Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

seems like the clunkers program has had some decent results.

redsamurai

redsamurai

Banned
I dunno, but it's getting people to A)buy more efficient cars
B) has gotten the smoking steel traps that permeate our nostrils with benzene off the road

and C) has gotten people to buy cars, especially cars that are built in N.America.


is it that bad? Honestly I'd rather have the govt. doing stuff like this right now rather than bull rushing through a healtcare plan. This is the kind of stuff which actually "stimulates" the economy. And it kills a couple birds with one stone.
 
It's one of the few bailout programs that's working as we speak.
 
Dial_tone said:
It's one of the few bailout programs that's working as we speak.
Click to expand...


I wish they'd give the healthcare a rest for awhile. They need a little better plan for that one. Programs like the clunker are actually pretty ingenious. It seems like everybody wins with that one, well almost everybody at least. :whatever:

And the contention that it's merely stimulating the japanese economy is disingenuine at best, completely and utterly purposefully misleading though is more like it. Those jap cars people are buying are made here in the states by american workers. It's not the high dollar models made oversea's that are experincing the jump. So basically people are sour that it's the japanese boardrooms that are happiest? Go see a Ford boardroom and see if they're pissed off by the increase in high mileage car sales. They're happy too......which makes me wonder who's really pissed off?
 
redsamurai said:
I wish they'd give the healthcare a rest for awhile. They need a little better plan for that one. Programs like the clunker are actually pretty ingenious. It seems like everybody wins with that one, well almost everybody at least. :whatever:

And the contention that it's merely stimulating the japanese economy is disingenuine at best, completely and utterly purposefully misleading though is more like it. Those jap cars people are buying are made here in the states by american workers. It's not the high dollar models made oversea's that are experincing the jump. So basically people are sour that it's the japanese boardrooms that are happiest? Go see a Ford boardroom and see if they're pissed off by the increase in high mileage car sales. They're happy too......which makes me wonder who's really pissed off?
Click to expand...
I agree. I don't see the point in rushing thru a Healthcare bill that nobody has time to read first.

I read that one of the auto plants has people on overtime now, which means the next step for them is hiring back more workers.
 
i think the majority of cars purchased are foreign designed.. and if a honda or benz built in the usa with non union labor..

and just think of it this way.. a portion of your income/tax is paying for that new car you see the idiot driving..

spreading it around.. i thought that was money.. not bull shit..
 
sadly my 10 year old work car with almost 180,000 miles doesn't qualify. wtf
And to top it off, went looking at cars on monday, not a single dealership would come off of sticker price. Not one. b.s.

Whiskey
 
redsamurai said:
I dunno, but it's getting people to A)buy more efficient cars
B) has gotten the smoking steel traps that permeate our nostrils with benzene off the road

and C) has gotten people to buy cars, especially cars that are built in N.America.


is it that bad? Honestly I'd rather have the govt. doing stuff like this right now rather than bull rushing through a healtcare plan. This is the kind of stuff which actually "stimulates" the economy. And it kills a couple birds with one stone.
Click to expand...

This is incorrect. The economy has been damaged by cash for clunkers. Firstly cash for clunkers did not get people to buy cars. What cash for clunkers did is increase government expenditures to entice people into accumulating more debt. The cars are generally paid for with debt via bank loans, which lends itself to further inflation. The subsidy wasn't just free cash that fell from the sky either. The government shunted taxpayer money into the program, so the cars were subsidized by good taxpayer money that could have been put to use in productive industry instead of disposable consumer purchases. Also most of the cars bought were foreign, not domestic. What this means is that the US government took tax payer revenue which could have been put to use in production and not only used it to entice indebting Americans. They took American tax payer money, gave the bulk of it to foreign companies, and also caused Americans to become indebted to foreign consumer good producers, not even American consumer good producers.

Whiskey also brings up an excellent point. The dealers know that you are coming in enticed by a huge subsidy and compensate by keeping the selling price higher. Your cash for clunker subsidy is really their opportunity to up the selling price. The American consumer and taxpayer lost. Cash for clunkers was a win for the Japanese economy, not the American economy.
 
