Hawke wrote:

Yeah, it's not really all that great. But remember, it could be a lot
worse. After letting the republicans run things in Washington, uh,
actually I mean letting them leave business to run things in Washington,
we're not that bad off. Last time the government let business run the
country we got the Great Depression. So in comparison were better off.
Truth is republicans/business ****ed the country just as bad as they did
in '29. The only difference is this time the government jumped in and
did the right moves to fix things. That made a big difference. It's not
going to take 13 years to get us back this time. Unless we make the
mistake of handing the reigns over to the republicans again.


So are you predicting the out of control spending going on isn't going to wipe out my
savings by inflating our currency? You seem to think you are good at predictions.

Wes
--
"Additionally as a security officer, I carry a gun to protect
government officials but my life isn't worth protecting at home
in their eyes." Dick Anthony Heller

"Wes" wrote in message
...
Hawke wrote:

Yeah, it's not really all that great. But remember, it could be a lot
worse. After letting the republicans run things in Washington, uh,
actually I mean letting them leave business to run things in Washington,
we're not that bad off. Last time the government let business run the
country we got the Great Depression. So in comparison were better off.
Truth is republicans/business ****ed the country just as bad as they did
in '29. The only difference is this time the government jumped in and
did the right moves to fix things. That made a big difference. It's not
going to take 13 years to get us back this time. Unless we make the
mistake of handing the reigns over to the republicans again.


So are you predicting the out of control spending going on isn't going to
wipe out my
savings by inflating our currency?

It may, it may not. So far, not. The key will be judging the rates of growth
and the velocity of money as we come out of the slump, and cutting back on
the money supply expansion at a rate that allows GDP to grow without causing
high inflation.

Right now inflation is running at 1.6%, despite all of the money in
circulation. The thing is, it isn't circulating. So cutting back now *would*
wipe out your savings, by leading to a serious decline in demand and a
soon-to-follow devaluation of the dollar. You'd still have the dollars, but
they wouldn't be worth jack ****. And their low value would lead to a big
increase in the debt-service cost of the national debt, as well as all other
interest rates.

This is an economic highwire act of the highest order. One misstep, and
we're in trouble. Anything else -- too much tax cutting, too much
money-printing, too little deficit spending or too many banks allowed to
fail -- and we're screwed for a long time. Of all the risks, the lowest one
is printing too much money. We know how to recover from that. It's painful,
but it's fairly reliable, as Paul Volcker demonstrated 1979 - 1983.

There is no other plan than the one we're following that any competent and
honest economics expert would propose. Even John McCain's chief economic
advisor said so, after Obama was in office and the $700 billion stimulus was
proposed.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote:

So are you predicting the out of control spending going on isn't going to
wipe out my
savings by inflating our currency?

It may, it may not. So far, not. The key will be judging the rates of growth
and the velocity of money as we come out of the slump, and cutting back on
the money supply expansion at a rate that allows GDP to grow without causing
high inflation.

Right now inflation is running at 1.6%, despite all of the money in
circulation. The thing is, it isn't circulating. So cutting back now *would*
wipe out your savings, by leading to a serious decline in demand and a
soon-to-follow devaluation of the dollar. You'd still have the dollars, but
they wouldn't be worth jack ****. And their low value would lead to a big
increase in the debt-service cost of the national debt, as well as all other
interest rates.

Inflation at my level sure isn't at 1.6% though. I suspect you are citing the core
inflation rate that excludes a number of things. I think we need a Joe Six Pack inflation
rate statistic.


This is an economic highwire act of the highest order. One misstep, and
we're in trouble. Anything else -- too much tax cutting, too much
money-printing, too little deficit spending or too many banks allowed to
fail -- and we're screwed for a long time. Of all the risks, the lowest one
is printing too much money. We know how to recover from that. It's painful,
but it's fairly reliable, as Paul Volcker demonstrated 1979 - 1983.

I'm simplistic on this sort of thing. To me, printing money is inflating our currency.
Tax cutting, well this might sound strange coming from me but we got bills we can't pay
now. I'd like to see more Americans paying taxes.


There is no other plan than the one we're following that any competent and
honest economics expert would propose. Even John McCain's chief economic
advisor said so, after Obama was in office and the $700 billion stimulus was
proposed.

Ed, I hope you are right.

Wes

"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

So are you predicting the out of control spending going on isn't going
to
wipe out my
savings by inflating our currency?

