SS running in 50B the red MSM very quiet

[boomerang]

It's due to the largest wealth transfer in history from bottom to top visa vi private and governmental debt. We went for years refusing to tax those that have to pay for things we count not afford, and instead financed visa vi debt. At the same time they extended credit back to the vast middle and lower and now we're perpetually in debt via the feds and privately because of it. This was by design - Some have been frank about the mechanizations like Grover Norquest in his starve the beast speeches.

So, what would the result be if we all quit paying federal taxes? I've heard some rumblings .........

 

[Jhhnn]

So you still think there's a difference Dems and Repubs, eh?

I'd suggest that Dems are more likely to work for the middle class, at least when they realize what they're doing. Which isn't to say I have a tremendous amount of faith in the current congress or the Obama admin- their headset has been poisoned by the rhetoric of the Right, as has that of much of America. But they still need the support of Labor, and have historical precedents to follow in the New Deal and the Great Society. It's been 100 years or so since Republicans engaged in any sort of similar undertakings.

On a collective level, we believe things that aren't true, can't possibly be true. Righties in particular refuse to exercise any sort of self examination at all. They believe what they believe because they believe it, and that's that. When Grover Norquist spells it out, tells them that he and his friends at the top intend to break the govt of the people, for the people and by the people with crushing debt, they can't even hear him- Hell, they cheer him on, having come to believe that govt itself is the problem, rather than the manipulation of their own heads and of the govt being the problem. They can't think straight because they're hooked on the self indulgent smug outrage spoon fed to them by their heroes...

 

[Darwin333]

The US will still take a large loss on those loans as a whole.

It looks like the US is going to take a complete loss on those loans seeing as how they are respending it as fast as it comes back in. I wouldn't really call that a D or R thing its more of a "politician" thing but its still not what was promised to the American people.

 

[StageLeft]

Our current president is turning out to be the worst president ever. Who COULDN'T turn the economy around given a $1T blank check? Only someone who spends it on special interest groups and other worthless endeavors.

Then he will tax businesses more to pay for everything and our journey to the bottom will be complete.

Despite being very underwhelming, he has an awful lot more to suck to even get in the same ballpark or the same league as Bush, imo. There are still a few years left to see, though, but he hasn't yet utterly fvcked up the execution of two wars.

 

[StageLeft]

According to statements from Denmark's Saxo bank they estimate SS to go negative next year: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...hes-China-flops-Bunds-soar-predicts-Saxo.html

Numbers aren't gelling with what else is in this thread, not sure who is wrong, though, perhaps all links so far in the thread...?

 

[Mani]

This is Obama's economy now. Clinton handed Bush a mess and within a year he turned it around. Democrats do nothing but sling mud and shift blame. Grow up and take responsibility. Your president is a failure.

lol...this post takes the cake.

 

[LegendKiller]

According to statements from Denmark's Saxo bank they estimate SS to go negative next year: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...hes-China-flops-Bunds-soar-predicts-Saxo.html

Numbers aren't gelling with what else is in this thread, not sure who is wrong, though, perhaps all links so far in the thread...?

As I've already stated, the graph above is skewed by several factors. The Saxo bank predictions are always whacked.

 

[Craig234]

As I've already stated, the graph above is skewed by several factors. The Saxo bank predictions are always whacked.

The accurate info doesn't change the point. If you want to be of any use, post the right graph. You don't, if history is any judge. I would post Kevin Phillips' graph but my computer is not working.

 

[LegendKiller]

The accurate info doesn't change the point. If you want to be of any use, post the right graph. You don't, if history is any judge. I would post Kevin Phillips' graph but my computer is not working.

As I've already stated, and as Ben Bernanke already also stated in recent quotes, the debt you see is including financial intermediation ie...

When you have a mortgage which is packaged with other mortgages, which are then put into a securitization, that securitization debt is often consolidated on the balance sheets of the banks.

Is that so hard to understand?

Bernanke recently reiterated this point, since Z1 does not remove double/triple/quadruple counting of debt. Sorry you're too retarded to think logically and understand the metrics you spout as "reality". Some of us "technical" brainiacs actually know what we're talking about.

 

[Jhhnn]

According to statements from Denmark's Saxo bank they estimate SS to go negative next year: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...hes-China-flops-Bunds-soar-predicts-Saxo.html

Numbers aren't gelling with what else is in this thread, not sure who is wrong, though, perhaps all links so far in the thread...?

Heh. Not exactly- from the article...

"Saxo Bank offers its thoughts as "Black Swan" risks that could paddle up quietly and bite you, rather than absolute predictions. Take them in the right spirit."

Yeh, the spirit of the boogeyman...

 

[Craig234]

As I've already stated, and as Ben Bernanke already also stated in recent quotes, the debt you see is including financial intermediation ie...

When you have a mortgage which is packaged with other mortgages, which are then put into a securitization, that securitization debt is often consolidated on the balance sheets of the banks.

