Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Deep recession feared in U.S.
financialpost.com — Economists are no longer talking about a U.S. recession but a deep recession after figures yesterday showed business sentiment continued to plummet in early February.
sparkleprincess- 1282 diggs
- digg it
- zappa717, on 02/25/2008, -9/+24scary.
- Khannea, on 02/25/2008, -17/+58No! I love it! And no, I dont care whether or not this will have effect on Europe (I am pretty sure the effects will be very limited) - we need to see happen, whatever it takes, to reduce the US from an empire to a normal, accountable country that honors international treaties and the rule of law. For starters I'd like to see the US treat its own citizens, including the poorer ones, as human beings.
- Ribbed4U, on 02/25/2008, -8/+10Couldn't have said it better myself. Dugg.
- Cwo655321, on 02/25/2008, -15/+6if you can't say it better, STFU!
- kazamx, on 02/25/2008, -6/+12All I want to know is how much lower the Dollar will fall. If it keeps going like it has over the last year or two I will be able to buy a mansion in the US just to use as a holiday home.
- megaton, on 02/25/2008, -5/+27If you think a U.S. recession wouldn't affect the rest of the world, you need to take basic Macroeconomics and some History. Many, many countries are heavily invested in the United States, and a decline in U.S. value will (and do!) negatively impact those countries.
This is not an isolated, cubbyhole problem, friend, and to think so is quite ignorant.- nospinhere, on 02/25/2008, -4/+13and arrogance, which Europe is just as guilty as the United States whether they want to admit to it or not.
- mightydavefish, on 02/25/2008, -0/+5Isn't it cute how the rightards accuse everyone else of their crimes?
- mightydavefish, on 02/25/2008, -0/+5Isn't it cute how the rightards accuse everyone else of their crimes?
- Khannea, on 02/25/2008, -11/+5If true, well, we outside the US will just have to suffer the misery. No price is too high to have the US collapse, USSR style.
- roodammy44, on 02/25/2008, -0/+12@livefr33ordi3
Not all of us Europeans want to see the US destroyed.
I used to love america, but since the torturing, warmongering and civil-rights clampdowns began I can't get to that any more.
Most europeans still have a lot of goodwill towards the US, I hope your next president sorts it out.
And please god make sure McCain doesn't win. - schlurp, on 02/25/2008, -0/+8last time I checked the russians beat Hitler
- paradigmx, on 02/25/2008, -1/+3@livefr33ordi3
if you truly lived up to your name, you'd be rioting in the streets right now. your government doesn't care about your freedom anymore, they care about America Corporation™
you live in yet another company George Bush has run into the ground - Gerz1219, on 02/25/2008, -1/+3There is a finite amount of power in the world, and whenever an empire collapses, another country fills in the vacuum. A weaker US means a stronger China and Russia. I suspect that when they're running things in the next half century, you will not like it.
- paradigmx, on 02/25/2008, -3/+1"I suspect that when they're running things in the next half century, you will not like it."
"I" Suspect that it really won't be much different, really, at least they tell their citizens they're gonna get ***** over, The US doesn't even get that, they just wake up one morning with the Governmental dick in their ass
- roodammy44, on 02/25/2008, -0/+12@livefr33ordi3
- nospinhere, on 02/25/2008, -4/+13and arrogance, which Europe is just as guilty as the United States whether they want to admit to it or not.
- catfish182, on 02/25/2008, -2/+3while you are dreaming why dont you wish for a pony also.
- hypertension, on 02/25/2008, -0/+3What you said makes sense, in theory. But, in reality, the US will continue to fund the military industrial complex regardless of how bad things get economically for its people. Consider that the US is already borrowing money from China to finance Iraq right now.
- mOdQuArK, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2Actually, the moment that the rest of the world decides to stop throwing money down the U.S. government rathole, that will pretty much shutdown the government's runaway spending.
If the legislators try to raise taxes significantly to keep the spending levels to the military constant, they'll get lynched.
If they drop the social spending significantly to keep funding the military (to the point where it starts cutting into American citizen's cushy lives), the'yll get lynched.
This will happen once the rest of the world decides that propping up the U.S. is going to be more expensive in the medium-to-long run, and they've got to let it collapse so that they can save themselves from financial ruin.
The main problem, of course, is that life in the U.S. will become hell for quite a while. Not only has a lot of the country's infrastructure been outsourced & the general education level reduced, so it would be hard to depend on workers to "produce" our way out of the economic collapse, but the government is going to be so deeply in debt that it won't be able to do what FDR did & reprime the economy by spending massive amounts of money on infrastructure. (If it tries to do it through printing money, it will trigger hyperinflation on the scale of Weimar Germany.)
Actually, I'm quite worried (and I think the rest of the world is too) that America might try to follow the example of pre-WWII Germany to get out of the bad economic situation its leaders have led it into. We've already got major chunks of the society who have shown fascist tendencies, and a general tendency of the public to think that military action can be used to solve just about every foreign issue. - SC4RP, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1We will probably keep the goose step but I think we should change the salute. Instead of palm forward make palm back and instead of a flat hand just fold down three fingers and tuck the thumb in.
- kuzotz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2I come from a working class family. I'm sorry but most americans don't have cushy lives. Those social programs at times is really all you have to support yourself.
Not everyone is rich. The republican solution is that people should make more money.
In a system in which if everyone made more money then the economy suffers.- Khannea, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Yah sweden does suffer a lot. Why don't you go and have a look once?
- mOdQuArK, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2Actually, the moment that the rest of the world decides to stop throwing money down the U.S. government rathole, that will pretty much shutdown the government's runaway spending.
- Ribbed4U, on 02/25/2008, -8/+10Couldn't have said it better myself. Dugg.
- megaton, on 02/25/2008, -3/+14Kinda is.
Recession is, in more ways than one, a self-fulfilling prophecy. Say "recession" and people withhold their spending. People withhold their spending, and profit declines. Profit declines and stock value declines. Stock value declines and people say "recession"... - jozb, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2Well this movie pretty much sums up whats been happening to the US economy. http://youtube.com/watch?v=_dmPchuXIXQ
I don't know how much is true, but most of it is based on verifiable facts.- catfish182, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1I guess i dont understand what your saying. You dont know how much is true but its based on verifiable facts? well if you call them verifiable facts then that means they are true then? but how can that be true if you say you dont know how much of the report is true?
- paradigmx, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1head 'sploded
- catfish182, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1I guess i dont understand what your saying. You dont know how much is true but its based on verifiable facts? well if you call them verifiable facts then that means they are true then? but how can that be true if you say you dont know how much of the report is true?
- mattsegal, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1did no one see this coming? for real?
- OwdenBowden, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1Deep Recession feared in the US... I also hear that we will be going to war in the middle east and Rosie O'Donnell is fat.
For the love of all that is holy can we stop posting links to the obvious.
As for seeing this coming. It was seen coming the second the United States stop being a Manufacturer of Products and because a Service Loving economy. If all you do is Consume Products then you eventually get to an event horizon and that is called Recession - But I would actually call what will be taking place in the next several months more of a Depression than Recession - because come July 08 people will be able to buy homes Penny's on the dollar.- kuzotz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1I shall be in Japan by then
- Khannea, on 02/25/2008, -17/+58No! I love it! And no, I dont care whether or not this will have effect on Europe (I am pretty sure the effects will be very limited) - we need to see happen, whatever it takes, to reduce the US from an empire to a normal, accountable country that honors international treaties and the rule of law. For starters I'd like to see the US treat its own citizens, including the poorer ones, as human beings.
- bobbybobington, on 02/25/2008, -22/+15The Business Cycle: It's not Going Away, Deal with it.
- yogy13, on 02/25/2008, -9/+24According to Austrian School of Economics, our fiat currency causes the business cycle.
- Berkana, on 02/25/2008, -6/+17Actually, it is not fiat currency itself that is the problem; there were societies that used sea shells, declaring them money by fiat. Anything can be used as currency, enforced as legal tender by fiat. The problem isn't fiat currency itself, but what fiat currency permits that hard asset backed currency doesn't.
The problem is not that we have fiat currency, but that 95% of our money supply is made by privately owned banks due to the institutionalized practice of fractional reserve banking. That permits our monetary supply to be manipulated by how easy or hard the banks make it to borrow money; when money is easy to borrow, they literally make the money (in the form of bank credit that can be legally exchanged for currency, so is effectively the same thing) out of nothing, and vice versa when they make it hard to borrow. This gives the power to manipulate the money supply to private corporations that operate for the profit of their share holders. It is this manipulation of the money supply that causes the business cycle.
See these for the details and the full explanation:
http://www.digg.com/business_finance/Our_Debt_base ...
http://www.digg.com/educational/A_History_of_Fract ...- radu79, on 02/25/2008, -4/+2Well, they don't really make money out of nothing, they can just borrow themselves money, but they still have to pay it back. If they can't pay it back, they are in deep ***** (which is what is happening right now, with so many subprime guys not being able to pay back the money they borrowed).