It may, it may not. So far, not. The key will be judging the rates of
growth
and the velocity of money as we come out of the slump, and cutting back on
the money supply expansion at a rate that allows GDP to grow without
causing
high inflation.

Right now inflation is running at 1.6%, despite all of the money in
circulation. The thing is, it isn't circulating. So cutting back now
*would*
wipe out your savings, by leading to a serious decline in demand and a
soon-to-follow devaluation of the dollar. You'd still have the dollars,
but
they wouldn't be worth jack ****. And their low value would lead to a big
increase in the debt-service cost of the national debt, as well as all
other
interest rates.

Inflation at my level sure isn't at 1.6% though. I suspect you are citing
the core
inflation rate that excludes a number of things. I think we need a Joe
Six Pack inflation
rate statistic.

Not if you want to know where the economy is going. The metrics for monetary
control are tuned to use CPI (as one factor), not the "Joe Six Pack"
inflation rate.

You could create such a statistic, but then you'd need 20 or 30 years to
tune monetary policy to deal with it.



This is an economic highwire act of the highest order. One misstep, and
we're in trouble. Anything else -- too much tax cutting, too much
money-printing, too little deficit spending or too many banks allowed to
fail -- and we're screwed for a long time. Of all the risks, the lowest
one
is printing too much money. We know how to recover from that. It's
painful,
but it's fairly reliable, as Paul Volcker demonstrated 1979 - 1983.

I'm simplistic on this sort of thing. To me, printing money is inflating
our currency.
Tax cutting, well this might sound strange coming from me but we got bills
we can't pay
now. I'd like to see more Americans paying taxes.

Printing money doesn't directly cause inflation. Right now the banking
sector of the economy is awash in money but inflation is extremely low --
almost dangerously so, but not quite.

Inflation, of course, means rising prices -- higher costs for goods:

http://www.economist.com/research/Ec...uery=inflation

What causes inflation is too much demand for the rate of supply. The thing
that many people don't recognize is that increasing money supply, right now,
is not having a strong effect on demand. Retail business owners could tell
you all about it. Normally it does, but we're operating in a period of
recession economics, not a normal one. If you want to look at inflation from
the money-supply angle, you have to include the velocity factor, which is a
multiplier on the quantity of money based on how quickly it's changing
hands -- a key measure of economic activity. That factor is extremely low
right now, at deep recession levels, which makes the economy respond as if
there was a lot less money around than there really is. Thus, inflation is
low, GDP growth is low, and recovery of jobs is going to be very slow. You
can't make those things go away with a magic wand. That's all just
fundamental economics and it's all interrelated.

There is less connection between inflation and money supply, historically,
than simplistic theories suggest. The _Economist_ entry above gives a more
meaninful, although too brief, explanation.



There is no other plan than the one we're following that any competent and
honest economics expert would propose. Even John McCain's chief economic
advisor said so, after Obama was in office and the $700 billion stimulus
was
proposed.

Ed, I hope you are right.

Just recognize that there is not, and there never has been, a sure cure for
recession. If everything worked according to textbooks it would be
different. But this is a pretty exceptional recession -- not for its depth,
but because it was triggered by an enormous financial failure, rather than
by some little negative feedback loop resulting from a policy error or an
unfortunate event in the fundamental economics, like the recession that was
started in the late '70s by wild inflation in oil prices. We can withstand
those shocks a lot better today. But now, some of the key tools for getting
out of a recession, such as a responsive source of credit, are broken and
are hobbling along. The administration was handed a half-empty box of tools,
and they're doing exactly what standard economics says they have to do.
Nobody is winging it here. This is more or less a textbook response to a
very bad hand, which has worked in the past but never with such a mess
triggering it. In some ways this is a worse set of problems than we faced in
1929 - 31. Fortunately, we already had in place some protections (like FDIC)
that kept it from spiraling into a depression.

--
Ed Huntress

On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 18:47:15 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:



Just recognize that there is not, and there never has been, a sure cure for
recession. If everything worked according to textbooks it would be
different. But this is a pretty exceptional recession -- not for its depth,
but because it was triggered by an enormous financial failure, rather than
by some little negative feedback loop resulting from a policy error or an
unfortunate event in the fundamental economics, like the recession that was
started in the late '70s by wild inflation in oil prices. We can withstand
those shocks a lot better today. But now, some of the key tools for getting
out of a recession, such as a responsive source of credit, are broken and
are hobbling along. The administration was handed a half-empty box of tools,
and they're doing exactly what standard economics says they have to do.
Nobody is winging it here. This is more or less a textbook response to a
very bad hand, which has worked in the past but never with such a mess
triggering it. In some ways this is a worse set of problems than we faced in
1929 - 31. Fortunately, we already had in place some protections (like FDIC)
that kept it from spiraling into a depression.


