Bad News for the Party of NO - Page 5 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

AkDiesel · #61 (**permalink**) 3 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by mabus

Sorry, but you are wrong. For each buck on their accounts, who ever it owns, a bank can borrow nine bucks form the fed - but it hs to give give it away as a loan. Who ever buys this loan after someone else signed that he will repay it, can borrow 8.1 bucks from the fed and give it away as a loan, too. That loan can be sold and the fed will grant a fresh loan of 90% of the previous loans size, as well. If you take this effect to an extreme, with it's .75 trillion loan, the government might actually have enabled loans in dimensions a common handheld calculator might not be able to calculate.

It's important to know that ALL money circulating was created by debt, that the system needs fresh money or it will collapse horribly, and that debt is the only source of new fresh money. And due to the fact that there is interest on the loans and that the banks have to repay the fed, there is always more debt than money circulating in the system.

The problem is that with each and every new dollar bill, all dollar bills are worth less. And in every monetary system, there is that amount of X dollar bills which marks the point of no return, the moment when "worth less" becomes "worthless".

Where is this FRESH money to come from? Better yet what is to BACK this FRESH money that you write of???

mabus · #62 (**permalink**) 3 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by AkDiesel

Where is this FRESH money to come from? Better yet what is to BACK this FRESH money that you write of???

The fresh money is printed by the department of treasury, issued by the fed as loans to the banks, which then have to issue it as loans to their customers, as well. What is giving the new money it's value is the promise of the lender to pay it back to the bank. The bank then has to pay it back to the fed, and can keep the revenues generated by the interest on the loan between the lender and the bank. However, the fed normally takes interest, as well. The only thing which gives the fresh money it's value is the promise of the lender to pay it back. The money itsself is merely more than a piece of paper.

And to put that into the context of Daddio's statement, by taking a .75 trillion dollar loan, the government threw a gigantic pile of dollars into the system. This puts banks into the position to sell new loans with fresh money from the fed, because debt can be created from debt. The problem which we have now at a recession is that few people want loans to invest, and banks give away fewer loans. By jumping in and filling this gap, the government actually helps the system to recover. At least as long as the new money is worth something. Problem is, the less the new money is worth, the more has to be printed. And the more has to be printed, the less is the money worth. Google "Germany 1923" to figure out what can happen if a government puts this to an extreme by purpose.

Swoop187 · #63 (**permalink**) 3 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knute

The economy is turning around primarily due to O's policies. Looks like he won't fail and bring the country down like you want.
WASHINGTON (AP) - The economy grew at a 3.5 percent pace in the third quarter, the best showing in two years, fueled by government-supported spending on cars and homes.The Commerce Department's report Thursday delivered the strongest signal yet that the economy entered a new, though fragile, phase of recovery and that the worst recession since the 1930s has ended.The much-awaited turnaround ended the streak of four straight quarters of contracting economic activity, the first time that's happened on records dating to 1947.It also marked the first increase since the spring of 2008, when the economy experienced a short-lived uptick in growth.The third-quarter's performance - the strongest since right before the country fell into recession in December 2007 - was slightly better than the 3.3 percent growth rate economists expected.Armed with cash from government support programs, consumers led the rebound in the third quarter, snapping up cars and homes.Consumer spending on big-ticket manufactured goods soared at an annualized rate of 22.3 percent in the third quarter, the most since the end of 2001. The jump largely reflected car purchases spurred by the government's Cash for Clunkers program that offered a rebate of up to $4,500 to buy new cars and trade in old gas guzzlers.The housing market also turned a corner in the summer. Spending on housing projects jumped at an annualized pace of 23.4 percent, the largest jump since 1986. It was the first time since the end of 2005 that spending on housing was positive.The government's $8,000 tax credit for first-time home buyers supported the housing rebound. Congress is considering extending the credit, which expires on Nov. 30.The collapse of the housing market led the country into the recession. Rotten mortgage securities spiraled into a banking crisis. Home foreclosures surged. The sector's return to good health is a crucial ingredient to a sustained economic recovery.Brisk spending by the federal government, led by efforts to stimulate the economy and on defense, also played into the third-quarter turnaround. Federal government spending rose at a rate of 7.9 percent in the third quarter, on top of a 11.4 percent growth rate in the second quarter.

AP News : Economy grows in 3Q, signals end of recession

The fucking audacity!

Knute · #64 (**permalink**) 3 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swoop187

The fucking audacity!

And , BTW, New Jobless Claims are going in the right direction as well. Not as much as O & I would like, but it is getting there although the blind far right well never admit it. They think it is audacious to see reality, but offer no proof or source for their alternative fantasies.