- Berkana, on 02/25/2008, -1/+3Yes, they actually make money out of nothing. If you don't think they do, you don't understand fractional reserve banking. They don't give the money to themselves; they lend out money they make out of nothing but the debt—the pledge of the borrower to forfeit whatever it is the bank will foreclose on if the debt is not paid. It is this debt that they trade on the bond market, which was what happened in the sub prime mess. Over 95% of the money we have in circulation is made this way; the rest of it, which is cash, is still made out of debt, since the Federal Reserve only gets the mint to print dollars when the Government sells it bonds, which it buys using dollars it makes out of nothing. The dollars the government gets for its bonds must ultimately get paid back with interest, which is idiotic, considering that all the money made this way is principal, and the interest portion doesn't exist.
Fractional reserve banking means the bank can lend out more money than it actually has reserves for. Look it up on wikipedia. The money they lend out beyond what they actually have is effectively new money, made out of nothing. This kind of money is almost always in the form of checkbook money; very little of it is actually exchanged for cash at any one time. Watch the documentary I linked, and you'll see what I'm talking about.- radu79, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2Isn't that what I said? They can borrow money for themselves (based on the pledge of the customer to pay it back), but it is wrong to say that they MAKE money out of nothing. Making money means they keep the money, but the banks have to pay it back, eventually.
A more proper way of saying it is that they can loan/borrow virtual money.
- radu79, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2Isn't that what I said? They can borrow money for themselves (based on the pledge of the customer to pay it back), but it is wrong to say that they MAKE money out of nothing. Making money means they keep the money, but the banks have to pay it back, eventually.
- Berkana, on 02/25/2008, -6/+17Actually, it is not fiat currency itself that is the problem; there were societies that used sea shells, declaring them money by fiat. Anything can be used as currency, enforced as legal tender by fiat. The problem isn't fiat currency itself, but what fiat currency permits that hard asset backed currency doesn't.
- Curlz31, on 02/25/2008, -9/+7With sound money, the business cycle would not exist.
- Berkana, on 02/25/2008, -2/+5To be honest, it would exist, but the severity would be a tiny fraction of what they are now. Business cycles would happen when people collectively spend out of their savings, such as around Christmas time. Business cycles might be seasonal, or local; right now, they are nation wide, and happen independent of the seasons because the amount of money in circulation is controlled by interest rates, since the vast bulk of the money we have in circulation is created by people borrowing money. The money is literally created because the banks do not have the reserves to back what they lend out, and are legally authorized to do so under the system of fractional reserve banking. Take this power away from the banks, and enforce a strict system that prevents the government from doing the same, and you would eliminate the business cycle as we know it even with fiat currency. Hard asset backed currency, such as gold or silver backed money, is only one of the ways to do this. And to be honest, history shows that even gold and silver are not immune to abuses. Any solution for preventing the arbitrary inflation and deflation of the money supply would require vigilance to really work, whether that solution involves precious metals or not.
- Curlz31, on 02/25/2008, -4/+5I'm talking about the artificial cycle created by the government. Natural cycles in a free-market are healthy.
- TopherT, on 02/25/2008, -3/+1Not according to John Meynard Keynes.
- Curlz31, on 02/25/2008, -2/+3So John Meynard Keynes hates people having the freedom to keep their money and spend it as they see fit?
- Berkana, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1No, Keynes appears to have mis-understood where severe fluctuations in the money supply come from. They don't come from people naturally spending more at some times and less at others; this kind of fluctuation cannot cause a severe depression. Libertarian economists love to hate Keynes, but his thesis wasn't a bad idea, it just fails to solve the root of the problem.
Keynesian economics does work IF social or other unforseen pressures cause people to collectively act in manners that lead to fluctuations in the money supply, such as hoarding of gold (which has happened before), a few powerful people cornering the market on precious metals, etc. but fluctuations caused by people spending or saving NEVER reach the proportions of the fluctuations caused by people being able to borrow new money into the economy and being encouraged to do so by interest rate manipulations for economic stimulus. This system just keeps swinging the pendulum back and forth; a system where money can't be easily made and destroyed would eliminate the pendulum altogether, short of minor seasonal variations, and possibly generational demographic variations, such as baby booms and their echos when the grand kids start having kids.
- cyberdork, on 02/25/2008, -1/+5The problem is not the fiat currency system, it's the abuse of the system.
There are many fiat currencies which are not backed by hard assets... such as ALL major currencies.
- Curlz31, on 02/25/2008, -4/+5I'm talking about the artificial cycle created by the government. Natural cycles in a free-market are healthy.
- Berkana, on 02/25/2008, -2/+5To be honest, it would exist, but the severity would be a tiny fraction of what they are now. Business cycles would happen when people collectively spend out of their savings, such as around Christmas time. Business cycles might be seasonal, or local; right now, they are nation wide, and happen independent of the seasons because the amount of money in circulation is controlled by interest rates, since the vast bulk of the money we have in circulation is created by people borrowing money. The money is literally created because the banks do not have the reserves to back what they lend out, and are legally authorized to do so under the system of fractional reserve banking. Take this power away from the banks, and enforce a strict system that prevents the government from doing the same, and you would eliminate the business cycle as we know it even with fiat currency. Hard asset backed currency, such as gold or silver backed money, is only one of the ways to do this. And to be honest, history shows that even gold and silver are not immune to abuses. Any solution for preventing the arbitrary inflation and deflation of the money supply would require vigilance to really work, whether that solution involves precious metals or not.
- bowens44, on 02/25/2008, -2/+10funny how the 'downs' in these cycles always correspond with republican administration. This is what supply side economics gets you every time.
- roodammy44, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1So where is everyone going to get the money to prop up the consumer spending the US relies on?
Houses? No, they're going down in value.
Credit cards / Personal loads? No, the banks are starting to reduce acceptance rates and increase interest rates because of the credit crunch.
Wage increases? No, salaries have stayed static over the last 10 years.
Loans from other countries? No, the other countries are starting to worry about when they're paid back.
Oil? No, a lot of countries are starting to switch to other currencies so blank oil cheques are starting to evaporate.
When you combine that with the fact that record inflation is occurring, the dollar devaluing fast, govt corruption and interest on foreign debt building up....
Well. Where is the money going to come from for the economy getting better??- bufmike, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1the money will come from the $ printing press. The real worry is that the gov't won't be able to borrow in dollars at some point. Then the US is toast.
- yogy13, on 02/25/2008, -9/+24According to Austrian School of Economics, our fiat currency causes the business cycle.
- h4ckler, on 02/25/2008, -24/+9yelling "the sky is falling the sky is falling" isn't helping any. =-
- cageybee, on 02/25/2008, -3/+21lol, true, but the sky is falling :)
- atdigg, on 02/25/2008, -2/+8is going to help people who have bunkers.
- kevinmotel, on 02/25/2008, -2/+4spurring the economy when people spend money on bunkers and bunker related commodities!
- Khannea, on 02/25/2008, -9/+4Well, I am amused aint I? I love it when the US collapses.
- megaton, on 02/25/2008, -2/+3In all honesty, you're right.
Recession is, in more ways than one, a self-fulfilling prophecy. Say "recession" and people withhold their spending. People withhold their spending, and profit declines. Profit declines and stock value declines. Stock value declines and people say "recession"... - bowens44, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2If the sky is falling, it is a great help.
- topgigmedia, on 02/25/2008, -1/+8You're right... my bad, sweeping it under the carpet is a much better solution.
- chicofaraby, on 02/25/2008, -13/+128How can this be? Tax cuts for the rich were supposed to make the economy boom... hey, what's that yellow stuff trickling down on me...?
- NonLeftistDiggr, on 02/25/2008, -23/+6It did, do the research. USA had a pretty good run up to now in growth and low unemployment.
- rotundo, on 02/25/2008, -1/+23That's like saying my finances improved when I started living beyond my means with a bunch of credit cards.
The US boom was just postponing the inevitable. We didn't want to take our medicine when it was first presented, so we put it off for a few decades. Now we have to take a lot more medicine. Blech.
- rotundo, on 02/25/2008, -1/+23That's like saying my finances improved when I started living beyond my means with a bunch of credit cards.
- masterm1nd, on 02/25/2008, -11/+5Right, because that is the sole variable in the complex system that is our economy.
- GramarNatzi, on 02/25/2008, -7/+16I think we need to tax the poor some more... and lower their wages. In fact, ***** it.. lets go back to the middle ages and demand 2 goats and a sheep from every poor person. That should sort things out.
- LokitheComplex, on 02/25/2008, -0/+72 Goats and a Sheep? You're being soft.
2 Goats, 2 sheep, a sack of grain, a bottle of nettle wine and their first daughter.- bosssmiley, on 02/25/2008, -0/+10I am interested in your backward-thinking Neo-Feudalist policies, and wish to know more.
For example, what is your position on carriages that move without horses? Be they the work of demons, or merely the result of man playing at God?
Is modern sanitation and scientific medicine morally suspect, or merely an unwitting insult to the peerless wisdom of our ancestors?- LokitheComplex, on 02/25/2008, -0/+5Horses were great examples of a fine powerful animal held under the yoke of a man with a whip which served as an example to the proles.
