely off the cliff, there's always a faint chance that someone can actually figure out how to fix America AND get that plan implemented. It's like a man sliding down a slope toward a drop-off with nothing to grasp except a spindly little bush - you know there's no way it's going to save you, but you still have to grab it.

It's funny too that the leaders of both sides are adamantly insisting that their side won whilst the followers of both sides are adamantly insisting that their side lost. I understand why, but it's still funny.

 

[werepossum]

Can someone explain something to me. I'm not very clued up on stocks and shares etc.

When they say $2-3 trillion was lost today, it's not like money is magically getting pulled out of peoples pockets and sucked into a black hole. I'm guessing it just means the value of the stocks have decreased (and guessing again) - that no one is going to be silly and start selling their shares at a huge loss now, instead they'll just wait it out until the markets stabilise again.

So next week the value of shares could go back up, and the money 'lost' could be regained?

Is that how it works?

Sorry I feel a little stupid asking the questions.

You are correct, the overall value of the market went down that much. No one has actually lost money until they sell, but the value at the moment declined that much.

 

[yours truly]

Thanks werepossum,

one last question to anyone who can help.

When the stock market tanks as bad as this, does the price of goods go up or down? My head say they'll go down but I'm not sure.

I was thinking about building a shiny new PC but I'm wondering if I should wait awhile..

 

[werepossum]

Thanks werepossum,

one last question to anyone who can help.

When the stock market tanks as bad as this, does the price of goods go up or down? My head say they'll go down but I'm not sure.

I was thinking about building a shiny new PC but I'm wondering if I should wait awhile..

I don't think anyone really knows. On the one hand, bad economic news makes people less inclined to spend money; less demand drives prices down. On the other hand, virtually no PC components (CPUs, SSHDs and RAM being exceptions) are manufactured in the USA, and the dollar is continually dropping, so prices will tend to increase. On the third hand, technology is always getting better and cheaper. On the fourth hand, much of the world has decent growth now, which will tend to drive prices higher even if we tank.

Personally, if your computer is significantly limiting you, and you have the money to spend and don't need it for your emergency fund, I'd say go for it. Prices are always going to trend generally lower, but there's something to be said for enjoying something today rather than waiting for prices to possibly drop. We just bought three new machines at work, and I've dropped a couple grand on house stuff in the last couple months. Hey, if we're all afraid to spend money, how are we ever going to recover?

 

[Jhhnn]

As to deflation, we may still be having some deflation in a few areas, such as government bonds, housing in some areas, maybe electronics. But in general we're having inflation, as anyone who regularly buys food, petroleum, etc. can attest. Artificially providing inflation is merely going to make this worse.

Dead wrong-

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/

Technically, inflation is occurring, just at an extremely low rate. Further economic contraction will tip into deflation territory. Obviously, that's what's coming, a nice double dip because the FRB can't solve demand problems cutting rates. They can't go negative, pay banks to borrow, but they're close. Hell- yield on Treasuries would be a lot higher if inflation were occurring. We're entering some very dangerous territory wrt a debt/deflation spiral.

It's the bust phase of the Boom/Bust nature of capitalism, and Repubs want to get a full measure of satisfaction beating down debtors. The financial elite is in good shape, highly liquid, in a prime position to enjoy the fruits of having money when few others do... They want deflation, and their Repub friends in Congress intend to deliver.

 

[werepossum]

Dead wrong-

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/

Technically, inflation is occurring, just at an extremely low rate. Further economic contraction will tip into deflation territory. Obviously, that's what's coming, a nice double dip because the FRB can't solve demand problems cutting rates. They can't go negative, pay banks to borrow, but they're close. Hell- yield on Treasuries would be a lot higher if inflation were occurring. We're entering some very dangerous territory wrt a debt/deflation spiral.

It's the bust phase of the Boom/Bust nature of capitalism, and Repubs want to get a full measure of satisfaction beating down debtors. The financial elite is in good shape, highly liquid, in a prime position to enjoy the fruits of having money when few others do... They want deflation, and their Repub friends in Congress intend to deliver.

Hmm. Looks like I'll have to spend the weekend framing a response that somehow impunes the economic wisdom of Enron's financial advisor. Boy, that's a toughie. If only there were some sort of bias in The conscience of a liberal, something to support the notion that he might find additional government spending to be the answer for literally every social ill. Anything at all . . .

Guess I'll have to go home and slap my wife. Things aren't getting more expensive, they're getting cheaper! Come to think of it, I'll have to slap myself too.

 

[yours truly]

Thanks werepossum I appreciate your response.

I might hold off on the PC and buy some shares instead..!

 

[werepossum]

Thanks werepossum I appreciate your response.

I might hold off on the PC and buy some shares instead..!

AAAAGH! Evil richer! Evil richer!

/Joe King

 

[spidey07]

You are correct, the overall value of the market went down that much. No one has actually lost money until they sell, but the value at the moment declined that much.

But the drop was do to a shit ton of selling. So it's related somewhat.

 

[Imp]

Welcome to flavour country gentlemen - US Debt Rating donwgraded by S&P:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...r-first-time-on-deficit-reduction-accord.html

If the US$ tanks, it looks like I've got vacation money set for life. Or I go buy a place in Florida.