Jacob Creutzfeldt said:
This is incorrect. The economy has been damaged by cash for clunkers. Firstly cash for clunkers did not get people to buy cars. What cash for clunkers did is increase government expenditures to entice people into accumulating more debt. The cars are generally paid for with debt via bank loans, which lends itself to further inflation. The subsidy wasn't just free cash that fell from the sky either. The government shunted taxpayer money into the program, so the cars were subsidized by good taxpayer money that could have been put to use in productive industry instead of disposable consumer purchases. Also most of the cars bought were foreign, not domestic. What this means is that the US government took tax payer revenue which could have been put to use in production and not only used it to entice indebting Americans. They took American tax payer money, gave the bulk of it to foreign companies, and also caused Americans to become indebted to foreign consumer good producers, not even American consumer good producers. Cash for clunkers was a win for the Japanese economy, not the American economy.
Click to expand...

and the US Car Dealers
and the banks making the loans (interest income)
and the US made autos sold

I bet it is closer to a break even for the government. They are using $4500 to get gas guzzlers off the street and creating about $20k in commerce. Also, remember a lot of those japanese cars are made in the USA.

The reason this is one is smart and worked, we borrowed it from the Germans. It had already been test driven there.
 
Last edited:
billfred said:
and the US Car Dealers
and the banks making the loans (interest income)
and the US made autos sold

I bet it is closer to a break even for the government. They are using $4500 to get gas guzzlers off the streat and crating about $20k in commerce. Also, remember a lot of those japanese cars are made in the USA.

The reason this is one is smart and worked, we borrowed it from the Germans. It had already been test driven there.
Click to expand...

The bank made loans, but by way of fractional reserve banking which is going to increase inflation in the long run. Debt and finance does not increase economic productivity. The government never 'breaks even'. The government spends too much money and it perpetually operates at a loss, hence the US deficit of 1.7 trillion plus dollars. America could be loaned to the hilt for consumer goods and guess what happens? Negative economic effects. Just look at what the government inspired housing market became. If they get "gas guzzlers" off the street doesn't that decrease American sales of petroleum? Don't mechanics that could have maintained and repaired salvageable vehicles take a hit now? Why would buying some American cars at the expense of American petroleum companies and mechanics equal a net increase in commerce? It doesn't matter if those cars are assembled in America. The sales and demands cause an increase in foreign production, marketing, and competition in the United States. Foreign sales outpace American sales and foreign car dealerships pop up where american dealerships could have. Those foreign companies in the US are in the US because it is profitable to them, not the American economy. The money could have been better spent on American production. These cars are disposable goods. The government could have subsidized the purchases of DVD players, air conditioners, or air hockey tables. I tend to think long range effects, not immediate results. Americans should be saving, not spending.

Wouldn't it be a hoot if the government created an automotive bubble? They'll drive up the cost of automobiles with subsidies and low interest loans making cars less affordable. To compensate they will force the banks to loosen credit standards so now many a Joe Blow, properly employed or not, able to afford it or not, can go out and get a new car then default on the loan.
 
The most common whining I see from the wingnuts about this plan is that they keep screeching that the plan is bad because it makes people buy things and drives them deeper into debt.

Which is silly. No one forces anyone to buy anything. And people already in debt - at least the ones acting halfway responsible - are not going to buy anything anyway and dig deeper. The irresponsible ones probably have no credit to buy them with anyway.

I think the plan has great potential to help people in need and gives a chance to help jump start one part of the economy.

Let's face it, the economy is not going to recover as a whole overnight or all areas on the same basis. But you got to start somewhere.
 
Jacob Creutzfeldt said:
The bank made loans, but by way of fractional reserve banking which is going to increase inflation in the long run. Debt and finance does not increase economic productivity. The government never 'breaks even'. The government spends too much money and it perpetually operates at a loss, hence the US deficit of 1.7 trillion plus dollars. America could be loaned to the hilt for consumer goods and guess what happens? Negative economic effects. Just look at what the government inspired housing market became. If they get "gas guzzlers" off the street doesn't that decrease American sales of petroleum? Don't mechanics that could have maintained and repaired salvageable vehicles take a hit now? Why would buying some American cars at the expense of American petroleum companies and mechanics equal a net increase in commerce? It doesn't matter if those cars are assembled in America. The sales and demands cause an increase in foreign production, marketing, and competition in the United States. Foreign sales outpace American sales and foreign car dealerships pop up where american dealerships could have. Those foreign companies in the US are in the US because it is profitable to them, not the American economy. The money could have been better spent on American production. These cars are disposable goods. The government could have subsidized the purchases of DVD players, air conditioners, or air hockey tables. I tend to think long range effects, not immediate results. Americans should be saving, not spending.