The horseless carriage was only good until they became cheap enough for all of them to use thus rendering the machine useless.
Modern sanitation improved health and therefore supplied more masses which at least kept wages down. If only they didn't fill up the Kings highways. But that's the problem with technology you never know who's going to gain.
- LokitheComplex, on 02/25/2008, -0/+5Horses were great examples of a fine powerful animal held under the yoke of a man with a whip which served as an example to the proles.
- bosssmiley, on 02/25/2008, -0/+10I am interested in your backward-thinking Neo-Feudalist policies, and wish to know more.
- LokitheComplex, on 02/25/2008, -0/+72 Goats and a Sheep? You're being soft.
- Innocentious, on 02/25/2008, -1/+7Truth be told, the problem is that optimism is what is causing problems now, people saw dollar signs in thier own property and many made a fast get away with houseing in terms of flipping houses, etc... That caused huge inflation of prices and banks willing to finance because even if the deal went south the propert would be worth more then was owed... BANKS AND THE RICH ARE TAKING IT MAJOR IN THE SHORTS PEOPLE. I know one man who has lost 500 Million dollars... Is broke and has nothing now. The rich are getting shafted too. And a rich man with no money finds he has few friends.
Anyway the problem is that people used thier property like a piggy bank and the rate of houseing cost went up 8 to 10 % a year over the last 20 years. Come on, wages barely kept pace with inflation. I saw this coming, I just thought it would have happened 4 years ago. ( I actually started to think I was wrong about the whole home prices are inflated thing )- WikiEasy, on 02/25/2008, -2/+3If you think taxes are the cure, you're just as big a fool as the rest of them. The government is like a crack addict. The more money you give it, the more it wants.
[edit] meant to reply to the parent, not this. - brownrabbit, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1TOO MUCH HAPPY... makes one sick.
- WikiEasy, on 02/25/2008, -2/+3If you think taxes are the cure, you're just as big a fool as the rest of them. The government is like a crack addict. The more money you give it, the more it wants.
- bufmike, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1actually taxing the less wealthy might help get a more responsible gov't elected. How about no representation without taxation for a slogan? Once the people who get the handouts have to help pay they might realize they are not "Free".
- NonLeftistDiggr, on 02/25/2008, -23/+6It did, do the research. USA had a pretty good run up to now in growth and low unemployment.
- mrzack, on 02/25/2008, -28/+6the two idiots above me obviously know nothing about what a Real economy would look like.
- drakethegreat, on 02/25/2008, -1/+15you did an excellent job proving you do...
- bowens44, on 02/25/2008, -1/+3wow. what a stupid remark.
- LokitheComplex, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2Are you somewhere in the White House?
- jgzman, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1Since you obviously know nothing about what a Reply Button would look like, I can't be sure who you are disagreeing with.
However, as a rule of thumb, people claiming that people 'don't understand' while everything goes to ***** are useless.
- Sammiboi, on 02/25/2008, -3/+28Deep recession feared everywhere.
There has been an inflation worldwide for the past couple of months. It is likely that a recession will also hit in Australia, the UK and all other markets heavily influenced by the US- cyberdork, on 02/25/2008, -6/+5You are wrong, while the US is still the single most important economy its influence on other economies is smaller than you might think. Take Germany for example (which is still the worlds biggest exporter) exports to the US account for 8.6% of their total exports (and only 5.6% of their imports).
- kuzotz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1no one said that the US was unimportant. He simply said that the US isn't the only ***** country that is dealing with a recession.
- kuzotz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1no one said that the US was unimportant. He simply said that the US isn't the only ***** country that is dealing with a recession.
- topgigmedia, on 02/25/2008, -0/+9sucks to be a barnacle on a sinking ship ;)
- vertinox, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1The problem is the Feds dropped the interest rates to save their buddies at the Mortgage Corporations and now everyone else is eating their greed through inflation.
- cyberdork, on 02/25/2008, -6/+5You are wrong, while the US is still the single most important economy its influence on other economies is smaller than you might think. Take Germany for example (which is still the worlds biggest exporter) exports to the US account for 8.6% of their total exports (and only 5.6% of their imports).
- JasonHD, on 02/25/2008, -26/+4You know what I think the countries economy is only going into a so called recession because the Media keeps saying its going into a recession. I believe all of this crazy talk will die down after the election. This is the main reason that Bill Clinton was elected because of a so called bad economy. Call me crazy but I believe if the media would shut up about it people wouldn't be so scared to spend money.
- felman87, on 02/25/2008, -3/+14So it's the media's fault that people are racking up debts, earning less, that the government spends too much, that the dollar is declining? Of course, it all makes perfect sense.
- Crabsinmypants, on 02/25/2008, -8/+3No its the media's fault for telling everyone we are in a recession. This economy will fail not because of the falling dollar, but the loss of faith of the consumer. The dollar can decline and America would still have a healthy economy, look at japan with the yen at value around 110 to 1 U.S. dollar.
Our economy is to complicated to blame inflation as the sole cause of ours woes. The debt is rather high, but not high enough to where America can not pay it back and sadly its the government spending that is more than likely keeping our economy from totally falling apart today. Because we as consumers are not spending near as much money as we did 2 years ago. So think about it, why would a business open or give raises to existing employees if less people out there are willing to purchase the goods? Saving money is good, but not in an economy where everyone has been spend, spend,spend for years.
It will take our economy time to adjust to our new lifestyle.- emmeron, on 02/25/2008, -1/+2Blame the media, but not the Fed, eh? I have no polite words for that foolishness.
- Crabsinmypants, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Emmeron, your a fool. Most diggers are ones also. Next time emmeron write out why the fed is the sole cause for the economies slow down.
Wait you can't, you just spout words instead of countering my argument for why many others and myself believe that this slow down in the economy is partly due to our change in habit. To stick money in the bank instead of spending it. BTW money in the bank does not always help the economy, minimum wage usually stifles growth, and yes media can cause a panic in where it actually effects the economy in both a downturn and positive way.
Next time read a book, any book really that deals with economics, and you will be surprised on what you could learn. Economics is not the measure of supply and demand but of opportunity cost. What did it cost you to not think on your own and rabble with the rest of digg that only the fed is to blame? 280 million in this country, a free market ( i had to add this because i am afraid most people on digg don't even know what this means), affects the economy more than 25 guys tinkering with interest rates. Inflation hurts but it won't destroy the economy unless it escalates to hyper speed.
- Crabsinmypants, on 02/25/2008, -8/+3No its the media's fault for telling everyone we are in a recession. This economy will fail not because of the falling dollar, but the loss of faith of the consumer. The dollar can decline and America would still have a healthy economy, look at japan with the yen at value around 110 to 1 U.S. dollar.
- drakethegreat, on 02/25/2008, -3/+7and the retard of the day goes to
- bowens44, on 02/25/2008, -1/+5ok , THIS is the dumbest post in the thread so far, Call yu crazy? No not crazy, but certainly ignorant on so many levels.
- Swivelstick, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2Well he's almost right in that the media has been towing the establishment line and not reporting facts for so long that it's hard to believe anything they do say. The economy has been screwed for a long time them not reporting it has allowed the markets to stay afloat longer then was practical.
- emmeron, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1This may be true, but it isn't the cause of the problem by any stretch. Let's not forget, the media reports what the government wants it to. That's the deal if you want to keep your job these days!
- Herostratus, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1You're crazy... and you need to read a book too... ignoramus.
- felman87, on 02/25/2008, -3/+14So it's the media's fault that people are racking up debts, earning less, that the government spends too much, that the dollar is declining? Of course, it all makes perfect sense.
- otakushark, on 02/25/2008, -10/+106No surprise. Bush has mismanaged every company (and every government) he's ever run.
- chase001, on 02/25/2008, -1/+38Not just mismanaged, he has bankrupted every company and country he has ran.
- mOdQuArK, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2Looks like he's not in any danger of ruining his record.
- Gemfinder, on 02/25/2008, -2/+36And John McCain (who at least admitted that he knows precisely Butt-kiss about economics), is considered a viable Presidential candidate.
Help?- cdahlkvist, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2The reason McCain is looking viable is because he is pushing for extra servings of Jell-o on Tuesday nights at the nursing homes and dicounted Depends undergarments.
There is no one in their right mind under the age of 60 that is pushing for McCain. - darkcthulhu, on 02/25/2008, -1/+2"no one in their right mind". That pretty much describes most of America (Yes, I'm an American).
- nakani, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1And since then he's started claiming to be strong an economics. Can you believe he has the nerve to say that now?
- cdahlkvist, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2The reason McCain is looking viable is because he is pushing for extra servings of Jell-o on Tuesday nights at the nursing homes and dicounted Depends undergarments.
- Khannea, on 02/25/2008, -12/+3You voted for him, dumbasses. Jolly I will be enjoying every second of this *****.
- Ribbed4U, on 02/25/2008, -1/+12Newsflash: Not all of us voted for him. Get a clue.
