What is Digg?Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate
Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.488 Comments
- tekhna, on 03/09/2008, -10/+122I'm no optimist, but I feel like perhaps some of these predictions are a touch hyperbolic.
- MyBookie, on 03/09/2008, -28/+114I sure wouldn't want to be running for president now. Whoever wins will have to fight being blamed for this mess. I don't think a democrat is the answer because the thrive on spending, not saving. I don't think a Republican is the answer, because generally they will want to continue the costly war in Iraq which is really going to bankrupt the U.S. I even think it may be too far gone for even someone with ideas like Ron Paul to save. It's pretty sad.
- inactive, on 03/09/2008, -7/+81Now I need some Lolcats to cheer me up.
- StingingNettle, on 03/09/2008, -35/+96I predict people having to flee the suburbs in the U.S. because they can't afford (or their isn't any) gas, they don't have a job, or food so they volunteer to go into a Halliburton internment camp for the rest of their lives. The city will have long soup lines and will be in an awful condition to live but it will be deemed "safe" by the government (with their street cams). Those struggling to live outside will be called terrorists and will be forced to learn how to live with nature again (while they trying to avoid being stocked by government satellite). But hey I'm a optimist. Its my Sagittarius nature.
- maninblac1, on 03/09/2008, -7/+44These predictions are all, very possible if you're are of the belief that the economy will be crushed under the inflation of the last 7 years. Which is a reasonable point of view. As the average consumer's budget gets tighter with inflation, you'll see more conservative spending, which will bring prices and profits down, which means layoffs and downsizing to keep profit margins and wallstreet happy.
But just that snowballs, because as people get laid off, they get even more spending conservative, and then the government must come in with unemployment checks to save the people, which begets more inflation which makes prices rise, which exacerbates the problem.
If we want the economy stable, we have to solve the inflation problem, which means we have to solve the national debt, the budget deficit, and over spending. The dems will win, which is ok, but it's a bad bad time economically for a democrat to be the president. - clearzen, on 03/09/2008, -2/+38Then Mad Max will rise from the "outlanders" to unite them against the evil city dwellers.
- outkaster, on 03/09/2008, -6/+40And another person pointing the finger across the isle when it is everyone who is at fault.
- fancypantscz, on 03/09/2008, -3/+37I don't think anyone reading this article in their right mind is going to come away thinking that a vote for the democrats this is going to fix this situation. It was decades of collusion between the two parties and big business that got us into this mess and it is partisan hacks like EvilA who will ensure that things get a lot worse before we are able to make any substantial change for the better.
- Rotzooi, on 03/09/2008, -11/+43Do what I did, move to a country where the government actually works FOR the people, even in a hospital I don't have to work crazy long hours, the food is better, health care is for everyone, there are no Starbucks in sight ...and get paid in Euros. You'll be glad you did.
- rzxc, on 03/09/2008, -22/+51Yet another "sky is falling" economic article on Digg. While the economy is going to be weak for a while, chances are things are not going to be as bad as the author of this article believes. Here's why. I don't think number 12 is going to happen. The basis of number 12 is that the bond insurers have become insolvent because of the sub-prime meltdown, therefore there is no bond insurance, therefore local governments can't get money. While this is true for the moment, I believe this problem will fix itself shortly. Most likely, the bond insurers are probably going to split themselves into two parts: a municipal bonder insurance company (which should be strong), and a mortgage bond company (which should go bankrupt the moment it is created). The reason why they're going to be split in two is because if they don't, someone else will fill the void. Right now, they can't offer any sort of insurance to anyone. If they split, at least they will have one good business. Actually, I think Warren Buffet had a lot to do with the movement to split the insurance companies. He wants to get into the municipal bond insurance business, and offered to buy out that part of the business from AMBAC and the other insurers. I believe that if the existing insurers do not get their act together quickly, Buffet will just step in and take that business from them. Most of the other predictions are equally debatable, or at least the consequences of them are equally debatable. For example number 8. There's no chance that a free trade bill would pass now, so if that legislation doesn't pass in the future, that situation is no different. As for number 3, economists have been worried that the consumer is going to stop spending for as long as I can remember. It hasn't happened yet and I doubt it will. Obviously, consumer spending does fluctuate somewhat, but I doubt it will really collapse. There are other issues I have with this article, but this comment has run on to long already, and I have other things to do.
- Daniel591992, on 03/09/2008, -3/+28http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008 ...