Maybe a little creative Communism would have been useful here. I'm thinking
something along the lines of:- The entire boards of directors of all the Wall
St quoted banks summonsed to the N.Y Giants stadium. Ensure they all have
their mobile phones with them. Line them up along the touchline with three or
four LMG equipped squads on the opposite touchline. Then ask them what they
are doing to ensure the flow of credit and control unjustified risk taking.
Hardest part would be selecting where to aim. Maybe leave it up to the LMG
squads...

Mark Rand
RTFM

"Mark Rand" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 18:47:15 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:



Just recognize that there is not, and there never has been, a sure cure
for
recession. If everything worked according to textbooks it would be
different. But this is a pretty exceptional recession -- not for its
depth,
but because it was triggered by an enormous financial failure, rather than
by some little negative feedback loop resulting from a policy error or an
unfortunate event in the fundamental economics, like the recession that
was
started in the late '70s by wild inflation in oil prices. We can withstand
those shocks a lot better today. But now, some of the key tools for
getting
out of a recession, such as a responsive source of credit, are broken and
are hobbling along. The administration was handed a half-empty box of
tools,
and they're doing exactly what standard economics says they have to do.
Nobody is winging it here. This is more or less a textbook response to a
very bad hand, which has worked in the past but never with such a mess
triggering it. In some ways this is a worse set of problems than we faced
in
1929 - 31. Fortunately, we already had in place some protections (like
FDIC)
that kept it from spiraling into a depression.


Maybe a little creative Communism would have been useful here. I'm
thinking
something along the lines of:- The entire boards of directors of all the
Wall
St quoted banks summonsed to the N.Y Giants stadium. Ensure they all have
their mobile phones with them. Line them up along the touchline with three
or
four LMG equipped squads on the opposite touchline. Then ask them what
they
are doing to ensure the flow of credit and control unjustified risk
taking.
Hardest part would be selecting where to aim. Maybe leave it up to the LMG
squads...

Mark Rand
RTFM

You've been hanging out on this NG for too long, Mark. g

--
Ed Huntress

Mark Rand wrote:

Maybe a little creative Communism would have been useful here. I'm thinking
something along the lines of:- The entire boards of directors of all the Wall
St quoted banks summonsed to the N.Y Giants stadium. Ensure they all have
their mobile phones with them. Line them up along the touchline with three or
four LMG equipped squads on the opposite touchline. Then ask them what they
are doing to ensure the flow of credit and control unjustified risk taking.
Hardest part would be selecting where to aim. Maybe leave it up to the LMG
squads...

Mark Rand
RTFM

Better yet, a .50BMG Barrett at one end of the line, see how many
rounds it takes to get to the other end.

David

On Sat, 02 Jan 2010 02:23:07 +0000, the infamous Mark Rand
scrawled the following:

On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 18:47:15 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:



Just recognize that there is not, and there never has been, a sure cure for
recession. If everything worked according to textbooks it would be
different. But this is a pretty exceptional recession -- not for its depth,
but because it was triggered by an enormous financial failure, rather than
by some little negative feedback loop resulting from a policy error or an
unfortunate event in the fundamental economics, like the recession that was
started in the late '70s by wild inflation in oil prices. We can withstand
those shocks a lot better today. But now, some of the key tools for getting
out of a recession, such as a responsive source of credit, are broken and
are hobbling along. The administration was handed a half-empty box of tools,
and they're doing exactly what standard economics says they have to do.
Nobody is winging it here. This is more or less a textbook response to a
very bad hand, which has worked in the past but never with such a mess
triggering it. In some ways this is a worse set of problems than we faced in
1929 - 31. Fortunately, we already had in place some protections (like FDIC)
that kept it from spiraling into a depression.


Maybe a little creative Communism would have been useful here. I'm thinking
something along the lines of:- The entire boards of directors of all the Wall
St quoted banks summonsed to the N.Y Giants stadium. Ensure they all have
their mobile phones with them. Line them up along the touchline with three or
four LMG equipped squads on the opposite touchline. Then ask them what they
are doing to ensure the flow of credit and control unjustified risk taking.
Hardest part would be selecting where to aim. Maybe leave it up to the LMG
squads...