Wouldn't it be a hoot if the government created an automotive bubble? They'll drive up the cost of automobiles with subsidies and low interest loans making cars less affordable. To compensate they will force the banks to loosen credit standards so now many a Joe Blow, properly employed or not, able to afford it or not, can go out and get a new car then default on the loan.
Click to expand...

I agree with a lot of what you say but once I got to your the comment about decreasing american petroleum sales I realized you are too dumb to carry on a debate with.
 
AAP said:
The most common whining I see from the wingnuts about this plan is that they keep screeching that the plan is bad because it makes people buy things and drives them deeper into debt.

Which is silly. No one forces anyone to buy anything. And people already in debt - at least the ones acting halfway responsible - are not going to buy anything anyway and dig deeper. The irresponsible ones probably have no credit to buy them with anyway.

I think the plan has great potential to help people in need and gives a chance to help jump start one part of the economy.

Let's face it, the economy is not going to recover as a whole overnight or all areas on the same basis. But you got to start somewhere.
Click to expand...

I am trading in an old cadillac I bought my son when he got his license because he is moving away to college and I want him to have something that is more economical to drive back home and something new that I don't have to worry about breaking down.

This program is perfect for me and I will pay cash for the new car so it will work for a stalled economy as well.

Without the program, I would have waited another year to make the purchase.
 
The markets seem to think it's working.
 
Jacob's a good guy, I don't like someone calling him too stupid to debate with. He's a good dude. But I have to agree that I am also "miffed" at the decreasing american petroleum sales comment. Isn't that somehow implying that the dinosauric pieces of shit still running around out there are good for our economy? Good for petroleum yes.......you must have stock in oil or something, lol.

As for the point about the money going to foreign auto companies, I don't see Detroit complaining about this. And I also read that the majority of those foreing cars are being made by americans. So to say that this money is propping up foreign economies is disingenuine. But the point about creating debt through the fractional reserve system is completely and wholly valid. I just learned about that whole bullshit a few months back. It's one of Ron Paul's personal peeves, and if the majority of all you really learned how that system works....well any rational person would have an issue there. But it is what it is. That system isn't coming down unless the Fed is completely dismantled. That's obviously not going to happen for a cold minute so I still hold that this C.F.Clunkers program really does seem like a good idea. Getting those shit cars off the road just by itself is WONDERFUL!
 
billfred said:
I am trading in an old cadillac I bought my son when he got his license because he is moving away to college and I want him to have something that is more economical to drive back home and something new that I don't have to worry about breaking down.

This program is perfect for me and I will pay cash for the new car so it will work for a stalled economy as well.

Without the program, I would have waited another year to make the purchase.
Click to expand...

you sonofabitch!


your BMW just went up in price. :)
 
Yeah let's see how great it is when all these new car payment contineu to default next year, wall st falls, more banks demand bailouts cuz of car payment defaults and more of you losers lose your jobs as a result. ha! Yep, income and jobs around the country are down - so let's put them in new cars with new car payments! Sweet!!

replace 'higher car sales' with 'higher house sales' and you got 2004. Well that worked out great didn't it?

r
 
Razorguns said:
Yeah let's see how great it is when all these new car payment contineu to default next year, wall st falls, more banks demand bailouts cuz of car payment defaults and more of you losers lose your jobs as a result. ha! Yep, income and jobs around the country are down - so let's put them in new cars with new car payments! Sweet!!

replace 'higher car sales' with 'higher house sales' and you got 2004. Well that worked out great didn't it?

r
Click to expand...


Clarify for me one thing, are they getting the cash for these cars in lieu of proving they're buying a new high mileage vehicle? Or are they just getting the cash and then people can do what they want with it?

