What is Digg?173 Comments
- inactive, on 03/25/2009, -14/+70Funny how in an economic crisis everyone is a ***** economist.
- alienufo, on 03/25/2009, -17/+67so now conservatives care about what Europe thinks all of a sudden. Interesting.
- z0rk, on 03/25/2009, -18/+60If only our government would listen to history and the people who already have.
- RonPauls, on 03/25/2009, -26/+59Czech leaders seem to be pretty cool
Vaclav Klaus is a pretty sweet dude - he invited Ron Paul over there for an Austrian economics roundtable - Gandalff, on 03/25/2009, -19/+41"...President Barack Obama's massive stimulus package and banking bailout "will undermine the liquidity of the global financial market."
That was an agreement we made with the world banks and Countries around the world back in 1945 after we put our Gold in Fort Knox and told the rest of the world that we had liquidity backed assets for our dollar in the form of GOLD and that they could rest assured we were good for the paper our dollars were printed on. We promised not to ever go past out backed assets in gold thus making the value of our dollar worth less and the world holding our cash more unstable. We found this out to be true later when we printed money in the late 70's and had to promise other countries back then that were upset that we the US would buy there products in return in addition to the Loan they would give us for printing this money, much like paying interest on interest except you get a gift. The Government gets to tax on the way into it's country and tax our people when they buy said products and nobody has to spend anything to make it. Win/Win right? Wrong!
Now we have been having other countries invest in ours for so long that some like China or Japan can cripple our economy by pulling out entirely because of our spending. We used to be the country that loaned to others and now we are defendant on others. Kind of like the credit card trick. Spend now pay latter only you never pay later because you had a no interest card only to find out that it was only no interest for 12 months and if you had a balance you had to pay for the entire years worth of interest accumulated if it was not paid off within the 12 month period otherwise you pay all of it with penalties. Not a good idea and exactly what America has been doing.
Why is it now we have had several Communist countries China, Russia, Just to name the two largest, the French, Switzerland very socialistic based, EU President hardly a free market guy but getting closer and also some in the UK, and Japan all telling the President to stop spending if Spending was the way out. If this was any other President what would the media be saying about him listening to our allies, or leaders around the world, or stubbornness, cockiness, arrogance? Really, with all these leaders out there calling for a slowdown on the spending are you going by way of political hack and attack by redirection or name calling or copy and pasting a line or two instead of the real issue underlining this whole thing? - THETEH, on 03/25/2009, -35/+56Where was this guy when Bush was undermining the global economy for eight years? Obama is fixing the mess Bush left by helping America develop an energy plan that actually WORKS, improving schools and hospitals, and creating jobs. If Bush hadn't got us in to the war, if he had done something about our dependence on oil sooner, if he had regulated the massive businesses a bit more, if he had done SOMETHING about outsourcing, if he hadn't introduced disastrous trickle-down tax cuts that NEVER work, Obama wouldn't need to spend this much.
But Bush DID screw up our economy. So Obama NEEDS to spend a lot to fix it. The conservative idea of a solution is to cut taxes for the wealthy MORE. That didn't work under Hoover. It won't work today. - Doubledown, on 03/25/2009, -3/+21well when the economists that should have seen this coming did nothing, we are all on pretty much the same playing ground
- burketo, on 03/25/2009, -10/+28Buried for innacuracy. The president of the country currently holding EU presidency is not the "EU President". There is no such thing (yet).
president of the EU parliament is Hans gert Pottering, president of the EU commission is José Manuel Barroso. Those are the two main institutions of the EU. The council is important too, but the presidency of it is by a nation, not a man.
Nobody cares what the Czech president thinks, aside from the Czechs of course. - TheHIV, on 03/25/2009, -1/+15Sorry, you got it wrong. The Czechs don't even care what he says. Seriously, the man is a wingnut and their form of Bush and they realize it.
- inactive, on 03/25/2009, -1/+12***** Aye it does. It will just get the world to listen to China and move off of the US currency sooner than later.
- kemp34, on 03/25/2009, -4/+15Isolationist? How?
Nationalists? Uh, oh, that CRAZY Constitution, right?