Quote:

New jobless claims drop slightly
Evidence that the labor market remains weak even as economy recovers
The Associated Press
updated 8:59 a.m. PT, Thurs., Oct . 29, 2009
WASHINGTON - The number of people claiming jobless benefits for the first time dropped less than expected last week, evidence that the labor market remains weak even as the economy is recovering.

The Labor Department said Thursday its tally of newly laid-off workers seeking unemployment insurance fell by 1,000 to a seasonally-adjusted 530,000. Analysts expected a steeper drop to 521,000, according to a survey by Thomson Reuters.

The report came on the same day the Commerce Department said the economy grew at a 3.5 percent pace in the July-September quarter, snapping a record streak of four straight quarterly declines. But the economy isn't growing quickly enough to spur much hiring.

Initial claims need to fall below about 450,000 to signal that employers are actually adding jobs, several economists said. Still, many saw some positive signs in the report.

The number of people continuing to claim unemployment insurance benefits dropped 148,000 to 5.8 million, a steeper fall than expected and the sixth straight decrease. Those figures lag initial claims by a week.

That doesn't include the nearly 4 million people receiving benefits from federal emergency programs during the week of Oct. 10, a decline of about 71,000 from the previous week. Many of those recipients likely are exhausting their benefits and falling off the rolls without finding jobs, some economists said.

The National Employment Law Project, an advocacy group for the unemployed, has projected that 1.3 million people will use up their benefits by the end of the year. Congress has added up to 53 extra weeks of support on top of the 26 typically provided by the states. The Senate is considering whether to provide another 14 to 20 weeks of emergency support for those about to run out.

About 52 percent of recipients in the past year have exhausted their regular state benefits, the highest proportion on records dating from 1972, according to Labor Department data.

But the decline in the total benefit rolls could also mean at least some are finding jobs.

The drop suggests "people are returning to work rather than shifting" from the regular program to emergency benefits, Zach Pandl, an economist at Nomura Securities, wrote in a note to clients.

Meanwhile, the four-week average of claims, which levels out volatility, fell for the eighth straight week to 526,250, its lowest level since early January. That indicates that companies are laying off fewer workers.

Initial claims have fallen at a faster pace than after the last two recessions in 1991 and 2001, according to John Canally, an economist at LPL Financial. The unemployment rate didn't peak until more than a year after each of those recessions ended, leading economists to dub them "jobless recoveries."

Claims have fallen by 19 percent since their peak in March, better than the 14 percent drops in the seven months following each of the last two recessions.

But claims fell about 27 percent in the same period after their peak in October 1982, as the economy quickly added jobs during the recovery. That suggests the current rebound could fall somewhere between the rapid hiring following the 1981-82 recession and the last two anemic recoveries, Canally said.

Economists closely watch initial claims, which are considered a gauge of layoffs and an indication of companies' willingness to hire new workers.

The unemployment rate rose to 9.8 percent in September from 9.7 percent, the department said earlier this month, as employers cut 263,000 jobs.

More job cuts were announced this week. Apparel maker Hanesbrands Inc. said Tuesday that it is shutting a hosiery plant in Winston-Salem, N.C., and laying off 240 employees.

Among the states, California had the largest increase in claims, with 5,774, which it attributed to layoffs in the construction, services and agricultural industries. Puerto Rico, Minnesota, Nevada and Nebraska also reported increases. The state data lag initial claims by one week.

Wisconsin had the largest drop in claims, with 5,681, which it attributed to fewer layoffs in manufacturing. New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois and Oregon had the next largest decreases.

URL: New jobless claims drop slightly - Stocks & economy- msnbc.com

jschmidt · #65 (**permalink**) 3 Weeks Ago

Summing up...

"The numbers say the economy is getting better."

"Oh yeah? Obama is a failure."

I'm reminded of the generic R congressman I saw yesterday who said,

Quote:

"Now if the White House would just get out of the way, we could finish this recovery."

EagleTed · #66 (**permalink**) 3 Weeks Ago

If the economy is recovering, and the signs are good that it is, it is despite the government, not because.

jschmidt · #67 (**permalink**) 3 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by EagleTed

If the economy is recovering, and the signs are good that it is, it is despite the government, not because.

You wouldn't happen to be a generic congressman, would ya'?

Melanie · #68 (**permalink**) 3 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knute

And , BTW, New Jobless Claims are going in the right direction as well. Not as much as O & I would like, but it is getting there although the blind far right well never admit it. They think it is audacious to see reality, but offer no proof or source for their alternative fantasies.

Knute... you are without a doubt THE most dense person that I have ever come across on the web.

FROM YOUR OWN SOURCE!!!

Quote:

Many of those recipients likely are exhausting their benefits and falling off the rolls without finding jobs, some economists said.

The National Employment Law Project, an advocacy group for the unemployed, has projected that 1.3 million people will use up their benefits by the end of the year. Congress has added up to 53 extra weeks of support on top of the 26 typically provided by the states. The Senate is considering whether to provide another 14 to 20 weeks of emergency support for those about to run out.