- Khannea, on 02/25/2008, -0/+7Newsflash - DEMOCRACY - the US is accountable for the tantrum of its government. And somehow, some mysterious way we yet have to fathom and explain not once but TWICE.
- Cronus6, on 02/25/2008, -1/+3So by your logic the German people are accountable for the holocaust because they voted for Hitler?
- Khannea, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1Hmmm let's use a different example - the people of Iraq got ***** over and genocided because they were just standing on the way? (Of all the oil...?)
- apc3161, on 02/25/2008, -2/+3This brings up the point as to whether the government should be even handling the economy. First off, we all know our federal government is not capable of doing such. That's not to criticize them, no one in the world is capable of doing such. The economy is a unbelievably complex organism where hundreds of trillions of dollars exchange hands on a yearly basis (GDP only takes into account final products). The government should set up the rules and regulations to prevent fraud and a few other things, but after that they should just keep taxes low and step back.
Here is an article I like by John Stossel.
http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=J ...- kuzotz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1I'm not about working an underpaid job 14 hours a week like they did in the 19th century,
- Hangly, on 02/25/2008, -8/+7The president doesn't run the economy, guys.
- buhbyebot, on 02/25/2008, -0/+3Apparently the people he appoints does, and the policies they enact on his behalf. What has yee to say to that?
- RationalXubrnce, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1 The Federal Reserve board members basically appoint themselves. Sure the President may approve them but it's all just for show. In reality has no control of the money changers and is in fact their subordinate.
- buhbyebot, on 02/25/2008, -0/+3Apparently the people he appoints does, and the policies they enact on his behalf. What has yee to say to that?
- jozb, on 02/25/2008, -5/+3It's easy to blame it on Bush because that is what we see most of the times, but it is really the people behind the curtains. Kind of like the code that runs your OS. http://youtube.com/watch?v=_dmPchuXIXQ this movie explains it pretty well.
- buhbyebot, on 02/25/2008, -1/+2So if Al Gore were actually have become President, and we didn't go to War with IRAQ, you are saying that, what? Some secret organization would have done so anyway? and we'd be ***** up to our necks paying high gas prices, mortgages going crazy, and oh yeah, a huge recession? I like Zeitgeist as much as the next person, and it's pretty interesting but no sale here bubba.
- hasslinthehoff, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1Sounds like we all need to just go back to living off the land...
- jozb, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1Maybe you might like the Ron Paul version: http://youtube.com/watch?v=_wCdULj6fOQ
- AgmLauncher, on 02/25/2008, -2/+3Right, because Bush is the only person in office, and economics are just that simple :)
- stonklit, on 02/25/2008, -0/+0No, but it is HIS war that we waste ***** hundreds of billions of dollars on.
Go on, tally up the total of this war and tell me how it doesn't negatively affect the economy.
That money could have easily gone to better uses than liberating ***** Iraq.
- stonklit, on 02/25/2008, -0/+0No, but it is HIS war that we waste ***** hundreds of billions of dollars on.
- tritisan, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2That's precisely why he placed into office. Those who hold real power HATE democracy and hate our government. What better way to dismantle it than to strategically place a complete nincompoop with a proven history of megalomania, addiction, and incompetence to run it? I'd say, "mission accomplished!"
- LastVisibleDog, on 02/25/2008, -1/+1If you believe the president controls the economy - you deserve your miserable life
- chase001, on 02/25/2008, -1/+38Not just mismanaged, he has bankrupted every company and country he has ran.
- meachen, on 02/25/2008, -14/+3***** that......I don't need your damn money
- Qtip42, on 02/25/2008, -4/+17But the media won't say deep recession just to make people feel better....When we're in the middle of one (we are now), the media will continue to say everything's alright...
You're better off doing business in a foreign currency right now.- TheFiestyFaun, on 02/25/2008, -3/+4Recession means two quarters of negative growth. We are at one in a half. We are not in a recession until the second quarter is up.
- emmeron, on 02/25/2008, -1/+5You're correct. We're simply in a *****.
- marksven, on 02/25/2008, -1/+1This is a common misconception -- many other factors are included. We had a recession in 2001/2002 but we only had one quarter of negative growth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recession
- vertinox, on 02/25/2008, -1/+1Or simply trade in gold through a gold broker.
- marksven, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1And pay 28% tax on your earnings on long-term gains with Gold. Other long-term investments are only taxed at 15%. If you believe in the hyperinflation scenario, it's better to buy stocks rather than gold. They are more liquid, are taxed less, and represent something that produces real value. The stock market will "crash upwards" with hyperinflation. The truth is, we've already had hyperinflation with oil at $100 and gold near $1000.
With trillions of dollars being destroyed from the economy, and the fed only providing mostly short-term liquidity with barely any new money printed, we are actually facing deflation. In this situation, you will get killed owning gold.
- marksven, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1And pay 28% tax on your earnings on long-term gains with Gold. Other long-term investments are only taxed at 15%. If you believe in the hyperinflation scenario, it's better to buy stocks rather than gold. They are more liquid, are taxed less, and represent something that produces real value. The stock market will "crash upwards" with hyperinflation. The truth is, we've already had hyperinflation with oil at $100 and gold near $1000.
- TheFiestyFaun, on 02/25/2008, -3/+4Recession means two quarters of negative growth. We are at one in a half. We are not in a recession until the second quarter is up.
- Curlz31, on 02/25/2008, -33/+15This is going to be the biggest financial collapse in human history. All because of the ridiculous Keynesian system of intentional inflation. Not only have bankers profited through the fed, the bankers will come in and buy everything up for pennies on the dollar after the collapse. When are you Obama-loving morons going to learn? Perhaps when you are in a 6-hour line to get bread at the local sports stadium.
Vote for Ron Paul you ***** idiots.- Qtip42, on 02/25/2008, -8/+28"Vote for Ron Paul you ***** idiots" should be his campaign slogan...
- avasol, on 02/25/2008, -2/+5Carls Jr - "***** you! I'm eating!"
Idiocracy is looking more and more true by the day now.- bjornski, on 02/25/2008, -2/+6That movie wasn't a comedy, it was prophecy.
- avasol, on 02/25/2008, -2/+5Carls Jr - "***** you! I'm eating!"
- cyberdork, on 02/25/2008, -4/+4"Vote for Ron Paul you ***** idiots"
I think he perfectly succeeded at that! - chall85, on 02/25/2008, -3/+5Where in Ron Paul's plan does he address the stagnant wages in the U.S. of the last, oh, say three decades? It seems like Ron Paul's plan only benefits people who have large investments and inherited wealth, rather than regular non-rich working people and minorities specifically. The elimination of the minimum wage is a perfect example of this. Let's see working people's reaction when Ron Paul tells them he believes the minimum wages "hurts the value of the dollar". He seems to live in this fantasy world where everything is macro, and refuses to acknowledge (for obvious political reasons) that working people exist and need concrete, practical help on the microeconomic level.
- BeforeSputnik, on 02/25/2008, -1/+1Let's assume i'm politically blind; what are the "obvious political reasons?"
- Qtip42, on 02/25/2008, -8/+28"Vote for Ron Paul you ***** idiots" should be his campaign slogan...
- sohorrifying, on 02/25/2008, -11/+1GGNORE UNINSTALL KTHXBAI
- SQLserver, on 02/25/2008, -5/+2At least that made more sense then most Paultard comments.
- GhostyBoy, on 02/25/2008, -15/+18Don't be fooled when the Amero (or whatever they decide to call it) is sold to us as an alternative for financial stability.
This is nothing more than an effort to further centralize the money supply, and thus the control of all of America.- Hangly, on 02/25/2008, -1/+6Let me get this straight. They bankrupt the US, turn the dollar into toilet paper, throw millions out of jobs and homes, just to introduce a new currency? With the American economy in shambles what makes anyone think a new currency would make a difference?
We have no gold and very little manufacturing, what would an Amero be worth? We may as well adopt the Tin Peso.- holzp, on 02/25/2008, -1/+3What is the conversion rate between Stanley Nickels and Tin Pesos?
- Hangly, on 02/26/2008, -0/+10.862 to 1
- emmeron, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2Macroeconomics works better the more centralized control there is. I say "works" with a lot of sarcasm, but its true. We go to a more unified currency, eventually the tides will turn anyways, and suddenly big business has greenlights to work elsewhere. It'll screw us harder, but it'll make big biz richer. What else do the neocons care about?
- Hangly, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Taking the most cynical possible interpretation, even a slave-owner or a cattle-rancher has to keep his slaves or livestock healthy and content. Even a neocon should be able to see that destroying the US does not work toward his own best interests.
- kuzotz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1are we talking Keynesian because if we are. Then you should really just shut the ***** up and let the adults talk economics.
- GhostyBoy, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1It makes a lot more sense once you accept that the country has been infiltrated but power hungry dick-holes who are looting it for every cent.
- Hangly, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2That's what's really going on here. The US is ***** because it has already been looted for every cent. I think the current crisis is a result of short-sightedness and greed, and not part of some grander agenda.
- holzp, on 02/25/2008, -1/+3What is the conversion rate between Stanley Nickels and Tin Pesos?