If the second is true, than it's not the program that is getting these people in the new cars. They still have to qualify for the loan. Yes, with $4500 in their pocket they can put more down and therefor qualify for less.........but unless we abolish the Fed anytime soon, the notion of debt expanding the economy isn't going away. I still like the idea of those cars getting off the damn road. Enough so that I could tolerate more consuer debt.


and could you please stop calling people who may disagree with you or have a different opinion "losers".
 
yup, checked out a maxima... mofo's won't come down from sticker. Said that they can't... wtf. Do they not think I can use the internet to find a better deal?

Whiskey
 
redsamurai said:
Clarify for me one thing, are they getting the cash for these cars in lieu of proving they're buying a new high mileage vehicle? Or are they just getting the cash and then people can do what they want with it?

If the second is true, than it's not the program that is getting these people in the new cars. They still have to qualify for the loan. Yes, with $4500 in their pocket they can put more down and therefor qualify for less.........but unless we abolish the Fed anytime soon, the notion of debt expanding the economy isn't going away. I still like the idea of those cars getting off the damn road. Enough so that I could tolerate more consuer debt.


and could you please stop calling people who may disagree with you or have a different opinion "losers".
Click to expand...

losers = people who follow others make stupid decisions then bitch and whine about it later. ie: losers.

There are two ways of handling this program

1) Take the $4,000 rebate and going "Hey I can get a $18,000 for $14,000! Sweet.

or

2) Take the $4,000 rebate and going "Hey I can get a $22,000 car for $18,000! Sweet.

Take a wild guess which option most people are goign to choose?

r
 
so it's not really putting people in cars that they can't normally afford. The monthly payments are monthy payments. It's not as if this program is forcing dealerships and/or banks to give them the car even if they don't qualify. Basically you're not going to cash in a clunker and then go try to buy a 50k car.



Razorguns said:
losers = people who follow others make stupid decisions then bitch and whine about it later. ie: losers.

There are two ways of handling this program

1) Take the $4,000 rebate and going "Hey I can get a $18,000 for $14,000! Sweet.

or

2) Take the $4,000 rebate and going "Hey I can get a $22,000 car for $18,000! Sweet.

Take a wild guess which option most people are goign to choose?

r
Click to expand...
 
redsamurai said:
so it's not really putting people in cars that they can't normally afford. The monthly payments are monthy payments. It's not as if this program is forcing dealerships and/or banks to give them the car even if they don't qualify. Basically you're not going to cash in a clunker and then go try to buy a 50k car.
Click to expand...

lol. You sound like a bear stearns exec in 2003! "It's not like we're putting people in homes they can't afford!" hahahahaha!

r
 
billfred said:
I agree with a lot of what you say but once I got to your the comment about decreasing american petroleum sales I realized you are too dumb to carry on a debate with.
Click to expand...

You confess to not even bother to read the bulk of my arguments, cut off the debate without a single counterpoint, personally attack me, then claim I am the one who cannot carry on a debate? Do you see the whole mess of contradictions in what you said?
 
Razorguns said:
lol. You sound like a bear stearns exec in 2003! "It's not like we're putting people in homes they can't afford!" hahahahaha!

r
Click to expand...

2009 != 2003. Dealers have no desire to send a tow truck out at 2AM to reclaim the vehicle. Credit markets are still tight.
 
redsamurai said:
Jacob's a good guy, I don't like someone calling him too stupid to debate with. He's a good dude. But I have to agree that I am also "miffed" at the decreasing american petroleum sales comment. Isn't that somehow implying that the dinosauric pieces of shit still running around out there are good for our economy? Good for petroleum yes.......you must have stock in oil or something, lol.

As for the point about the money going to foreign auto companies, I don't see Detroit complaining about this. And I also read that the majority of those foreing cars are being made by americans. So to say that this money is propping up foreign economies is disingenuine. But the point about creating debt through the fractional reserve system is completely and wholly valid. I just learned about that whole bullshit a few months back. It's one of Ron Paul's personal peeves, and if the majority of all you really learned how that system works....well any rational person would have an issue there. But it is what it is. That system isn't coming down unless the Fed is completely dismantled. That's obviously not going to happen for a cold minute so I still hold that this C.F.Clunkers program really does seem like a good idea. Getting those shit cars off the road just by itself is WONDERFUL!
Click to expand...