Is that so hard to understand?

No, welcome to the 2008 discussion threads where this was covered repeatedly.

Bernanke recently reiterated this point, since Z1 does not remove double/triple/quadruple counting of debt. Sorry you're too retarded to think logically and understand the metrics you spout as "reality". Some of us "technical" brainiacs actually know what we're talking about.

You're an idiot anbd a liar. Yet more lying attacks with not one valid point in them. Yes, you sure proved all of my posts saying the Z1 data was correct wrong. All zero of my posts saying anything about that.

And thanks for the requested correct charts, that would have made you a little useful for all the BS.

You're apparently so desparate to get one valid critcism of me that you have sunk to the level of posting a statement and then simply lying and saying that I'd said the opposite. Pathetic. Earn it.

Your problem here is, besides that I said nothing on the topic you posted, is that you can't draw me in to challenging you in the niche you know about - I don't challenge you in that one area you know.

That's why you just keeping making poopyhead name-calling posts, because you have nothing else.

You don't know yet to quit when you're behind and stop making a fool of yourself. Dr. Legend posting a valid technical point on finance doesn't somehow give Mr. Killer cover for his lies and idiocy.

 

[Rangoric]

According to statements from Denmark's Saxo bank they estimate SS to go negative next year: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...hes-China-flops-Bunds-soar-predicts-Saxo.html

Numbers aren't gelling with what else is in this thread, not sure who is wrong, though, perhaps all links so far in the thread...?

But that's the problem, I see no SS DATA in there either.

Just saying that since the US Gov uses SS like a piggy bank, in a lean year for SS (high unemployment means, surprise, less income for it), there isn't the stored up money to use.

Basically all I am getting is that the Government will have to PAY BACK some of the money SS is supposed to have.

And even at that, nobody is giving any data on it except one guy who said $50b. And I just want to know where that number came from.

Call me skeptical, but anyone can make up numbers.

 

[Zebo]

Tax receipts are down huge this year, 44%. Unemployment is way higher than reported. Employment e.g. earned income is where SS draws taxes from and employment is disappearing. I'm surprised any news outlet had guts to report but they did - AP did, take it up with them but it makes perfect sense to me. It's all very hush hush we are failing to meet SS obligations since all pros and politicians projected 20 years safeness.

 

[Zebo]

So, what would the result be if we all quit paying federal taxes? I've heard some rumblings .........

What do you mean if? Have you seen tax receipts? Everyone I know is pouring over every exclusion, exemption, deduction like never before, play gray even as all they can do is say no. Then you have former taxpayers not paying at all due not being employed at all. IRS added 1000 new agents in desperation recently - watch out.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Will do when I get back from fishing.

Why don't you post it here?

 

[GTaudiophile]

Tax receipts are down huge this year, 44%. Unemployment is way higher than reported. Employment e.g. earned income is where SS draws taxes from and employment is disappearing. I'm surprised any news outlet had guts to report but they did - AP did, take it up with them but it makes perfect sense to me. It's all very hush hush we are failing to meet SS obligations since all pros and politicians projected 20 years safeness.

Have you noticed how truly, relentless negative economic news has been pretty rare since BHO got elected? Shhh! Don't rock the change boat!

Goebbles would be proud of our "main stream" media.

 

[Jhhnn]

Yawn. The alarmist rhetoric in this thread has no basis in fact, and attacks on the Obama admin wrt to SS are totally unjustified, beneath contempt. Hell, the guy's been in office less than a year. It took RR, the hero of the right, a couple of years to turn it into a giant cashcow of deception, raising rates on workers so he could cut taxes for the rich... his fans lapped it up, too.

Here's the only numbers put forth in this thread that actually mean anything-

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TRSUM/index.html

$50B shortfall? Only in the fevered dreams of the fringewhacks...

 

[LegendKiller]

No, welcome to the 2008 discussion threads where this was covered repeatedly.

Then why didn't you mention it shitstain? Instead, you piled wood on top of the fire. So much for your objectivity.

You're an idiot anbd a liar. Yet more lying attacks with not one valid point in them. Yes, you sure proved all of my posts saying the Z1 data was correct wrong. All zero of my posts saying anything about that.

And thanks for the requested correct charts, that would have made you a little useful for all the BS.

You're apparently so desparate to get one valid critcism of me that you have sunk to the level of posting a statement and then simply lying and saying that I'd said the opposite. Pathetic. Earn it.

Your problem here is, besides that I said nothing on the topic you posted, is that you can't draw me in to challenging you in the niche you know about - I don't challenge you in that one area you know.

That's why you just keeping making poopyhead name-calling posts, because you have nothing else.

You don't know yet to quit when you're behind and stop making a fool of yourself. Dr. Legend posting a valid technical point on finance doesn't somehow give Mr. Killer cover for his lies and idiocy.

How am I a liar? What, because I don't accept your bullshit posts? I do love how you reduce my posts and knowledge to nothing more than "technical" knowledge. As opposed to your real-world finance/economic knowledge that you get from theoretical non-real-world economists?