- AndreiOttawa, on 02/25/2008, -2/+3Canada will never agree to Amero. Why ruin a perfectly good currency and switch to something that it cannot even fully control?
- GhostyBoy, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1I am Canadian and a lot of Canadians have been telling me this, but our elected officials have been moving ahead on the SPP without any kind of referendum.
- Hangly, on 02/25/2008, -1/+6Let me get this straight. They bankrupt the US, turn the dollar into toilet paper, throw millions out of jobs and homes, just to introduce a new currency? With the American economy in shambles what makes anyone think a new currency would make a difference?
- theinept, on 02/25/2008, -7/+30I think that it's important for people to remember that media tends to exaggerate in both directions. There was no end to discussion circa 1999 amongst analysts, professionals and the outlets that report their comings and goings of how the advance of technology would never end how we were entering a new economy with a new way of doing business. Very few people disagreed and those who did were made fun of by popular outlets. And then the same for real estate circa 2005, wherein housing, flipping and all that crap was the subject of endless trumpeting and even popular television programs, and how everyone and their dog knew that real estate only ever goes up. And these are just the two most substantial recent examples, which everyone on Digg is sure to remember.
As enthusiastic as people get when things are going well, they become equally fearful and demoralized when things are going poorly. Whereas everyone was previously in agreement that things were stupendous, now everyone is in unanimous agreement that this is the end. It's the people who apply logic and rational thought to the situation who come out on top, not those who follow along.
It's important that you look critically at the information you're being provided by these outlets, both when it's universally positive and when it's universally negative. Media outlets and the analysts whose information they report tend to produce very polarized information because it's easiest to present in short-format and they always tend to align with one another because nobody gets fired when everybody is wrong.
Things do look bad in a macroeconomic sense and nobody's going to argue that everything's just peachy right now but I could post you excerpts from the worst days of the 70s, 80s and 90s without the dates and you might think it was all written yesterday. The point is that no matter how bad things looked then or how bad they may look now, we're all still here. People with long memories have seen this all before. They may not know what's going to happen over the next day, month or year but they do know that in the long run things tend to iron out.- Burritoboy, on 02/25/2008, -2/+5Spot on.
This is more than just a business cycle, after 7 years blame can only be directed in 1 direction.
Critical thinking is a big part of the answer. Stop believing - start questioning. - megaton, on 02/25/2008, -2/+1True, but recession is, in more ways than one, a self-fulfilling prophecy. Say "recession" and people withhold their spending. People withhold their spending, and profit declines. Profit declines and stock value declines. Stock value declines and people say "recession"...
- Burritoboy, on 02/25/2008, -1/+4You're right, it is a process with a certain amount of feedback.
But there has to be meat in the sandwich, a physical factor that causes the "*****, where has my money gone" reaction to kick it off.
Three recessions:-
1) 70's UK. Spiraling inflation.
2) Late 80's. UK housing crash.
3) Late 90's, early 00's Hong Kong. Combination of Asian financial crisis, dot com bomb, 9-11 and SARS.
This is an adjustment caused by cheap credit dished out by banks over the last 10 years.
Expect a very rough ride, learn to live on less, but don't panic. - netant, on 02/25/2008, -1/+1So keep spending yourself into insolvency is the solution?!?!!
Got some news kiddies. America is in this predicament because it "spent" itself into insolvency. It allowed its citizens to do real estate speculation to the point of bankruptcy. People pretending its the 1990's will not avert the recession, and only a retarded JACKASS thinks there is no problem with the American economy.
- Burritoboy, on 02/25/2008, -1/+4You're right, it is a process with a certain amount of feedback.
- buhbyebot, on 02/25/2008, -0/+0The media is always late to every party, they hog the booze (sensationalize everything not really most important), are grandiose, miss the point (miss punchlines), and are controlled by the richy riches of the world. There is no hope for the upper, middle-upper, middle, middle-lower, or lower class in this society. NONE. It's all bought and paid for, so just go to work like a good little machine and don't ask too many questions or aspire to too much.
- wiggles, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2What's this? Reason and logic? ON DIGG?!? Who approved your account? Everyone knows that only sensationalized "ITS TEH END OF TEH WROLD!!!!1!111!!ONE1!" comments are allowed here!
- Burritoboy, on 02/25/2008, -2/+5Spot on.
- macwac, on 02/25/2008, -3/+10A lot of economic indicators coming out this week... if they are bad, such as housing, consumer spending etc.. watch the markets fall a LOT more..
- mikeyhell, on 02/25/2008, -3/+7so should i invest in beans and cornbread or lcd tv's?
- bjornski, on 02/25/2008, -2/+11Bullets.
- mdcarso, on 02/25/2008, -1/+4Amen, the ballot box and the soapbox haven't worked -- its time for the ammo box
- zaphar, on 02/26/2008, -0/+3Guns, ammo, Chef Boyardee, a garden, and "weed" seeds.
- bjornski, on 02/25/2008, -2/+11Bullets.
- macwac, on 02/25/2008, -25/+23America needs some serious change... cough* cough* Ron Paul cough* cough* ;) hehe
- chase001, on 02/25/2008, -4/+12Too bad the media eliminated all but the establishment status quo candidates for us such as Ron Paul, Mike Gravel and Kucinich.
- mike17032, on 02/25/2008, -4/+3Do you rontards really think that it was the media who got rid of old paul? It must be nice to be able to delude yourself like that.
Old Paul got rid of himself by being a fringe moonbat with ***** ideas and by not having the ability to run a frozen banana stand.
- mike17032, on 02/25/2008, -4/+3Do you rontards really think that it was the media who got rid of old paul? It must be nice to be able to delude yourself like that.
- topgigmedia, on 02/25/2008, -6/+8Do you honestly think Ron Paul's economic ideas will help? Wouldn't he even further remove regulations on big corporations?
- MrCobaltBlue, on 02/25/2008, -2/+6Well cutting spending would help a lot. Unfortunately Bush has left us with no "quick fix" we're going to just have to tighten our belts for a while but we need to cut spending.
- emmeron, on 02/25/2008, -2/+2Really, more freedom and a lot more requirement of honest reporting would be better. Positive reinforcement for good ethical behavior is better than negative for the few asses they can catch.
- netant, on 02/25/2008, -3/+2You can extract a lot of economic value by making 8 year olds work. You can tax their salaries, and they are useful in coal mines.
- chase001, on 02/25/2008, -4/+12Too bad the media eliminated all but the establishment status quo candidates for us such as Ron Paul, Mike Gravel and Kucinich.
- NonLeftistDiggr, on 02/25/2008, -4/+10aka, get out of debt if you have any and are capable, to get ready to invest/save heavily in the next few years where bargains are too be had.
- eyal0, on 02/25/2008, -0/+7If you owe someone a lot of dollars, and dollars are getting cheaper by the minute, then why don't you wait and pay them back when the dollar costs you less? That's how America is screwing China at the moment, letting the dollar become worthless precisely when China holds tons of 'em.
- JMSantos, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1Your idea falls under the presumption that his own wealth is in something other than dollars.
- 955701, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1But that's easy to do. Either have no wealth at all, or go to garage sales and buy up the naive's old gold jewelry.
- emmeron, on 02/25/2008, -1/+1@ 955701 -- Does your mommy know you're on the computer? Who the crap doesn't know about the value of gold... and worse, you sound like you have the ethics of a Bush.
- kuzotz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1well that idea fails because wages are gonna tank also.
- JMSantos, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1Your idea falls under the presumption that his own wealth is in something other than dollars.
- Hangly, on 02/25/2008, -0/+3like cheap and/or free soup.
- mdcarso, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1That's assuming you still have a job right?
- burntsac, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1That's it exactly. I got buried for saying basically the same thing.
- eyal0, on 02/25/2008, -0/+7If you owe someone a lot of dollars, and dollars are getting cheaper by the minute, then why don't you wait and pay them back when the dollar costs you less? That's how America is screwing China at the moment, letting the dollar become worthless precisely when China holds tons of 'em.
- mikeyhell, on 02/25/2008, -5/+11I would just like to point out that my father in law insisted we weren't in a recession(btw. he's very we'll off). I told him this about 2 months ago and he still insisted. Now he's having a hayday wondering why his property values are falling. I guess a silver cloud to it all for me at least, who receives much ridicule for not borrowing on credit.
- kinerry, on 02/25/2008, -1/+5borrowing on credit isn't bad, it's when you borrow for a vacation/car/other non-profit generating thing that it's bad
- emmeron, on 02/25/2008, -1/+1And most cannot afford a car without it. That's a good indicator something is amiss.
- netant, on 02/25/2008, -0/+4Its not borrowing for a car that is economically killing this country. Its borrowing so we can be the uber military power of the rest of the world COMBINED that is making us broke!
- kinerry, on 02/25/2008, -1/+5borrowing on credit isn't bad, it's when you borrow for a vacation/car/other non-profit generating thing that it's bad
- xsquirrel378x, on 02/25/2008, -9/+5keynes is rolling in his grave
/i dont know ***** about economics, i just wanted to say that ^_^- TctclMvPhase, on 02/25/2008, -0/+4Mises and Hayek are rolling in their graves...