Are you going to leave us in suspense, or will you tell us what "LMG"
is, Mark?

Oh, my freakin' Crom! You can't mean Light Machine Gun, can you? Nah,
a Brit wouldn't think those thoughts. They've outlawed butter knives,
fer chrissake.

P.S: Would your dream have been more world-efficient by including
Pennsylvania Avenuers with the Wall Streeters?

--
Society is produced by our wants and government by our wickedness.
--Thomas Paine

Mark Rand wrote:

Line them up along the touchline with three or
four LMG equipped squads on the opposite touchline. Then ask them what they
are doing to ensure the flow of credit and control unjustified risk taking.
Hardest part would be selecting where to aim. Maybe leave it up to the LMG
squads...

The Heart of Oak isn't dead yet.

Wes
--
"Additionally as a security officer, I carry a gun to protect
government officials but my life isn't worth protecting at home
in their eyes." Dick Anthony Heller

I've noticed that liberals tend to hate Republicans,
regardless of any truth or evidence to the contrary. Trying
to show liberals that conservativism is good for the country
is ineffective. The (rational) logic meets with the
(emotional) visceral hatred, and the logic is totally lost.
The bitter, hateful rhetoric of the left demonstrates a pure
hatred that is seldom seen any where else.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


Hawke wrote:

Truth is republicans/business ****ed the country just as
bad as they did
in '29. The only difference is this time the government
jumped in and

Funny that even with their hypnosis by Obama slowly wearing off, we are here
to catch them and help them as they get shocked back into the real world. Do
you think any of them appreciate our help? Pffft!
Ed

"Stormin Mormon" wrote in message
...
I've noticed that liberals tend to hate Republicans,
regardless of any truth or evidence to the contrary. Trying
to show liberals that conservativism is good for the country
is ineffective. The (rational) logic meets with the
(emotional) visceral hatred, and the logic is totally lost.
The bitter, hateful rhetoric of the left demonstrates a pure
hatred that is seldom seen any where else.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.


Hawke wrote:

Truth is republicans/business ****ed the country just as
bad as they did
in '29. The only difference is this time the government
jumped in and

Wes wrote:
Hawke wrote:

Yeah, it's not really all that great. But remember, it could be a lot
worse. After letting the republicans run things in Washington, uh,
actually I mean letting them leave business to run things in Washington,
we're not that bad off. Last time the government let business run the
country we got the Great Depression. So in comparison were better off.
Truth is republicans/business ****ed the country just as bad as they did
in '29. The only difference is this time the government jumped in and
did the right moves to fix things. That made a big difference. It's not
going to take 13 years to get us back this time. Unless we make the
mistake of handing the reigns over to the republicans again.


So are you predicting the out of control spending going on isn't going to wipe out my
savings by inflating our currency? You seem to think you are good at predictions.

Actually, my record of predictions is pretty good. Although since I only
make predictions about things I have a lot of information about
sometimes what I predict is pretty easy. But to answer your question,
I'd tell you that your savings are not going to be wiped out. With one
caveat, that you have your savings in legitimate financial institutions
that are backed by the FSLIC. As long as your accounts are where they
have government backing you're fine. What you and most other people are
getting wrong is the fear of out of control governmental spending. It's
a red herring.

We just experienced a situation similar in seriousness as World War II
or the Great Depression. In cases that severe the government has to do
what ever it takes to remedy the situation. What you call "out of
control spending" was what was necessary to get out of the financial
crisis we were in. The level of spending that was done is not what is
going to keep happening. It's going to go back to a more normal level
and at some point Obama will do the same as Clinton did and have a
balanced budget, maybe even a surplus. It won't happen until the crisis
subsides and until the economy heats up. But that will happen
eventually. The other thing that is a problem is that Obama's opponents,
the republicans, are exaggerating the issue of governmental spending for
political reasons. Don't forget, they spent us into massive debt and
there was no crisis to blame it on. They were just irresponsible. For
them to criticize the new administration for spending too much,
considering the level of our problems is really a joke. But it's a good
tool to upset the public and it makes Obama look bad. It's just a tactic
and it isn't going to work. Your money is safe. I'm won't say that about
other investments, which all depend on your level of risk, but the
savings accounts backed by the government are safe. And when the current
crisis ends the spending will decline and interest rates will rise. The
Federal Reserve will then put controls on inflation. Normal is possible
and is coming. It just it takes time to fix a problem that was as
gigantic as the one we are still working on.

Hawke