 

[Ozoned]

Then why didn't you mention it shitstain? Instead, you piled wood on top of the fire. So much for your objectivity.



How am I a liar? What, because I don't accept your bullshit posts? I do love how you reduce my posts and knowledge to nothing more than "technical" knowledge. As opposed to your real-world finance/economic knowledge that you get from theoretical non-real-world economists?

When you reduce economics to a pure science, the knowledge behind it has to be empirical to have weight. There are people that absolutely refuse to acknowledge that there can be anything beyond that.

 

[soccerballtux]

Tax receipts are down huge this year, 44%. Unemployment is way higher than reported. Employment e.g. earned income is where SS draws taxes from and employment is disappearing. I'm surprised any news outlet had guts to report but they did - AP did, take it up with them but it makes perfect sense to me. It's all very hush hush we are failing to meet SS obligations since all pros and politicians projected 20 years safeness.

Yeah the unemployment is definitely there. We're at 17.6% IIRC according to U6. That's going to have to come way down before we can even think about adding new workers to the economy. I would not be surprised if SS were actually cash negative.

So do really have a survival guide? That's fine if not, mentioning it made for nice effect, but if you had written one I would have enjoyed reading it.

 

[Ozoned]

Doesn't matter who is president now -There is no way out of this box - It's debt and correlary of no credit left or corresponding GDP to maintain illusions.
We are experiencing the fore-shocks of an impending socioeconomic event of such immense magnitude and life-altering proportions that you can't comprehend and that will not be abated: Prepare, that's no joke. The market and economy will follow an Etruscan M pattern

The total debt on this chart is less than The (USA) total PRIVATE net worth.(Barely) After the impending round of inflation runs its course, the debt will be 10% (or less) of the total net worth. The only people that will notice a significant change in their socioeconomic status are the ones that hold their wealth in dollars.

 

[Jhhnn]

The total debt on this chart is less than The (USA) total PRIVATE net worth.(Barely) After the impending round of inflation runs its course, the debt will be 10% (or less) of the total net worth. The only people that will notice a significant change in their socioeconomic status are the ones that hold their wealth in dollars.

Which means anybody who actually works for a living, who's not already wealthy, right?

Not to mention that a huge % of America's "net worth" is held in the value of private residences, and in the bonds issued in borrowing against that now much inflated number. We're not done with this whole real estate imbroglio, not by a long shot. The only way real estate prices are going anywhere but down is if more people earn more money to increase demand- fat chance of that, so far...

And I think it's important to realize that LK's argument wrt compounding of debt on the books of various institutions is a non-starter, given that such has been the case all along the graph. Let's face it, the rate of change, of increase since 2000 is troubling, to say the least.

 

[Ozoned]

Which means anybody who actually works for a living, who's not already wealthy, right?

Not to mention that a huge % of America's "net worth" is held in the value of private residences, and in the bonds issued in borrowing against that now much inflated number. We're not done with this whole real estate imbroglio, not by a long shot. The only way real estate prices are going anywhere but down is if more people earn more money to increase demand- fat chance of that, so far...

And I think it's important to realize that LK's argument wrt compounding of debt on the books of various institutions is a non-starter, given that such has been the case all along the graph. Let's face it, the rate of change, of increase since 2000 is troubling, to say the least.

Consumer debt is 13 1/2 Trillion. Consumer net worth is 53 Trillion. The boomers have the lions share of it. If they don't spend it, the government is going to take it away from them, via inflation. When inflation cycles, the average middle class citizen that starts with a $200,000 mortgage on a $200,000 home is going to find himself sitting on a $700,000 home with a $150,000 left to pay on his mortgage. We can keep this cycle up as long as the $ is king. When it isn't, we'll have to find a new way to make a living.

 

[LegendKiller]

Consumer debt is 13 1/2 Trillion. Consumer net worth is 53 Trillion. The boomers have the lions share of it. If they don't spend it, the government is going to take it away from them, via inflation. When inflation cycles, the average middle class citizen that starts with a $200,000 mortgage on a $200,000 home is going to find himself sitting on a $700,000 home with a $150,000 left to pay on his mortgage. We can keep this cycle up as long as the $ is king. When it isn't, we'll have to find a new way to make a living.

The inflation argument is a joke, as a huge portion of Boomer assets are in real assets, bonds, or stocks all of which keep up pretty well with inflation in the long-run. People like you make it sound like they have all of their pennies stuck in bank accounts yielding negative cash to inflation.

Provided we keep PPP, inflation doesn't matter. You can do that even if your currency doesn't have hegemony.

 

[ericlp]

It's just an IOU anyway... isn't it what bush called it? But, I too would like to see how it's in the red, unless we've been taking out too many IOU's AGAIN! Maybe someone needed the money you know for a REALLY good reason, like some stupid fucking war manorial.

When will it end?