Passe? Our political leaders should be chosen based on how "cool" they are, right? - SarcasticPirate, on 03/25/2009, -2/+12Care to clarify that statement there, champ? Do you mean that in a 'government should haven't done anything and let the economy fix itself'-sort of way, or a 'the stimulus was way too small compared to the New Deal'-way?
- Wargala, on 03/25/2009, -2/+12Except idiots like Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat, is wanting to block renewable energy projects in her own back yard.
http://www.rightwinglunatic.com/wp/?p=4605 - Irlande, on 03/25/2009, -0/+9That's exactly what I came to say! This seems to come up everytime a new country takes the presidency, it's just disappointing how little people know of the system :(
And, speaking of how wonderful the Czechs are:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7963175.stm
Vote of no confidence in the government and a subsequent collapse. - BabyWookie, on 03/25/2009, -1/+10The Czech Republic is not a former Soviet state. Also, just like pretty much every European country, it is currently far more "socialist" than the US - universal health care and all.
- maximumstats, on 03/25/2009, -6/+15Buried. He isn't even the PM anymore. Plus, I'd rather listen to Krugman than this jagoff.
<a class="user" href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7962177.stm" ... rel="nofollow">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7962177.stm</ ... - dafragsta, on 03/25/2009, -1/+9The press might get excluded, but that doesn't mean there is no record of oversight. It's also not the least bit suspicious that they couldn't say with whom he was meting? Is it not bothersome that he had told a group from the press who had chartered the plane for him to fly back to Chicago, that he wasn't actually on the plane until the door was closed and it was taxiing?
- GoKings, on 03/25/2009, -5/+13I don't get it:
First I read a story that says the government is in some massive grand conspiracy to develop a global unified economy by destroying the dollar
Now I read a story that has the EU saying that we are destroying the global economy. Strange how in a recession everyone seems to act like some world-renowned economist because they know the meaning of the words deficit and inflation. - lizard450, on 03/25/2009, -3/+11McCain would have done the same exact thing. The blame goes to those who has ever voted Republican or Democrat since both parties lost the American way. There are 300 million people here now and our Federal government simply has too much power. Your vote is meaningless. We shout all we want at our Federal Representatives and they will turn a deaf ear to us. Too few people rule over too many. It is time we move the country back to the format it was originally designed for. Small federal government which steps in to preserve personal and individual liberties if a state gets out of line. State governments that control things like bank regulations, emergency response, highway systems etc. Its the way our republic was meant to scale. This problem has been building up for years and it is all of our faults.
- xanadu2113, on 03/25/2009, -12/+19I suppose I see how The Czech Rep. (a former soviet state) could be weary of government intervention, communism didn't work out so well for them.
- dalittle, on 03/25/2009, -3/+10The Czech Republic, seriously? That is going to a lot of trouble to try to find someone that agrees with you.
- macmcraeart, on 03/25/2009, -1/+8it is pretty ***** clear no one on the planet in a position of power has a ***** clue what is going on with our "global economy". our leaders are using strategies and theories developed in the 1920s to tackle 21st century economic problems. It reminds me of the ***** up incompetent ***** generals were responsible for in world war one. Using Napoleonic cavalry charges against machine guns and armored tanks. we are witnessing a ***** of epic proportions.
- sdwilly, on 03/25/2009, -2/+9So by that reasoning, Bush did something right. Correct?
- Doubledown, on 03/25/2009, -3/+10and who created the economic crash??????
- burketo, on 03/26/2009, -0/+6indeed. I think these things are just said to make it seem more dramatic. "EU President" makes it sound like he runs the EU, where in reality he barely runs his own country.
To anyone still confused: This man is not a representative of the EU. The Czechs have the presidency (a term which simply means the meetings are held in the Czech republic) now by default and it will move on in a few months. He is just using this moment as a soap box.
google it if you are still confused. - OldGuyFox, on 03/26/2009, -1/+7at the top of your post erkokite, you forgot to start it out with
"In my opinion"
Because that all your statement is. Unsubstantiated opinion from a truly uninformed citizen. - SpinningHead, on 03/25/2009, -5/+11So we shouldn't listen to the French when they say there are no WMDs, but now we should take advice from the Czechs? If we don't fix our infrastructure (what Bush should have done with the surplus he inherited), there will be no recovery.