Keeping those cars on the road is good for the economy. I can understand your point about the 'clunkers' being worse for the environment, but I think that is debatable also. The clunkers are good for the economy because not going into debt to buy more disposable domestic and especially foreign goods promotes savings. Savings increase the capital available for domestic production. Savings also generally cause banks to decrease interest rates making more capital available to loan for production.

In terms of pollution, have you asked yourself where the clunkers cashed in go? If so do you know how much pollution is created crushing these cars down and transporting them to China? What about the pollution created during the manufacture and transport of the new cars that replace the clunkers?

I think many people are looking at this program in too much of a bubble isolated from the rest of reality. The money to finance the program doesn't magically appear without consequence. These clunkers do not magically disappear without creating pollution. The new cars replacing the clunkers do not magically appear without creating pollution also.

Also what people seem to ignore economically is the law of supply and demand and it's effect. If you have the government subsidizing car purchases, you will increase the demand for new cars. If you increase the demand you will increase the selling price as seen in Whiskey's earlier post. For somebody like me who lives at the poverty line, what am I to do if cars go up in price when my car dies? My options become less. Now I either have to take out a loan I cannot afford or buy an even worse piece of shit THAT WILL HAVE INCREASED EMISSIONS. Therefore I will now create greater pollution and have to pay even more to create that greater pollution.
 
Razorguns said:
lol. You sound like a bear stearns exec in 2003! "It's not like we're putting people in homes they can't afford!" hahahahaha!

r
Click to expand...

We disagree often, but you are spot on here in my opinion. I think the people who make the loans get paid for making the loans, not for making loans to people who will actually pay the loan back.
 
Dial_tone said:
2009 != 2003. Dealers have no desire to send a tow truck out at 2AM to reclaim the vehicle. Credit markets are still tight.
Click to expand...

And what bank wants a house or condo they loaned half a million on and can now liquidate for only one hundred grand? Do you realize that this is the same thing we were told about the housing market until 2008?
 
I think the prefix predatory belongs to both parties. What doesn't seem to get as much mention as the "predatory lenders" is the "predatory borrowers".

My former room mate is a predatory borrower. He lies about his income and employment status to get credit that he can never repay extended to him. I threw him out shortly after I discovered his scam. He was using a landline in my name to run his scam. He tried to get me to pretend that I was his employer and say that he made 70K a year to get more credit extended to him so he could keep up with the minimums on his credit card debt. He hasn't held a real job in over a decade.
 
Jacob Creutzfeldt said:
My former room mate is a predatory borrower. He lies about his income and employment status to get credit that he can never repay extended to him. I threw him out shortly after I discovered his scam. He was using a landline in my name to run his scam. He tried to get me to pretend that I was his employer and say that he made 70K a year to get more credit extended to him so he could keep up with the minimums on his credit card debt. He hasn't held a real job in over a decade.
Click to expand...

He needs to die!
 
This is something people don't seem to get. The subsidy is going to make cars more expensive if it goes on. It's supply and demand. The supply of money has effectively been increased to the auto industry with the subsidy. The demand for cars has gone up due to the subsidy. Soon the selling price of the cars will exceed the money allocated for the subsidy. Look at Whiskey's post on the first page of this thread. The upselling has already begun. I challenge anyone familiar with economics to prove me wrong.
 
Jacob Creutzfeldt said:
This is something people don't seem to get. The subsidy is going to make cars more expensive if it goes on. It's supply and demand. The money supply of money has effectively been increased to the auto industry with the subsidy. The demand for cars has gone up due to the subsidy. Soon the selling price of the cars will exceed the money allocated for the subsidy. I challenge anyone familiar with economics to prove me wrong.
Click to expand...

No you're right. It's already happening.
 
It won't last. Those prices will come down and what we see is people opting for the high mileage vehicles which in the short term does increase the prices somewhat...but in the long run it means that the american auto companies will wake up and start competing in that market which will bring the prices down again. And when Indai and China sell their 5000 dollar cars here, that will force the corolla class of cars to drop in price. It remains to be seen but i think in the long run this is going to be a good thing.
 
redsamurai said:
It won't last. Those prices will come down and what we see is people opting for the high mileage vehicles which in the short term does increase the prices somewhat...but in the long run it means that the american auto companies will wake up and start competing in that market which will bring the prices down again. And when Indai and China sell their 5000 dollar cars here, that will force the corolla class of cars to drop in price. It remains to be seen but i think in the long run this is going to be a good thing.
Click to expand...

