AnnMarie wrote:
http://www.politifact.com/t***h-o-meter/statements/2013/jul/25/barack-obama/obama-says-deficit-falling-fastest-rate-60-years/
Stop gloating. A falling federal budget deficit means a declining flow into the money supply. As we are exporting cash for imports, the money supply (effectively, consumer demand) is leaking badly.
Try to guess when GDP will start to decline.
With massive $17+trillion debt, saying the deficit is going down is like saying the fire is dying down AFTER the house has burned to the ground. What bulls**t!
We are long past broke, the bank just hasn't started bouncing the checks.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I haven't read this particular article, but I KNOW Paul Craig Roberts knows his stuff and is politically savvy as he served in our government some years back. I'd be willing to bet he knows a heck of a lot more than the author of the article posted, which also I have not read.
I had wondered last month when they announced that Belgium had bought up all those treasury bonds how that was possible. He explains how they did it here. You cant believe a word they say any longer. You know who else is good at explaining the MSM headlines that never make any sense is Pam Martens but she wants people to sign up for her free newsletter and has duplication restrictions so I cant post them. Dr Roberts is happy when his articles are passed around.
Tasine wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I haven't read this particular article, but I KNOW Paul Craig Roberts knows his stuff and is politically savvy as he served in our government some years back. I'd be willing to bet he knows a heck of a lot more than the author of the article posted, which also I have not read.
Bottom line: The administration is puffy chested about overspending less recently.
For every $100 they had spent $110. Now they spend $107 and they are proud of that.
I can't run my house that way. Can you?
You are so right and even sadder 73 cents of every one of those dollars is through debt. I don't remember but last time I looked it was 42 cents and for me to even remember that it couldn't have been too long ago.
Docadhoc wrote:
Bottom line: The administration is puffy chested about overspending less recently.
For every $100 they had spent $110. Now they spend $107 and they are proud of that.
I can't run my house that way. Can you?
buffalo wrote:
With massive $17+trillion debt, saying the deficit is going down is like saying the fire is dying down AFTER the house has burned to the ground. What bulls**t!
We are long past broke, the bank just hasn't started bouncing the checks.
even a blind man can see that.
What really po's me is they aren't happy "printing" the people into the abyss they have to let their buddies in on the game.
"From the August 16, 2007 transcript (page 13 of 37) of the conference call preceding this announcement.
MR. LACKER. If I could just follow up on that, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Yes, go ahead.
MR. LACKER. Vice Chairman Geithner, did you say that [the banks] are unaware of what were considering or what we might be doing with the discount rate?
VICE CHAIRMAN GEITHNER. Yes.
MR. LACKER. Vice Chairman Geithner, I spoke with Ken Lewis, President and CEO of Bank of America, this afternoon, and he said that he appreciated what Tim Geithner was arranging by way of changes in the discount facility. So my information is different from that.
CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Okay. Thank you. Go ahead, Vice Chairman Geithner.
VICE CHAIRMAN GEITHNER. Well, I cannot speak for Ken Lewis, but I think they have sought to see whether they could understand a little more clearly the scope of their rights and our current policy with respect to the window. The only thing Ive done is to try to help them understandand Im sure thats been true across the Systemwhat the scope of that is because these people generally dont use the window and they dont really understand in some sense what its about."
At least we now know who the bankers' mole on the FOMC was before, as gratitude for his services, he was promoted to Treasury Secretary of the US. Because if he leaked one, he leaked them all.
Docadhoc wrote:
Bottom line: The administration is puffy chested about overspending less recently.
For every $100 they had spent $110. Now they spend $107 and they are proud of that.
I can't run my house that way. Can you?
You could if you could legally print money in your attic. That's why the federal government has almost always had a deficit: because it can.
And please don't tell me that we are suffering from too much consumer demand and have shortages of goods in the stores.
Docadhoc wrote:
Bottom line: The administration is puffy chested about overspending less recently.
For every $100 they had spent $110. Now they spend $107 and they are proud of that.
I can't run my house that way. Can you?
You could if you could legally print money in your attic. That's why the federal government has almost always had a deficit: because it can.
And please don't tell me that we are suffering from too much consumer demand and have shortages of goods in the stores.
Patty wrote:
You are so right and even sadder 73 cents of every one of those dollars is through debt. I don't remember but last time I looked it was 42 cents and for me to even remember that it couldn't have been too long ago.
The pity here is that too many people buy into the spin and never take the time to actually look into these wild claims.
What he is actually saying "we are still heading down the road to run....but thanks to me, it will take just a little longer to get there".
That just isn't good enough for me. I expect more.
It's too late to point fingers. Heck, I can't even lift the scoresheet.
We need an entire new crew in Washington. The GOP won the house last time and can't even manage to use what power they do have now. The Dems think spending is the way out of debt and much of the spending is earmarked "ludicrous".
A new team could not do worse....and may be trainable in the process.
AnnMarie wrote:
http://www.politifact.com/t***h-o-meter/statements/2013/jul/25/barack-obama/obama-says-deficit-falling-fastest-rate-60-years/
Wow, first you inflate the numbers to the nth degree and then when Republicans stop your gigantic spending spree, you take credit for it. Yep, typical Obama, blame others for his actions and take credit for others.
MarvinSussman wrote:
You could if you could legally print money in your attic. That's why the federal government has almost always had a deficit: because it can.
And please don't tell me that we are suffering from too much consumer demand and have shortages of goods in the stores.
I won't tell you anything of the sort. If I had that printing press, the best thing I could do is break it.
Anytime the market is flooded with anything, it's value goes down accordingly. Gold, diamonds, plutonium. Anything us worth less when it becomes easy to obtain.
The answer does not lay in printing more $ because the more you print, the more it takes, and ut's not a break even proposition....ut's a losing one.
The dollar is weaking consistently. Eventually it will be discarded if this errant philosophy continues.
I say we need to start over. This administration has botched so much up that it cannot be unraveled. There is no start or end to work from.
A fresh start with fresh people. Maybe we'd get lucky and elect some wjo care. Especially if there were term limits to congress.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.