- lendrick, on 03/09/2008, -12/+37Democrats thrive on spending, not saving? The Democrats were responsible for the first (and only) budget surplus in ages. And as much as people like to talk about how taxes make a mess out of the economy, all recent evidence points to the exact opposite.
- Timetheos, on 03/09/2008, -1/+25No, you'll see busses rise in popularity. In fact, I am already seeing that.
- stev31h, on 03/09/2008, -0/+23they are 1/20 the size of America, but nonetheless, highly populated areas should have better options.
- charmaniac, on 03/09/2008, -8/+30Give me a break. We are going to enter a deep recession, but we will survive. It will not be a "great depression" for many reasons. We have the SEC which provides much greater regulation of securities than existed in the 1920's. Sarbanes-Oxley makes it much less likely that company executives will lie about the state of their companies because they will face potential prison time. We have technology that makes our society much more efficient.
Things will get bad, lenders are going to lose a ***** load of money. You know what? Thats the cost of doing business as a lender. Lenders decided that due diligence just wasn't necessary, so now they will get burned. But, it will not be anything like the great depression.
And for everyone who thinks Russia, China, or India are going to take our place as the world's largest economy, it just isn't going to happen anytime soon. When we go into recession, the rest of the world will go into recession. Yes, we are that big of a deal. 25-40% of the world's economy in fact. - Spottswood, on 03/09/2008, -0/+20they dont use euros in switzerland
- inactive, on 03/09/2008, -12/+31Meh.
- lougoose, on 03/09/2008, -5/+23[citation needed]
(some of it is true for sure, but for the rest, we need some evidence) - OisinT, on 03/09/2008, -4/+22the USD is crashing and the Euro is going the other way. Explain that? Also the Euro is at an all-time high against GBP also.
- aukxsona, on 03/09/2008, -1/+17The FDIC released a statement that at least one large bank will fail this year. The FDIC is also hiring veterans from the Savings and Loan crisis on. It's no BS. If you look at all the data it adds up.
- xOKxWhy, on 03/09/2008, -0/+16What country do you live in, out of curiosity?
- aliengoods, on 03/09/2008, -1/+16I lived in Switzerland for a few months. It did my soul some good. You should give it a try.
- inactive, on 03/09/2008, -3/+18a tad pessimistic too, things will be bad in the next 4 years but not quite as bad as this article states.
- tdog138, on 03/09/2008, -1/+16Yeah, because that Republican president really did a lot to help the national debt. Wait a minute...
- littlemarcho, on 03/09/2008, -0/+14yes
- roho76, on 03/09/2008, -6/+20Paper money not backed by Gold or Silver is just that, Paper.
- tracywood, on 03/09/2008, -0/+14and bicycles...
- hamobu, on 03/09/2008, -0/+13because our elected leaders are elected to four year terms, they are driving this country like it is a rental car. There is no incentive to sacrifice now for the better future.
- Hoogie7Dowser, on 03/09/2008, -1/+14Awesome! I can't wait! Halliburton Gruel (TM) tastes Mmm mmmm GOOOD!
- hamobu, on 03/09/2008, -11/+24The truth about economy is that American way of life is unsustainable. Not every family can have a house and two cars. I think what we are seeing is some necessary belt tightening that will continue in the decades to come. Still, I think that nobody will starve in the US.
- inactive, on 03/09/2008, -10/+22you know, the sad thing is that euro is heavily dependent on US economy, and if US dollar crashes, euro will go right after usd into the same direction. so, you thought you got away, but you didn't.
- inactive, on 03/09/2008, -2/+14Oh, but Gold and Silver are? LOL. Believe me, the only commodity that will matter in the doomsday scenarios that diggers have such a hard-on for is WATER.
- browwiw, on 03/09/2008, -1/+13I'd love to see a train transit system here in the US like they have in most of Europe. I'm especially fond of the French model. You can get practically anywhere in France is just two or three train stops.
- 15charmaxwtf, on 03/09/2008, -0/+12A victory for public transport!
- aliengoods, on 03/09/2008, -5/+16Grab your ankles and invest in gold.
- tracywood, on 03/09/2008, -9/+20Ron Paul is right on the money.
If no one wants hims as President, how about whatever position has control of finances. - maninblac1, on 03/09/2008, -0/+11That's poor consumer choice. My motto is never to spend money i don't have. You pay off your cards in full each month. The only outstanding things you should pay for on a monthly basis are your home and your car. Other recurring debts are simply a waste of money.