About 52 percent of recipients in the past year have exhausted their regular state benefits, the highest proportion on records dating from 1972, according to Labor Department data.

So, to YOU, it doesn't matter that people are no longer receiving unemployment because they have exhausted their benefits. As long as people are no longer receiving benefits and the number of people on unemployment is going down, that is all you care about.

Just how thick IS your skull..... fuck!

Hey... how about this.... how about you just kick everyone off unemployment, then you can say that no one is on unemployment anymore. That should make your numbers look GREAT!!!

Quote:

The unemployment rate rose to 9.8 percent in September from 9.7 percent, the department said earlier this month, as employers cut 263,000 jobs.

More job cuts were announced this week. Apparel maker Hanesbrands Inc. said Tuesday that it is shutting a hosiery plant in Winston-Salem, N.C., and laying off 240 employees.

Did you miss THAT part? Or, does that not matter? Did you just skim through the article without reading it to find a snippet to take out of context to make you look like "you" are right?

Dense... just fucking dense.

jschmidt · #69 (**permalink**) 3 Weeks Ago

That's a continuing problem with how unemployment is determined. Always has been. I don't think you can make the case you're making using that evidence.

I'd call that cherry picking.

Disillusioned_1 · #70 (**permalink**) 3 Weeks Ago

Keeping people on unemployment is socialist.

Therefore letting people fall off of the unemployment rolls is good for the country. It makes the unemployment numbers look better, it makes our nation less socialist, and it lowers government spending.

Right? Isn't it a good thing that people are exhausting their unemployment? Now maybe they'll get off their lazy asses and get real jobs like true americans.

(and yes this is tongue in cheek)

Melanie · #71 (**permalink**) 3 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Disillusioned_1

Right? Isn't it a good thing that people are exhausting their unemployment? Now maybe they'll get off their lazy asses and get real jobs like true americans.

I know what you are saying. With all those jobs out there, they should just quit being so lazy.

Maybe they should be more like the people on welfare who NEVER add anything to the system and only pop out more babies at taxpayers expense.

As far as I know, unemployment INSURANCE is INSURANCE that is paid for by your employer on your behalf (which is figured into your salary) for a safety net in case you ever need it.

Disillusioned_1 · #72 (**permalink**) 3 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim

How on earth does the worth of the derivatives market (which, by the way, is outside national borders) compare to the national debt?

It shows how insigificant the debt is in the sense of how much 'wealth' is actually out there. The $700 billion that is supposedly going to 'stimulate' the economy isn't even 1% of the total wealth that the US has.

Yes probably some of it is international money, but the lion's share is in the US.

Disillusioned_1 · #73 (**permalink**) 3 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melanie

As far as I know, unemployment INSURANCE is INSURANCE that is paid for by your employer on your behalf (which is figured into your salary) for a safety net in case you ever need it.

That is true in part - note that its another government mandated socialist program that forces companies to pay into it at all. However when congress votes to extend benefits for another 6 months, etc, the money to pay for that is coming right out of the taxpayer's pocket (or perhaps the chinese worker's pocket).

So whether the government forces companies to pay into the system or whether the government funds extensions of the program is immaterial: Its still a government tax to fund a socialist program.

Melanie · #74 (**permalink**) 3 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Disillusioned_1

That is true in part - note that its another government mandated socialist program that forces companies to pay into it at all. However when congress votes to extend benefits for another 6 months, etc, the money to pay for that is coming right out of the taxpayer's pocket (or perhaps the chinese worker's pocket).

So whether the government forces companies to pay into the system or whether the government funds extensions of the program is immaterial: Its still a government tax to fund a socialist program.

Depends on how long someone has been paying into it. Can you say that someone who has been in the workforce for 40 years hasn't paid their fair share into the system?

Fuck it, the way I see it... those people who are on unemployment have actually paid into the system. If anyone is going to be bashed, it needs to be the young 20 somethings that have never paid into the system at all and think that they money that they are getting is just "free Obama money".

The way I see it, those on unemployment deserve the help more than the fat white trash (or brown trash... or black trash... whatever) that do nothing but lay around on welfare spitting out kids. Of the people that I know that are on unemployment right now, over half of them are on some kind of antidepressant because they are so fucked up right now because they can't support their families as they feel that they should. They feel like true POS because they can't find work. Of all the people that I know that have lost their jobs, NONE of them have EVER been on any kind of government assistance.

The people I have met on welfare take drugs just to get high, not help them NOT feel like a worthless POS living of the government tit.

tsquare · #75 (**permalink**) 3 Weeks Ago

Hell of a day in the market huh guys?

Everybody looked at the number and figured out that they were really crap and are acting accordingly

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode