Comments on: “Talks” break down

By: Ymarsakar

Ymarsakar — Sun, 13 Oct 2013 22:07:19 +0000

That prices have dropped by 30% would invalidate the thesis you present yet we all know that inflation is present

In the short term, yes, there was a drop off for the last year or so. I was more thinking of the long term trend, since Obama didn’t start last year but in 2008.

By: Matt_SE

Matt_SE — Sun, 13 Oct 2013 18:05:04 +0000

This administration has so distorted the economy that if we ever start to recover, bad things are going to happen:
– If job creation ever takes off, the unemployment numbers may actually rise as all those who’ve stopped looking for work seek to re-enter the market.
– With Yellen at the helm, the Fed will continue printing money. I’ve heard that the reason this hasn’t resulted in much inflation is because the banks are sitting on the money…it isn’t entering the economy. It’s not just that the banks are eschewing risk in favor of the guaranteed return from the Fed; there is no expansion of the private sector, so there’s no demand for the money anyway. If that changes, all the printed money will start entering the economy, probably resulting in inflation…which will necessitate a raising of interest rates to stop it, which will slow down the economy again as well as make the interest due on the national debt explode.

This is gonna be a wild ride.

By: southpaw

southpaw — Sun, 13 Oct 2013 12:36:09 +0000

Drew points out the current situation:
“Right now the GOP is losing because within an hour or so of starting this fight they began making more and more offers, each with more concessions to Obama”
Unfortunately, that’s how they handle every fight. They negotiate with themselves, and give the appearance to their base of being losers. To the general public, who don’t know any better, the non-stop olive branches give the appearance of being apologeticand imply they’re guilty of something. Rather than explain it’s their responsibility to manage the budget, they act as if they are intruding on Obama’s sovereign right to spend as much as he wants, for whatever he wants.
The most amazing thing to me is their inability to definitively say what happens to the economy if they don’t raise the debt ceiling. The fact that nobody can agree on, or seems to know what happens to the economy by not raising it, is stunning. These are the people we elect to manage the budget, and they freely admit they don’t know what they’re doing, but are also determined to keep borrowing and incurring debt – without knowing the consequences of that, or wanting to discuss it.

By: parker

parker — Sun, 13 Oct 2013 04:08:53 +0000

“while negotiating”

Negotiating with megalomaniacs is impossible. Might as well slit your wrists.

By: T

Sun, 13 Oct 2013 02:31:28 +0000

“[The House] can wait forever on EPA, HUD, Education, and Energy.”

And I certainly hope they do.

By: Mr. Frank

Mr. Frank — Sun, 13 Oct 2013 02:15:58 +0000

I think the best bet is to pass a temporary increase in the debt limit so as not to tank the economy while negotiating on the government shutdown. The House can continue to pass targeted authorization to spend for specific items that voters want one at a time. They can wait forever on EPA, HUD, Education, and Energy.

By: Wolla Dalbo

Wolla Dalbo — Sun, 13 Oct 2013 02:05:46 +0000

According to the chart from the St. Louis Federal Reserve I linked to above, the U.S. monetary base was somewhere around $200 billion in 1985, slowly climbed to a high of more than $800 billion in 2010, and has since skyrocketed to an astronomical $3,528.278 billion dollars as of this October 2nd.

So, more than a four-fold increase in our monetary base in the last 36 plus months.

All that extra money was supposed to stimulate lending by banks, which was supposed to increase production, leading to higher employment, more investment, and increased consumer spending, all of which was supposed to revive our economy, but due to all the economic uncertainty, the disastrous jobs situation, and the pretty moribund housing market, banks have reportedly just parked most of that money in interest bearing accounts with the Federal Reserve.

By: jms

jms — Sun, 13 Oct 2013 01:23:31 +0000

From Wikipedia: The monetary base (all money in circulation or storage) is currently 3.5 trillion dollars, and the United States holds 261 million troy ounces of physical gold.

Dividing the monetary base into the government gold holdings, we get $13,409. So, if we went back to the gold standard, where all U.S. money was guaranteed by gold, gold would have to be $13,000+ per ounce in order to cover all the money we have printed.

By: M J R

M J R — Sat, 12 Oct 2013 23:52:30 +0000

Heh — “megaphones”, not “microphones” [middle paragraph].

You get the idea.

By: M J R

M J R — Sat, 12 Oct 2013 23:51:00 +0000

Mr. Frank, 7:24 pm — “I don’t think Republicans fully appreciate Obama’s instinct for the jugular. If we go past the debt limit, he would hold up Social Security checks or some such cut and blame it on the Republicans. There go the 2014 elections.”

Instinct for the jugular, plus a near metaphysical certainty that the mainstream media will reinforce the idea/meme that it’s all/always the Republicans’ fault. How confident, how *cocky*, would the spoiled-child-in-chief be, even given his instinct for the jugular, if he “knew” that the figurative microphones would virtually all be blaring the Republican position incessantly?

The good guys are being defeated even as we here converse, and may well be defeated in 2014 and 2016 and beyond, not so much by their own incompetence — although that sure helps when it rears its ubiquitous head — but by the combination of the left, the mainstream media, and the low information voter. (That’s why the amalgamation of the first two may properly be referred to as the “enemedia” — hat tip (as far as I know) to Pamela Geller for inventing that term).