- emmeron, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1Obviously. Keynes supports this *****, just figured we didn't do something right. To keep an economy stable by his model, one needs to see the future. That's why the people who play with our currency try to manipulate the future as much as they can... Keynes, at best, might start to see the error of his ways.
- SuspicionVandit, on 02/25/2008, -24/+3I downloaded the entire Eminem discography on Limewire and didn't get robbed. Why do people say that Limewire steals your music?
- Soyea, on 02/25/2008, -14/+9It's all about the north american union, the powers to be the shadow powers want this to happen and it will.
- Soyea, on 02/25/2008, -17/+5It's all about the north american union, the powers to be the shadow powers want this to happen and it will.
- bowens44, on 02/25/2008, -2/+1I've heard that if you switch from tin-foil to copper you can block more of the rays......
- RationalXubrnce, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1Shh, the Digg crowd has barely realized the Federal Reserve is a problem yet, they're not ready for North American Union talk yet.
- DiggSystemAdmin, on 02/25/2008, -10/+3Dear Bush, "Your just a bastard in a basket, a bastard in a basket......bastard in a basket.......BASTARD IN A BASKET...............BASTARD IN A BASKET!!!"
- lys3rgic, on 02/25/2008, -8/+12AKA a depression. And soon it'll be cheaper to wallpaper our houses with US currency, just as it has been done before in other countries during their economic failures.
- freezeout, on 02/25/2008, -0/+5my grandmother used to tell me stories about how they wallpapered their house with money back in Germany's hyper-inflation days, but are we really looking at something like this in our future?, or just a re-run of 70's stagflation?
- RationalXubrnce, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1Eventually yes the dollar will be totally worthless. The only question is will it happen in 5 years or 25 years.
- LupeFiasco, on 02/25/2008, -4/+13How bad is it gonna get? Like Germany post ww1 bad? Is there something I can compare this possible upcoming recession to so I can understand the weight of the situation?
- fedak, on 02/25/2008, -4/+0Photoguy bad.
- Kahlzarg, on 02/25/2008, -0/+10Considering in Wiemar Germany people were payed daily to keep up with inflation, and the price of a loaf of bread would increase from the time that you lined up to when you reached the end of the line, and members of the middle class were sent their life savings of 10,000 marks in a envelope with a 50 million mark stamp because it wasn't worth the banks effort to keep the account open, and the cost of living increased over 560 trillion percent in 3 years... no.. I don't think it will be as bad as WWI Germany.
- chaosium, on 02/25/2008, -2/+1This is why Survivalists are morons.
- RationalXubrnce, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2Why not? The people running our banks are the direct descendants of those who robbed Germany. They are from the exact families and everything, why do you think they wouldn't do it again?
- Kahlzarg, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1Name 3 families that were running the banks in Wiemar Germany in the 1920's that benefited from Hyperinflation. and are now running the banks in the United States who would benefit from a depression. While you are making that up, can you also make up a explanation as to how these people have the ability to force the US Reserve Bank to print huge amounts of money, and how the possibility of a depression in the US can even be compared to Wiemar Germany hyperinflation, since they are completely different economic occurrences, with different causes, where the only common factor being that it seems that there are a quite a few people with a feeble grasp of both concepts that results in drawing far fetched comparisons between the two.
- cyberdork, on 02/25/2008, -1/+7My guess is it won't be that bad, just that Americans will have to get used to paying the same prices for goods as most Europeans.
- scamper22, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1It's going to be so bad, a poor person in the United States is not going to be able to borrow money at low interest to buy a home they can't afford and then use the anticipated increase in the home's value to buy an Escalade.
- Gemfinder, on 02/25/2008, -2/+4Help?
- BrianCrosbie, on 02/25/2008, -20/+33Ron Paul is Americas only hope for financial stability. It's odd to me that the majority of Americans don't get that.
- rotundo, on 02/25/2008, -6/+12And even more odd that when you point this out, and people can clearly see that Ron called it, they digg you down.
I guess the truth hurts sometimes. People love their misery.- mike17032, on 02/25/2008, -4/+3Well when you are an old raving retard who says "OMGZ A RECESSION IS A COMMIN!" for 20 years, sooner or later it will happen. I know most of you rontards are to young to remember the last one, but welcome to history *****.
- mike17032, on 02/25/2008, -8/+8Old gold standard Paul is the answer? Shal we go back to horses too?
RP would be the end of this country if he somehow was able to implement the idiot ideas he has. Thankfully he proves he is borderline retarded everytime he speaks, and even if he did find a magic lamp and somehow get elected the president still doesnt have the power to do half of his moonbat ideas.
How about you ***** send another money bomb to his retirement fund? Its funny as hell that he is sitting on all your money and not doing anything. 5% FTW right? - darkcthulhu, on 02/25/2008, -2/+4It isn't odd to me, what would you expect from a country that the majority of its citizens believe in an invisible man?
- jer2eydevil88, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2How about the 18% of Americans who think the Sun rotates the Earth, or the 19% of people who are still approving of George W. Bush's presidency. Oh and those polls have a 1% margin of error.
- d3mag0gu3, on 02/25/2008, -2/+0Obama's speeches will destroy inflation. His speeches have that much power. So you needn't be worried. Obamabots for the win.
- rotundo, on 02/25/2008, -6/+12And even more odd that when you point this out, and people can clearly see that Ron called it, they digg you down.
- VaporBro, on 02/25/2008, -4/+39I'M MAD AS HELL AND IM NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE!
- jer2eydevil88, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1What was that movie? News night or something?
- Armughan, on 02/25/2008, -7/+6Hmm this might turn out to be an interesting twist in the zionist plot.
- drakethegreat, on 02/25/2008, -3/+18I can confirm this given the opinions of those around me. My best friend is a financial econ major, my mom is a business accountant and my dad is a business finance major. I should include my boss who is a financial econ major who has run his own businesses before. All of them have said to start saving in foreign markets. That should scare people and ***** those who claim that bush didn't cause this. They need to pull their head out of the caves (oh the irony).
- kinerry, on 02/25/2008, -0/+7This is what everyone is saying.
Save your money in a foreign currency and you are already gaining more than the banks here are giving.- kuzotz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Euros FTW!!
- burntsac, on 02/25/2008, -1/+6When "everyone" starts saying to do something, that's when I'm really concerned. Feel free to share more opinions of your friends, thanks.
- kesam, on 02/25/2008, -1/+3When "everyone" said housing would never drop, we got a bubble. And when "everyone" starts saving in foreign currency, the dollar will crash.
- emmeron, on 02/25/2008, -1/+1and since everyone put their money into something worth more than "ours," it won't be "ours" anymore, it'll be "theirs." Let the dollar crash if that is the only way to make a change. Do it buy buying up Euros or whatever you'd like, so much the better for you if you do. Do you think the Georgie and Dickie aren't already in gold and foreign currency?
- marksven, on 02/25/2008, -1/+1What "everyone" doesn't get yet is that the rest of the world is screwed more than the US is. The herd's flight to safety overseas is not where you want to be. The US dollar will increase in value as trillions of wealth in housing and banking is destroyed and the US withdraws forces and stops deficit spending on Iraq.
- kesam, on 02/25/2008, -1/+3When "everyone" said housing would never drop, we got a bubble. And when "everyone" starts saving in foreign currency, the dollar will crash.
- JohnboiWaltune, on 02/25/2008, -0/+3It's a pain in the ass to open an offshore account denominated in Swiss Francs or Euros or whatever, but you can get one with HSBC or Citibank... you just have to provide a lot of notarized documentation about where your income comes from, so you can prove you're not a terrist or money launderer. And they pretty much won't want to do business with you unless you have $20,000+
I believe Dick Cheney has most of his investments in Europe.- roodammy44, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1I remember hearing 6 months ago about how Dick Cheney was starting to take all of his investments out of dollars and thinking "uh oh, trouble ahead for america"
- AndreiOttawa, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2You can go to your bank and just buy foreign currency in cash. If you don't want to keep the cash in the house, you can always get a deposit box and keep the cash there.
- flip2trip, on 02/25/2008, -1/+0you want to explain exactly what Bush caused? You and people like you are idiots.
- kinerry, on 02/25/2008, -0/+7This is what everyone is saying.
- SynthFreud, on 02/25/2008, -9/+10Hey all you Ron Paul fans, vote LIBERTARIAN in November.
- SQLserver, on 02/25/2008, -5/+4I know that it's all about some righteous cause and some good stuff for you guys, but unless the Libertarian party gets a huge gigantic massive boost, you won't get passed 10% of the votes.
I used to be independent, but then in 04 looked at it this way: Is doing the right thing worth it if I have to deal with Bush in 04?
It can be applied now to mean:
Is doing the right thing worth it if I have to deal with McCain in 08?
In other words, while it may be right to vote independent, you are almost basically throwing away your vote.- SamuraiGhost, on 02/25/2008, -1/+3That kind if thinking is why we need to switch to instant-runoff voting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting
This would allow everyone to vote for exactly who they want without fear of a 'wasted vote'. - Tetraca, on 02/25/2008, -1/+1If we had negative voting, I'll bet it'd be a different story. The question isn't "Who do I want in the white house?" but rather "Who do I definitely not want in the white house?". Then, none of the media whores could ever get elected because so many votes would be stacked up against them.
- emmeron, on 02/25/2008, -0/+3This is the evil that has corrupted America beyond repair. The idea that one must vote for a "winner." No, sir, you waste your vote when you vote in someone you don't believe in. You make a liar of yourself and degrade the democratic republic further with each "but I want to support someone who has a chance of winning" you pull. Oh, I see what you are saying. It's a kind of game theory device. The issue here is that this is not a ***** game. It is your one vote, your one chance to make your voice more than just pissing and moaning over the internet. Don't waste your vote, indeed.
- roebeet, on 02/25/2008, -0/+3I'm going to vote for the best candidate, period. If I "waste" my vote, so be it. At least I won't have any regrets. Just think if everyone did the same thing - it would completely alter politics in this country.
- SamuraiGhost, on 02/25/2008, -1/+3That kind if thinking is why we need to switch to instant-runoff voting.
- SQLserver, on 02/25/2008, -5/+4I know that it's all about some righteous cause and some good stuff for you guys, but unless the Libertarian party gets a huge gigantic massive boost, you won't get passed 10% of the votes.
- andreinvictoria, on 02/25/2008, -4/+30One bright spot.
People might start taking better care of there personal finances.
Don't charge it.
Buy locally.
Success in life is not measured by the size of your TV.
Wake the ***** up people!- kinerry, on 02/25/2008, -12/+2Buy locally? wtf does that have to do with anything at all?
- bjornski, on 02/25/2008, -0/+12It means buy American, and keep American workers employed. Buy from your local market, to keep your local citizens employed (and fewer houses foreclosed, for sale, keeping property values UP. Helping keep your local economy strong where you live, etc)
Seriously, the fact that you needed that explained to you is very, very sad.- emmeron, on 02/25/2008, -0/+5Actually, it's beyond that. For one, half our manufacturing still happens elsewhere, so we're still keeping Americans in the money when buying something made overseas. For two, the buy locally means truly local. If I drive to another state where taxes are less to save a few bucks total (counting for gas, maybe food on the trip, etc), I've put more money into an economy where the money is worth more to begin with. By buying the same goods in my town at a higher rate, I'm helping keep the local business afloat -- they need to pay the same taxes I do, after all.
Oh wait, and that's why I disagree! Living in New England, I'd rather drive to New Hampshire and let them make more money. That is the state system! Support the state that favors you.
As for "buy American," seriously now... that doesn't help much at all. The dollar is still going to be an asswipe since the CEOs take the bulk of the profits.
- emmeron, on 02/25/2008, -0/+5Actually, it's beyond that. For one, half our manufacturing still happens elsewhere, so we're still keeping Americans in the money when buying something made overseas. For two, the buy locally means truly local. If I drive to another state where taxes are less to save a few bucks total (counting for gas, maybe food on the trip, etc), I've put more money into an economy where the money is worth more to begin with. By buying the same goods in my town at a higher rate, I'm helping keep the local business afloat -- they need to pay the same taxes I do, after all.
- brownrabbit, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1very _ very sad...
- bjornski, on 02/25/2008, -0/+12It means buy American, and keep American workers employed. Buy from your local market, to keep your local citizens employed (and fewer houses foreclosed, for sale, keeping property values UP. Helping keep your local economy strong where you live, etc)
- d3mag0gu3, on 02/25/2008, -3/+0True. Success is measured by the number of Obama speeches you've attended. This being digg and all.
- kinerry, on 02/25/2008, -12/+2Buy locally? wtf does that have to do with anything at all?
- TctclMvPhase, on 02/25/2008, -12/+2I don't fear a "deep" recession.
Buried as inaccurate.- mdcarso, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1comment buried as idiotic
- burntsac, on 02/25/2008, -17/+5Seriously, as someone in their 20s I don't have a problem with a recession. It's a natural part of the economy and get this, there were even recessions BEFORE Bush came into office! And, gulp!, there were recessions while a Democratic President was in office! Once the Dow got over 14,000 and was breaking records every week, everyone knew it couldn't last forever and eventually it would have to fall again. For those of you that are getting a head start on saving for retirement, putting money in your 401ks or what have you, you should be glad, because as stocks fall, you're buying them for less and less and will benefit more when stocks eventually rise again.
- eyal0, on 02/25/2008, -7/+2Finally, someone with a brain! Good! Next time the next Chicken Little tells you about the recession, tell him that outside it's cold and snowing and what-ever shall we do do stop all this winter?
- bjornski, on 02/25/2008, -2/+7Your lack of wisdom is showing.
- burntsac, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Nice rebuttal.
- roodammy44, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1A lot of the companies with stocks may go out of business.
Others may not rise to the same highs again after inflation for decades, effectively wiping out profits.
Linking pensions to the performance of the stock market may be a bad thing. The companies investing your pensions could lose practically everything if they make a few bad debts and collapse.
That's what happened in England 10 years ago, a pension company with AAA collapsed and hundreds of thousands of people lost their pensions forever.
But whatever. Ignorance is bliss, right?- burntsac, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1This is where diversification comes into play - you don't invest a large percentage in your company stock and you don't only invest in 5 company stocks or 10 company stocks - you can select funds that invest much more broadly, for instance in the entire S&P 500, which significantly decreases your unsystematic risk. Then you can hedge by investing in international stocks, treasuries, etc. You also can open IRAs outside of your company at Vanguard or Fidelity to further reduce your risk. It's a tragedy what happened at Enron or your example, but I can guarantee that diversification would have helped to mitigate the situation.
- ka9dgx, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1I don't fear a recession either.. but that's not what's headed our way.
Unlike 1929... we don't have overcapacity in manufacturing, we have "just in time" and "global supply chains"
Unlike 1929... we don't have the world's largest oil reserves, we're the biggest importer
Unlike 1929... we don't have a currency backed by gold
Like 1929... we do have a banking industry that went out of control
Like 1929... a lot of people have their life savings tied up in paper assets (stocks)
Like 1929... people think that things are only going to take a minor dip and keep going up- burntsac, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Like 2008...we have learned a great deal from previous recessions, including 1929, where we can respond much more quickly to the needs of the economy. Every recession since the Great Depression has been significantly shorter. It also allows people to put things in perspective and reassess their financial situations. If stocks just continued to rise with no repercussions, then where would we be? The average recession from 1948-91 has been 11 months (http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Recessions.html ... which is a blip on this country's history. Despite these recessions (Great Depression included) the US economy has still averaged about 2-3% rate over its history.
- mal1964, on 02/25/2008, -2/+6Its not the first time it wont be the last time, its just this time. Its a roller-coaster problem.
- zephc, on 02/25/2008, -2/+7Time to buy a wheelbarrow while I still can, so i can haul cash down to the store and buy a loaf of bread
- freezeout, on 02/25/2008, -0/+4no need, they'll just print '5 billion' dollar bills like they did back in Germany, that should be enough for some Top Ramen
- SQLserver, on 02/25/2008, -3/+2Wait... We should all sell our stock tomorrow at the same time!
I love these get rich quick schemes! - daxsymbiont, on 02/25/2008, -2/+12quick. invade an oil country.
- brownrabbit, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1oil is peaked. buy land.
- ElectricMunk, on 02/25/2008, -1/+12For those of you into information and different viewpoints....the following is a lecture on the economics of globalization delivered by a friend of mine. He is an economics professor and has been teaching for 30+ years. Very informative....give it a watch and pass it around if you are so inclined.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-345721242 ...- Zaneris, on 02/25/2008, -0/+3I just finished watching an hour of it, I'll watch the rest later on, and I have to agree, very informative. I appreciate the fact that he's not afraid to talk about controversial issues. Intelligent guy, I'm actually a bit interested in economics of all things now.
- brownrabbit, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1Thank you for posting this. someone posted it in a thread on Digg a few months ago so I watched it and I am very happy that I did. Education and sharing information will empower us and make us all more capable of figuring out the best way through any situation we face. AUM AH HUM
- Fremen93, on 02/25/2008, -7/+12We need to cancel the tax cuts on the wealthy (those making over 250k a year) and distribute that extra tax to stimulate the economy, the way FDR did it in the "NEW DEAL". Because obviously the wealthy aren't doing a good job of stimulating the economy with all the tax cuts they got because of Bush.
- emmeron, on 02/25/2008, -1/+5FDR screwed our economy for the long term. Stop pretending he was a cure. He made things worse, but did it with a lot of gloss. He made the depression longer, not shorter. These are considered facts by almost all economists. RTFM or something.
- Toallpointswest, on 02/25/2008, -2/+1BINGO!!! You nailed the problem with our lopsided economy, it's too lopsided. The contradictory as it sounds the upper economic tiers do little to stimulate the economy because they're reactive to it, and simply put, there's just too few of them. The middle class does the most to drive the economy and in the US, they've been shrinking for decades.
- bufmike, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1I'll probably get burried, but the percent of taxes paid by the wealthy has been going up, not down. The tax rates have been cut, not the tax $.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Commentary/com-12 ... - monkeypaw, on 02/29/2008, -0/+0Yeah right. Cause wealth re-distribution isn't communist or anything.
- kev110382, on 02/25/2008, -3/+19Guess whose fault this all is... its all not Bush or his cronies. It's your fault and your parents fault. You overspent, you undersaved, and you're now dealing with it.
If you bought a house recently for $600,000, it better have been a mansion. Otherwise, you got ripped off and probably owe more than your house is worth.
As for the government overspending, its not Bush's fault. Its Congress's fault. Bush doesn't pass the bills- he just signs them. Traditionally, over expenditures are caused by Democrats funding of social programs. Unfortunately though, this 'disease' now affects both sides of the aisle.
For instance, are you telling me that a person making $150,000 a year needs a rebate check for $600? That someone making $500,000 a year needs a tax cut?
What needs to happen is some sort of flat tax... either a flat income tax (including corporations) with no deductions allowed or a flat national sales tax. That way both the poor and rich are treated equally.- andy314159pi, on 02/25/2008, -0/+0The downturn is a direct result of the decline of manufacturing and heavy industry and not much else. The ubiquitous outsourcing was promoted by broken currency exchanges (and in the case of China, pegged exchanges.) And FYI, a flat tax would do nothing helpful.
- netant, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1It would put tax preparers out of business. Almost worth letting the rich get a free ride.
- ussoldier, on 02/25/2008, -0/+5I didn't buy billion dollar stealth bombers, and spend exorbitant amounts to send million dollar tanks "by air" half way across the world overnight . Do you know what the FedEx shipping charge is to send something that weighs several tonnes by overnight airmail costs??!?!? No you don't, because its obscene. But nobody blinks an eye about it.
No, the National Debt is not mine. If it was, I could walk onto a military base or into a government building and start hauling home "my" stuff. The national debt is not my debt, it is no American's debt, it is their debt. Congress spent the money, it is their debt. If the United States is bankrupt, then it should be dissolved as a corporation, and its assets sold at auction to pay its creditors whatever can be recupperated.- HankinTrees, on 02/25/2008, -0/+0Gimme my A-10, and field rations! Time to pay up U.S.!
- whalt, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1***** about Bush not being at fault for overspending. His proposed budgets every year have had massive deficits and have set the tone for congress who by the way were controlled by Republicans for most of his term in office. And he never vetoed any of this spending, He's also responsible for the war in Iraq which is a major contributor to our overspending. His massive tax cuts for the wealthy drained trillions in revenue at the same time. Yeah, I know people like you still believe that tax cuts raise revenue but that's because you are completely divorced from the historical economic record which shows conclusively that this is not the case.
- andy314159pi, on 02/25/2008, -0/+0The downturn is a direct result of the decline of manufacturing and heavy industry and not much else. The ubiquitous outsourcing was promoted by broken currency exchanges (and in the case of China, pegged exchanges.) And FYI, a flat tax would do nothing helpful.
- Search153, on 02/25/2008, -7/+22Of course you're headed for a deep recession. How long did you think an enormous trade-deficit and offshoring jobs to the lowest bidder would last? The Chinese are poised for takeover, having employed the Art of War (read: Sun Tzu). They manufacture all the technology that makes your world go round, from cell phones to computers to consumer electronics, they can knock off all your most coveted fashionista goods with perfection, and they've been working for next to no wages for generations. Couple that work ethic with the virtues they place in education and honor, and you've got the makings of the world's next superpower. Add to this the fact that they pay North Americans big money to go over there and teach English, because a) they can afford it and b) once they are all fluent in English, the rise of the red sun will ensue.
- daxsymbiont, on 02/25/2008, -3/+5English is not needed.
You're probably first language English to think like that.- kazamx, on 02/25/2008, -1/+2English is needed. English is the language of business. Go to any country in the world and you will find someone who speaks English. While French, Spanish or Mandarin are popular, you can't go anywhere and expect people to understand you.
Name one language the is spoken in more places by more people than English?- waydee, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2While I agree that this is the case currently it certainly won't be forever. It is the language of business because traditionally English speaking countries have dominated business and set a precedent. We can only hope that it's enough of a lingua franca to keep it that way.
English is the wests second language, theres a good chance of most people our generation being able to communicate at a basic level in it. When the west do not dominate the world as much as they do currently, or perhaps believe they do, then slowly that second language preference will shift towards another. But that will take a long time, a lot could happen in the time required for such a transition to take place and i'd say its impossible to predict what the next dominant language will be.
- waydee, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2While I agree that this is the case currently it certainly won't be forever. It is the language of business because traditionally English speaking countries have dominated business and set a precedent. We can only hope that it's enough of a lingua franca to keep it that way.
- brownrabbit, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1That's why I am learning Chinese.
- kazamx, on 02/25/2008, -1/+2English is needed. English is the language of business. Go to any country in the world and you will find someone who speaks English. While French, Spanish or Mandarin are popular, you can't go anywhere and expect people to understand you.
- Search153, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1I don't recall I said that it was necessary, just pointing out that it is currently happening to aid their cause. Then again, you're probably not first language English to have read into it like that, so I forgive you.
- mlavergn, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2That's exactly the same thing they said about Japan in the late 80s, early 90s.
- brownrabbit, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1Except Japan is a very small and limited island that is deeply economically integrated with the US...
- freezeout, on 02/25/2008, -7/+1I for one welcome our new slanty-eyed overlords
- daxsymbiont, on 02/25/2008, -3/+5English is not needed.
- d38as3r, on 02/25/2008, -3/+20No ***** recession, geez, its only gonna get worse, much worse, Cheers! hope all you fools that voted for bush are happy now.
- JohnboiWaltune, on 02/25/2008, -2/+4The bushtards will say to themselves, "It wasn't Bush's fault, it just happened while he was in office, and you know Clinton set this up 10 years ago, and we are just now feeling the effects..blahblahblah"
- darkcthulhu, on 02/25/2008, -1/+1Do you think anyone on DIGG voted for BUSH??? I don't.
- LastVisibleDog, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2Many on Digg seem to be not old enough to vote - or not smart enough....
- RationalXubrnce, on 02/25/2008, -0/+3 Do you honestly think if Kerry got elected the banks would have had different policy? I'd love to hear why you think that to be the case.
- LastVisibleDog, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2If you think the president controls the economy - you deserve your miserable life
- daxsymbiont, on 02/25/2008, -2/+3king bush and his l33t skilz
- Born4Surf, on 02/25/2008, -1/+4As US recession fears grow, it looks like UK recession fears are being reduced as a 'remote risk' at present
http://digg.com/business_finance/US_Recession_fear ...- daxsymbiont, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1It's all a Queen's plan all along!
- gigasquid, on 02/25/2008, -6/+4I wanned you this would happen. Not just once but several times. Get your face out of the plate of mashed potatoes I said, and look around at what's happening. Did you listen? Nope. The truth is that most of you couldn't find your bum with both hands on a sunny day. And now you gotta lie in the mess you made. For a loooong time. That's what you get for living in dreamland. Adios.
- flip2trip, on 02/25/2008, -0/+3they have computers in the mental ward?
- MiddleOfNowhere, on 02/25/2008, -2/+3This is going to hit the US hard if/when Barack Obama (hopefully) becomes President. And the republicans with their expertise in lying will undoubtedly find a way to blame the recession/depression on the democrats. On a smaller scale, this happens in many countries: Spend like mad, and when your pockets are empty and the Other Guy takes over, wait a few months, then put the blame for the mess you're leaving behind on him.
- bpb404, on 02/29/2008, -0/+1Are you kidding me.
- monkeypaw, on 02/29/2008, -0/+2Reputation for lying. Hilarious. It was the democrats that tried to appoint Murtha as head of the ethics committee.
- vermax, on 02/25/2008, -2/+5"business sentiment" is down? we live in a gullibility-based economy, you tell people *****'s going to go bad, people start buying futures on tragedy, and guess what, "business sentiment" snivels and withers. whether it's true or not, the propaganda can make it true. and whatever of it is true, is so because BushCo cronies gnawed the bones clean.
- moontime, on 02/25/2008, -1/+8We have BEEN in a recession for quite some time. Its a DEPRESSION you need to be worried about.
- earlycj5, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2How pray tell can you be in a recession for some time now? There's a definition of recession and as far as I know, it's not even been met yet. Thus it can't have been for "some time now" as you state.
- InorganicMatter, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1Traditionally, you don't know you're in a recession until the numbers for that cycle come out, and by the time you know you're in a recession, it's already on the rise again.
- macman2k, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Using shadow stats calculation of GDP we have had negative GDP growth for years. Thus we meet the technical definition.
- earlycj5, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2How pray tell can you be in a recession for some time now? There's a definition of recession and as far as I know, it's not even been met yet. Thus it can't have been for "some time now" as you state.
-
Show 51 - 90 of 90 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by