- kemp34, on 03/25/2009, -1/+7Break out the credit card and the printing press!
- Optiks, on 03/26/2009, -0/+5@Insightful: Be prepared, big wall o' text.
#1 - Google 'Bretton Woods system', or: http://tinyurl.com/cu78q3
#2 - You're right. China, Japan or any other nation could just unload all the bonds they've ever purchased all at once, but they'd have to do it in dollars, causing a short term spike in inflation and a rise in interest rates (since there would now be a shortage of dollars on the market). To counter this, the Fed would just buy an equal number of bonds to replace the lost dollars and let the market find a new equilibrium point.
$3 - Still, there's no real 'credit line' to speak of. Not in the sense that you and I know of, anyway. There's no Platinum Card the U.S. keeps in its wallet. There simply isn't enough money in the world to pay the interest in the amount of debt nations carry. In fact, the majority of our own debt that everyone worries about in the U.S. is debt that we owe ourselves. The Federal Reserve itself owns almost half as much as all debt the Treasury issues, and the U.S. owns collectively almost three times as much of our own debt as all foreign governments combined. The national debt is bad, mind you, but not as bad as many would lead you to believe. The problem mostly comes from the accounting issues.
Luckily, since the Great Depression, our economy has grown at an average rate faster than the average rate our debt has, and so we've been been able to keep our debt relatively under control. The problem though, is that through massive deficit spending and government expansion (even in periods of lean tax revenues), the debt continues to multiply exponentially, and so we end up borrowing more just to make interest payments. This debt will wind up being paid for by, you guessed it, borrowing more bonds - to be paid off by future generations.
#4 - That's why so many people have so many problems with Obama's stimulus and budget plans. Governments needs to spend money to keep consumption levels high, and money flowing through the economy. But the debt spending is extremely dangerous if it doesn't boost the GDP in the future to pay down the debt. Politicians have a nasty way of not giving back money once they get it. If the money is there in the future, it *has* to pay down the debt. If it isn't, we're screwed.
#5 - Agreed to a point, and with a caveat. The dollar has and always will be the reserve currency of a global economy as long as we remain leaders in what makes the world tick. With China and Russia on the rise, they would rather not see New York remain the financial center of the world. And it would really piss them off if we suddenly no longer needed oil as our primary energy source.
A majority of Russian revenue and influence comes from their oil exports and influence peddling. China has spent much political capital forging ties and trade routes to secure oil rights. What would happen should oil no longer be the primary source of energy and suddenly drop to $.01 a barrel? Imagine the shift in wealth and power throughout the world.
Suddenly, large-scale wind farms, realistic efficient fuel-cell, cold-fusion, and a host of other alternative energy sources are exported from the U.S. and again make us the leader in the fourth industrial revolution, leaving Russia and China again playing catch-up. Not to mention the host of other technologies derived from research that could lead to breakthroughs like these.
Anyone want out of the Middle East? Get us off the oil. Problem solved. - maximumstats, on 03/25/2009, -0/+5ah *****...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7962177.stm - bacon_skoda, on 03/25/2009, -0/+5Topolanek spoke the day after he was ousted by his own parliament.
cool eh? - StarlessKnight, on 03/25/2009, -2/+7Everyone but France. Freedom fries an' all.
- MrFunStuff, on 03/25/2009, -0/+4Order out of Chaos
- peticsu, on 03/25/2009, -2/+693% of the workforce is employed...if you dont have a job: DEVELOP A SKILL...aka human capital
I cant believe I have to say this to you Austrian Classical economist types...
you guys scream about free markets but the truth is you couldnt handle the free markets...if we lived in true hardcore capitalism, and you didnt have any skills I guarantee an immigrant would beat you for a job... - diguptruth77, on 03/26/2009, -0/+4Alright, smart guy. What happens when the inevitable inflation happens? Suddenly the US Treasury ain't looking so good.
I'm not asking to be a smartass, I really want to know what you think. - HappyScrappy, on 03/25/2009, -7/+11Well, now that the Czechs say it, I'm really concerned.
- rda1441, on 03/26/2009, -4/+8I thought Obama and Hillary were going to be licking the foreigner leader's anus so they would like us again?