Their wouldn't be credit issues if we didn't have inflation, people could afford their debts. - ScienceDoc, on 03/09/2008, -18/+29This prosperity is courtesy of the Bush Tax Cut. Keep waiting. It will trickle down. Those Exxon and Wallymart execs are gonna have to buy something.
- sanman, on 03/09/2008, -2/+12Umm, the Chairman of Airbus himself recently warned that for every 10 cents the US dollar drops against the Euro, that Airbus will lose $1billion. Airbus is already doing massive job cuts, and relocating factories to the US, creating jobs there. The fact is that a low US dollar is making it very tough for Europe to compete. Europe is now hollering more loudly than the US against the devalued Chinese yuan currency. Europe's Central Bank will soon have to abandon its cherished anti-inflationary policy of high interest rates, in order to stay abreast of the world. And that will lead to a gradual loss of EU centralized policy control over its special economic club.
- enki25, on 03/09/2008, -0/+10What's more realistic, that some homeless fundamentalists in the middle east will invade America and institute sharia law? Or that the economic tricks all of us have been pulling for the last 20 years are about to come back to bite us?
No, Republicans are the only ones using fear mongering to try to win in November. This article is not the Democratic position, it's just a hard look at the future if no changes are made. - aburd, on 03/09/2008, -4/+14I'm not saying that everything is going to be hunkydory, but this is a worst case scenario peice. I would love to know this guy's qualifications for making a large series of specific predictions. None of this is guaranteed and I would listen less to this sort of thing and more to many many legitimate economists making different predictions and reads on the state of things.
- Cryoniq, on 03/09/2008, -1/+11Actually, the people at the top of the economy that pull the strings think it is a game.
- Enasni1212, on 03/09/2008, -4/+14Don't you mean lack of interest?
- inactive, on 03/09/2008, -0/+10Reputable sources, logic, rationale thinking and unbiases facts will never be accepted on Digg.
- hamobu, on 03/09/2008, -1/+11That is true in the short term, but huge government debt is biting us in the ass.
- cliffzdude, on 03/09/2008, -4/+14I logged in just to reply to this inaccuracy. There never was a surplus. None. Zero. Nada. Not even a projected-someday-would-be-surplus. There was a projected surplus, in the FUTURE, based upon invalid growth rates and invalid (stagnant) spending rates. In other words, the Clinton "surplus" was but a so-called projected surplus, saying that if growth continued (think Dot-Com Bubble Era) and government spending stayed the same, there would someday be a surplus. to lendrick and the (currently) 14 people who dugg his comment up, you really need to learn what's behind the ***** that any politician is spewing. Don't take my comment as anything but a friendly piece of advice, I'm not trying to insult you or flame-bailt. Quite the contrary.
Ignore me, read the numbers:
FiscalYear
----------Year Ending
------------------------------National Debt
FY1993 09/30/1993 $4.411488 trillion
FY1994 09/30/1994 $4.692749 trillion
FY1995 09/29/1995 $4.973982 trillion
FY1996 09/30/1996 $5.224810 trillion
FY1997 09/30/1997 $5.413146 trillion
FY1998 09/30/1998 $5.526193 trillion
FY1999 09/30/1999 $5.656270 trillion
FY2000 09/29/2000 $5.674178 trillion
FY2001 09/28/2001 $5.807463 trillion - mOdQuArK, on 03/09/2008, -0/+10I wonder how much that inheritance's value will fall in 5 years.
- xerigen, on 03/09/2008, -2/+12Bill Clinton was a fiscal conservative for the most part.
- anarcurt, on 03/09/2008, -6/+15As a subscriber to the Wall Street Journal and the Economist, as well as being a Finance MBA Student I can tell you most of the ideas expressed are spot on. Many politicians are trying to hide the real weakness in our economy, for the obvious political reasons. Inflation will be a real problem. Most commodities are already at all time highs, even adjusted for inflation, the dollar is weak making imports expensive (including oil). Wages are staying low, the economy is heading south and even people like Alan Greenspan see double digit interest rates within 5-10 years (see his book and interview on 20/20). And please, don't post on anything finance related if you can not spell Wall Street.
- burnnation, on 07/27/2008, -1/+10debt*
-
Show 51 - 100 of 483 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 