bush_cheney2004 Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Not according to Ben Bernanke:... Like I said, that would be US fiscal policy, not monetary policy, which is the Fed's doing. The US economy will see slow but positive economic growth for several more years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Like I said, that would be US fiscal policy, not monetary policy, which is the Fed's doing. The US economy will see slow but positive economic growth for several more years. I wasn't talking about that. I showed that the economy is not recovering well at all, and is on the verge of faltering. Why would those who received bailout money be able to pay it back with interest, when the recovery is on the verge of faltering, they need yet another stimulus. Bernanke says it did not work as they planned. Will they give money again to those companies that are still faltering? And now they are busy printing more "funny money". Because they are lying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maple_leafs182 Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Irrelevant....US fiscal policy has far more impact than monetary policy. Bailed out financials have paid back their TARP loans plus interest. GM and Chrysler have not. I am not sure what you mean by "we". You are wrong. The fed is the enabler to large US fiscal policies. The Fed continues to pump money into banks, a lot of that money is going into US bonds, if the Fed did not do that then the US government would be forced to change its fiscal policies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 You are wrong. The fed is the enabler to large US fiscal policies. The Fed continues to pump money into banks, a lot of that money is going into US bonds, if the Fed did not do that then the US government would be forced to change its fiscal policies. The US had always sold debt to domestic and international buyers. Interest rates are quite low at the time and more debt is very attractive in the short term. Make no mistake here...the USA's economic future is far more dependent on government spending than games with by the Fed, which is really out of ammunition at this point, including QE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 I wasn't talking about that. I showed that the economy is not recovering well at all, and is on the verge of faltering. Let it falter then..that is always a possibility. Why would those who received bailout money be able to pay it back with interest, when the recovery is on the verge of faltering, they need yet another stimulus. You are confusing American domestic politics with Wall Street banking and the write offs for bad paper. Bernanke says it did not work as they planned. Will they give money again to those companies that are still faltering? I doubt that...not in an election year. The "Jobs Act" is an altogether different idea, a la FDR's NRA. And now they are busy printing more "funny money". Because they are lying. It's not funny money....you would not refuse it...even in Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted October 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 It never gets old how leftists ramble on and on about the evil corporations, never realizing that corporations are collections of real flesh and blood human beings. We're counting on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 We're counting on it. More meaningless phrases huh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) More meaningless phrases huh. I certainly didn't understand it. Remember, corporations are evil machines bent on destroying the world, not collections of flesh and blood human beings people working towards a common purpose in their self-interest. Edited October 10, 2011 by Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPCFTW Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) I wasn't talking about that. I showed that the economy is not recovering well at all, and is on the verge of faltering. Why would those who received bailout money be able to pay it back with interest, when the recovery is on the verge of faltering, they need yet another stimulus. Bernanke says it did not work as they planned. Will they give money again to those companies that are still faltering? And now they are busy printing more "funny money". Because they are lying. You seem to have trouble distinguishing between the economy and Wall Street banks. They are not one and the same. The economy faltering has nothing to do with Wall Street banks this time around. In fact, it has more to do with your precious socialist ideologies bankrupting some European economies and slowing global growth. The Wall Street banks are not asking for stimulus spending, it is a policy to appease voters. Edited October 10, 2011 by CPCFTW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 That is a weird question. I was just pointing out 1 in roughly 3 Canadians belongs to a credit union, with 11 Million Canadians having themselves a membership. That is quite a lot of people involved in the Co Op banking movement, there must be a reason. So your summation that if there was a Need for Co Ops we would see a society with a lot of them is a bit silly because you live in a country with A lot of Co Ops. At least in the Banking sector. I would also point out the Canola plant which is one of the largest Cash crops in Canada came from a government program. It was created after WW2 to find a use for all the Rapeseed the farmers were growing because while the oil was great WW2 it wasn't good for eating. It was not a Capitalist program in the least it was a government funded money losing program for the better good of farmers. Guess what it worked. Capitalism isn't the end all and be all. And I would also like to point out that without corporate investment the canola industry would have gone nowhere. Without the capitalist form of funding canola would not be a cash crop it is today. There isn't enough dollars in the public sector to research and develop crop varieties on the magnitude the big boys can, and the big boys can get results. The private sector research has produced far better canola plants far faster than the old method of public investment. The canola industry is one of the most capitalistic aspects of canadian agriculture and its little wonder that its the fastest growing and most successful part of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted October 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 I certainly didn't understand it. Remember, corporations are evil machines bent on destroying the world, not collections of flesh and blood human beings people working towards a common purpose in their self-interest. some Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 In fact, it has more to do with your precious socialist ideologies bankrupting some European economies and slowing global growth. The Wall Street banks are not asking for stimulus spending, it is a policy to appease voters. Oh I see, and so handing out billions of tax payers money to keep banks alive, that is ok. It's not "socialism". And the fact that it did not succeed is someone else's fault, absolves the government and banks of any blame. Nothing to see here folks, move along... move along. "It is a policy to appease voters"... we see how well appeased they are. The banks did not live up to their obligations. They did not use the money to increase lending. Why should they? Interest rates are too damned low. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 The US is already at a 16% unemployment rate. Bailing out those companies out didn't solve any problems. At least if we let the companies fail we could of got rid of all the bad debt. It would be 3 years later, we may of been back to growth instead of continuing to have a teetering global economy. An interview with Dr. Robert Shapiro who is an adviser to the IMF says that if Greece isn't bailed out then there could be a crisis worse then 08'. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsXg_kn-vYY&feature=feeduAll these bail outs have done to solve our problem is a temporary fix, we kicked the can down the road and made the problems larger. The people are protesting wall street, wall street is the financial sector, they are protesting the financial sector...the financial sector is the problem, not the corporations. You guys have to start looking at monetary policy...the reason these corporations are so large and are goblin up all the wealth is because we give them easy access to capitol. We favour them over other the little guys, if they make bad bets we bail them out and take on the debt. This isn't a left vs right issue, this is an up vs down issue. While I don't disagree with you about monetary policy OR the current level of REAL unemployment in the US,if those auto company bial outs had not have happened (by the way,those loans are well on thier way to being repaid),consider the employment chasm North America would have fallen in to.. Let's say we did what the Free Marketeers wanted (which was more about trying to kill the UAW/CAW,but that's another issue)and GM and Chrysler went under and driectly depp-6'd 10's of thousands of jobs... Consider how that would have effected the feeder industries to the auto industry,specifically the automotive sector.Remember,Toyota and Honda all advocated for a bailout because they both knew the major disruptions in suppliers would hurt them also... Then consider the secondary industries of steel production,and the massive lay offs that would have occurred because of a lack of demand... Then consider the primary industries of dolomitic limestone,iron ore,and,coal production that would have certainly taken a serious hit... Then consider all the ancillary industries that feed all of those,and the cascading ripple effects throughout the enitre economy and we've got Depression era ,real unemployment numbers staring us in the face. And people think these Occupy Wall Street demonstrations are a little annoying... Undoubtedly,however,the same Free Marketeering yutz's would still be mocking those out of work and collectively trying to do something about it in that horrific scenario as they are now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 While I don't disagree with you about monetary policy OR the current level of REAL unemployment in the US,if those auto company bial outs had not have happened (by the way,those loans are well on thier way to being repaid),consider the employment chasm North America would have fallen in to.. Let's say we did what the Free Marketeers wanted (which was more about trying to kill the UAW/CAW,but that's another issue)and GM and Chrysler went under and driectly depp-6'd 10's of thousands of jobs... Consider how that would have effected the feeder industries to the auto industry,specifically the automotive sector.Remember,Toyota and Honda all advocated for a bailout because they both knew the major disruptions in suppliers would hurt them also... Then consider the secondary industries of steel production,and the massive lay offs that would have occurred because of a lack of demand... Then consider the primary industries of dolomitic limestone,iron ore,and,coal production that would have certainly taken a serious hit... Then consider all the ancillary industries that feed all of those,and the cascading ripple effects throughout the enitre economy and we've got Depression era ,real unemployment numbers staring us in the face. And people think these Occupy Wall Street demonstrations are a little annoying... Undoubtedly,however,the same Free Marketeering yutz's would still be mocking those out of work and collectively trying to do something about it in that horrific scenario as they are now... And where is the money going to come to keep that house of cards called the auto industry afloat. North americans are already indebted heavily. Perhaps buying trinkets called cars every year or so with borrowed money that people can't afford to pay back isn't a good idea. I don't think you get it, various governments and many people in the western world are broke because they took on too much debt and can't create enough wealth to pay it back. Bailing out the auto industrty would be as pointless as paying people to dig holes and fill them in the next day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 And where is the money going to come to keep that house of cards called the auto industry afloat. North americans are already indebted heavily. Perhaps buying trinkets called cars every year or so with borrowed money that people can't afford to pay back isn't a good idea. I don't think you get it, various governments and many people in the western world are broke because they took on too much debt and can't create enough wealth to pay it back. Bailing out the auto industrty would be as pointless as paying people to dig holes and fill them in the next day. I agree... Indebtedness is a form of slavery... But you seem to be advocating for (not shockingly) 25% unemployment and a decimation of our standard of living??? I mean,we can't create any wealth because folks like you have chosen/advocated for cheaper labour and shareholder value in low wage/standard of living jurisdictions over anything else... In essence,your ilk have given us the consumer based economy/service sector economy we have now over the one we used to have where we actually produced things..And the resultant stagnant wage/standard of living problems that are now coming home to roost... "Let the Free Market reign!!!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 I agree... Indebtedness is a form of slavery... But you seem to be advocating for (not shockingly) 25% unemployment and a decimation of our standard of living??? I mean,we can't create any wealth because folks like you have chosen/advocated for cheaper labour and shareholder value in low wage/standard of living jurisdictions over anything else... In essence,your ilk have given us the consumer based economy/service sector economy we have now over the one we used to have where we actually produced things..And the resultant stagnant wage/standard of living problems that are now coming home to roost... "Let the Free Market reign!!!" Sometimes medicine tastes bad... No, that would be government policy of easy money providing incentive for some bankers to lend money to fools and at the same time provided incentive for deadbeats to spend their money on whatever instead of saving and spending their money wisely. I'm saying everyones hands are dirty concerining this and everyone will be taking a haircut. If your in the business of providing raw materials to places overseas which are currently growing, its good time charlie right now. Perhaps manufacturing doesn't make sense in north america right now under these conditions. I don't see what the big deal if wages drop. If people aren't making enough money, then demand for goods drop and as a result prices for goods drop. Easy money policy throws a wrench into that by creating an unsustainable demand. I think its a person not understanding how debt works and abusing it that caused the mess. By bailing out everything and racking up more debt, it makes the problem worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Sometimes medicine tastes bad... No, that would be government policy of easy money providing incentive for some bankers to lend money to fools and at the same time provided incentive for deadbeats to spend their money on whatever instead of saving and spending their money wisely. I'm saying everyones hands are dirty concerining this and everyone will be taking a haircut. If your in the business of providing raw materials to places overseas which are currently growing, its good time charlie right now. Perhaps manufacturing doesn't make sense in north america right now under these conditions. I don't see what the big deal if wages drop. If people aren't making enough money, then demand for goods drop and as a result prices for goods drop. Easy money policy throws a wrench into that by creating an unsustainable demand. I think its a person not understanding how debt works and abusing it that caused the mess. By bailing out everything and racking up more debt, it makes the problem worse. Yeah but you're tacitly admitting that the auto companies should have allowed to go under... If so,what would you folks be doing with 25% unemployment to justify 1/4 of the population being North America being out of work and financially unable to prop up the consumer based economy you advocate for??