Prices wont come down until the cash for clunkers program stops or manufacturers start overproducing cars. The demand is going up and the amount of money available for the purchase of new vehicles is going up. It's called inflation. All other factors equal, you can't increase the money supply without increasing prices. That's why houses shot up in value during the 90's and 2000's. Prices didn't start falling until builders started overproducing houses and people began defaulting on loans causing a tightening of lending standards which stopped speculative buying of real estate. I'm betting house prices are shooting up again as the Fed lowered interest rates and the government is now offering $8000 tax credits to homebuyers thereby increasing the money supply to the housing market.
 
Jacob Creutzfeldt said:
This is something people don't seem to get. The subsidy is going to make cars more expensive if it goes on. It's supply and demand. The supply of money has effectively been increased to the auto industry with the subsidy. The demand for cars has gone up due to the subsidy. Soon the selling price of the cars will exceed the money allocated for the subsidy. Look at Whiskey's post on the first page of this thread. The upselling has already begun. I challenge anyone familiar with economics to prove me wrong.
Click to expand...
By your logic any economic recovery will also raise demand and therefore raise the price of cars. Perhaps we should stay in recession so the price of cars will stay low. Most ridiculous argument ever.
 
Dial_tone said:
By your logic any economic recovery will also raise demand and therefore raise the price of cars. Perhaps we should stay in recession so the price of cars will stay low. Most ridiculous argument ever.
Click to expand...

A true economic recovery will cause almost all prices to drop. Part of an economic recovery requires that the current money supply contracts. Recovery is not about getting people to buy more things. Recovery at this point would revolve around the United States increasing savings and producing products instead of accumulating debt and spending money on foreign products.

The prices of cars are already too high, they are not low. The stimulus will cause the prices of cars to go from too high to even higher, not from low to higher. The average price of a new car in 1980 was around $7200. Can you even buy a "cheap" older model new car today for that price today?

You are assuming that the government can spend it's way out of US a recession. This is not the case. Markets need to contract. America's GDP is based on almost 70% debt and consumption. You cannot consume more than you produce and continue to prosper. These "stimulus" packages are only going to make the situation worse in the long run. "Stimulus" packages are part of the cause of the recession, not the antidote. The housing bubble was created by similar "stimulus" packages. The recession will prevent a depression. The Reagan administration induced a recession in the early 80's to head off a depression.

We need the recession. That's what many people don't understand. The US economy is where it is in part as the result of low interest rates and government subsidies in various industries. You can call it ridiculous, but all of these "stimulus" packages and low interest rates cause inflation and bad investments.

I know the temptation is to not admit that the US needs to face the music and pay the piper for a long economic boom caused by overconsumption and debt. The government doesn't want to let the US go through a hard recession as it may kill the politicians' ability to get re-elected.
 
milo hobgoblin said:
fixt

nice to see "something" from this stimulus plan is actually doing effective
Click to expand...

The Goldman Sachs cash infusion is going gangbusters. We'll easily profit on that one. The stimulus money given to states to make payroll and avoid layoffs has definitely worked. The extensions of unemployment benefits, COBRA benefits, and assistance with home foreclosure avoidance has also worked.

When unemployment went up in June Repubs were all over it saying "see, I told you Obama's plan isn't working." Even when numbers are good they still won't give him credit for anything. It's just coincidence the Dow is up hugerific. Stevie Wonder could see that things are looking better.
 
Dial_tone said:
The Goldman Sachs cash infusion is going gangbusters. We'll easily profit on that one. The stimulus money given to states to make payroll and avoid layoffs has definitely worked. The extensions of unemployment benefits, COBRA benefits, and assistance with home foreclosure avoidance has also worked.

When unemployment went up in June Repubs were all over it saying "see, I told you Obama's plan isn't working." Even when numbers are good they still won't give him credit for anything. It's just coincidence the Dow is up hugerific. Stevie Wonder could see that things are looking better.
Click to expand...