- dannykeene, on 03/25/2009, -4/+8if you say anything negative about obama you are labeled as stupid. thanks. got it
- diguptruth77, on 03/26/2009, -1/+5Totally - Kerry was never the intended victor. He and Bush are cut from the same skull n' bones cloth anyway.
Arguing whether Bush or any repub would be doing a better job than Obama is a totally moot point. Fact is, the banking cartel bought the gov a long time ago. - bono4u, on 03/26/2009, -0/+4Country first, doesn't translate to "You don't have to think of anybody else" but to "Citizens and their representatives should know best what to do for their own country". If that fits to a bigger picture, the better the actions taken will result into benefits for all.
Myself doesn't have any problem with the US bailing out some key companies, but if inflation hits the US badly, the whole world has to suffer as so much is build upon the Dollar.
There are other ways to help firms which struggle - tao52nyc, on 03/26/2009, -0/+3You still haven't described what you think of as "isolationist". Ron Paul believes in the Jeffersonian maxim of "peace and free trade with all nations, entangling alliances with none." In other words, a "non-interventionist" foreign policy - a bit like Switzerland, a country that hasn't been in a war for 800 years.
- OldGuyFox, on 03/26/2009, -1/+4The Federal Reserve and the Bank of England.
If a teacher gives her classroom a big bag of pixie sticks and leaves the room, then comes back in and the room is trashed, whos fault is it? The teacher for giving the kids pixie sticks or the students for eating them? - liquisoft, on 03/25/2009, -2/+5I know very little about economics, but I know that we're effectively damned if we do, damned if we don't. The type of "damned" we become, though, is what's at stake.
Right now we're borrowing tons and tons of cash from other countries. Mostly it's China throwing money across the ocean, and have been doing so looking to get a significant return on their investments (just like any lender would). Recently they've expressed concern about their investments, and Obama apparently had to reassure them just to get them to fork over more cash.
In 8 years our debt, under Obama's new plan, will be greater than our national output. That means we'll literally be spending more than we could possibly make. Healthcare is also going to continue to become a larger and larger and larger cost to this government, especially since people are living so much longer (and life expectancy continues to rise, meaning more people will be expecting help from the government as they enter senior-hood).
But the biggest problem is the recession. People aren't spending money because companies are laying people off, etc etc. We've got to get our nation exchanging money again. It seems like the government is the only entity in this country with the ability to inject money into the system and hope people start using it. We can't keep cutting taxes, since that'd mean even LESS money is going to the government while people expect MORE expenditures and benefits.
So in the end, we're stuck with a giant decision: Do we go into massive debt in order to save the economy of this country and then hope we can pay it off, or do we stop borrowing money and just let our debt accumulate slower while more people enter unemployment and homelessness? - JigoroKano, on 03/26/2009, -0/+3Communists took over Czechoslovakia by democratic means. That does not make them part of the U.S.S.R.. They eventually broke off into the Czech Republic and Slovakia as their communist government failed.
- JayTee44, on 03/26/2009, -4/+7Once again, a diversion about the hated 'W'.
Very little of the money now being spent is going towards infrastructure.
The overwhelming size of the expenditure will keep us in debt. - Pssdoff, on 03/26/2009, -0/+3You don't have to be an economist to see that 'business as usual' isn't going to work anymore.
- masamunecyrus, on 03/27/2009, -0/+3"And to preserve their independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude." -- Thomas Jefferson
And to the inevitable result of such vast amounts of debt:
"A nation trying to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to pull himself up by the handles." -- Sir Winston Churchill - JayTee44, on 03/26/2009, -3/+61. Yahoo Finance is conservative? Not.
2. Conservatives are WORRIED. The whole Obama trip is looking like a disaster. - VisualRhetoric, on 03/25/2009, -1/+4"***** economist"...where the "trickle-down effect" means something completely different.
- tracespeck, on 03/25/2009, -2/+5Problems can be solved by fixing broken/bad government policy rather then spending. Instead they are spending, creating more problems (more bad policy), and doing nothing to fix the old ones. Bush was completely clueless, Obama is smart but just plain wrong on economic issues, spending isn't how you solve problems.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 174 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is