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maple_leafs182 Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Sometimes medicine tastes bad... Exactly. All the bad debt would be gone, all the good assets of those companies had would of been bought up, the market would of self corrected but we won't let the market work. As for a free market, there hasn't been one since 1913, we should of been listening to what the free market people were saying then and we would of avoided this mess we are in today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Exactly. All the bad debt would be gone, all the good assets of those companies had would of been bought up, the market would of self corrected but we won't let the market work. As for a free market, there hasn't been one since 1913, we should of been listening to what the free market people were saying then and we would of avoided this mess we are in today. Uh huh... If we listened to the Free Marketeers,most would reduced to living like animals,sending most of our wealth upwards into the hands of the few... Sorry,I'm not interested in the "Kevin O'Leary types" who seem to be in love with the Chinese model of government as a way to enforce their version of Totalitarian Capitalism...Essentially Corporate Fascism... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Yeah but you're tacitly admitting that the auto companies should have allowed to go under... If so,what would you folks be doing with 25% unemployment to justify 1/4 of the population being North America being out of work and financially unable to prop up the consumer based economy you advocate for??? Us folks are in the commodity production industry which exports overseas so that results in labor costs coming down. Like it or not the high wage party is over. the market corrects all the time, just not at the rate some people want. What happens is the economy corrects and liquidates the bad parts ie housing and auto industry out and things that are doing well such as ag, energy, and finance get the resources needed to grow. The auto industry in the early 2000s was a house of cards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Exactly. All the bad debt would be gone, all the good assets of those companies had would of been bought up, the market would of self corrected but we won't let the market work. As for a free market, there hasn't been one since 1913, we should of been listening to what the free market people were saying then and we would of avoided this mess we are in today. its not the fed's fault, its people abusing cheap money. If it wasn't for credit, we'd still be living in the dark ages. People should quit looking for scapegoats and look at themselves. People need to be smarter when borrowing money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Us folks are in the commodity production industry which exports overseas so that results in labor costs coming down. Like it or not the high wage party is over. the market corrects all the time, just not at the rate some people want. What happens is the economy corrects and liquidates the bad parts ie housing and auto industry out and things that are doing well such as ag, energy, and finance get the resources needed to grow. The auto industry in the early 2000s was a house of cards. 1.I don't care what you do for a living. 2.You did'nt answer the question,other than vague references to your blessed "invisible hand" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Uh huh... If we listened to the Free Marketeers,most would reduced to living like animals,sending most of our wealth upwards into the hands of the few... Sorry,I'm not interested in the "Kevin O'Leary types" who seem to be in love with the Chinese model of government as a way to enforce their version of Totalitarian Capitalism...Essentially Corporate Fascism... Perhaps you need to get out more, the free market has made the world a richer place. Those who are in sustainable industries and are smart with their money do well. I personally prefer the canadian way of doing business. Lower taxes, streamlining regulations, seems to be working here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maple_leafs182 Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) Uh huh... If we listened to the Free Marketeers,most would reduced to living like animals,sending most of our wealth upwards into the hands of the few... Sorry,I'm not interested in the "Kevin O'Leary types" who seem to be in love with the Chinese model of government as a way to enforce their version of Totalitarian Capitalism...Essentially Corporate Fascism... You have it backwards, what we have now is essentially corporate fascism. Right now the wealth is being sent upwards to the hands of the few. Edited October 10, 2011 by maple_leafs182 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 1.I don't care what you do for a living. 2.You did'nt answer the question,other than vague references to your blessed "invisible hand" Out west, we are decoupled from eastern canada and sell what we produce for world prices. An auto industry/manufacturing in the tank doesn't affect western canada. Western canadians compete with other places around the world in our respected industries, why can't the manufacturing sector? The invisible hand at work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.