I think you look at things with too short sighted of a lense. You consider government spending and welfare as progress. To follow this to a logical conclusion the economy would be great if everyone either went on welfare or worked for a government bureaucracy. People who work for the government produce nothing and only consume. Who is going to produce? Current numbers may be better, but you aren't looking at things over a long haul. One purpose of stimulus packages is to make numbers look better. Numbers looked great in say 2001 while the government was helping to inflate the housing bubble. How did they look come 2008? Things look better, but the effect is temporary. Historically during recessions and depressions, there are strong market rallies. Recessions and depressions are not linear downfalls, they are trends over time.

The Dow is up, but the Dow is denominated in inflating US dollars. Look at the dollar index. In general the buying power of the dollar is falling. If you compare the Dow to the price of assets such as gold, I bet it is either not increasing significantly or falling.

I have no political stake in this. I am neither Democrat nor Republican. I am a low income full time student who lives in fear of what the future holds due to my studies in economics. I experience what happens first hand with a lot of inflationary policies because they destroy the lower class.
 
you have a point jacob, a very good one. But what you fail to realize is that to do what you're talking about would require a complete overhaul of our financial infrastructure. I'm not sure you realize what that entails. I'm all for it, but it has to happen gradually and it can't be done in a recession. Do you think the fed can be dismantled in a few months? This system is so intricate and convaluted, and purposefully so, that it's going to take a long time to untangle. In the meantime we have no choice but to live with the system and something has to be done to stabilize it. If we let it collapse and just say when the dust settles we'll start over.........that is what you need to be worried about. We let that happen and y'all better be building sandbags around your house with a few .50 cal nests placed strategically. That's not a joke. People like to think it would only be minorities that would be hit by such a restructuring........uhhh, no. Letting our current system just lapse is in theory a good idea, but in practicality it probably means civil war.
 
Obama should carry this further. Cash for Clunker Houses. Buy up shitty houses to put poor people into newer bigger homes. Give banks trillions to make it real easy to get mortgages. What u all say? Let's take it to the next step, recession would be over!!! Come on!! Woot Woot!

r
 
Jacob Creutzfeldt said:
I think you look at things with too short sighted of a lense. You consider government spending and welfare as progress. To follow this to a logical conclusion the economy would be great if everyone either went on welfare or worked for a government bureaucracy. People who work for the government produce nothing and only consume. Who is going to produce? Current numbers may be better, but you aren't looking at things over a long haul. One purpose of stimulus packages is to make numbers look better. Numbers looked great in say 2001 while the government was helping to inflate the housing bubble. How did they look come 2008? Things look better, but the effect is temporary. Historically during recessions and depressions, there are strong market rallies. Recessions and depressions are not linear downfalls, they are trends over time.

The Dow is up, but the Dow is denominated in inflating US dollars. Look at the dollar index. In general the buying power of the dollar is falling. If you compare the Dow to the price of assets such as gold, I bet it is either not increasing significantly or falling.

I have no political stake in this. I am neither Democrat nor Republican. I am a low income full time student who lives in fear of what the future holds due to my studies in economics. I experience what happens first hand with a lot of inflationary policies because they destroy the lower class.
Click to expand...
I studied Business in college as well. You are like the single author writing a book on parenting. The book says if I add 1 + 1 + 1 I'll get 3 but what I have now is 2. Why isn't it matching up with the book? There's book knowledge...and there's the reality of real life.

BTW, people who work for the government produce a service, which is as tangible as most any good. Policemen, Firemen, postal workers and teachers only consume? Seriously. They'll be quite perturbed to discover that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
  • Locked
Natural post cycle therapy. Holistic cycle support . The drug and steroid user Bible
Replies
70
Views
410K
Fitstitch
Fitstitch
future
Hit q & a
Replies
2
Views
3K
future
future
SouthernLord
Another Carb Cycling Diet Thread
Replies
10
Views
7K
nelsonclassic
N
Tatyana
Training Manual
Replies
3
Views
3K
seerer3
S
eat big
Article about Katrina...
Replies
0
Views
602
eat big
eat big
Top Bottom