It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bailouts Will Push US into Depression: Manager

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by TruthWithin
reply to post by sir_chancealot
 


Not missing it so much as mutually assuming that if there is a depression, the dollar will naturally tank.


And remember folks...this is an ELECTION year when the incumbents are supposed to make the economy look as good as possible!


This is the strongest statement 'FOR' the possibility that this is all happening for a reason. Sure, we are in debt (too much as far as I am concerned and from what I can see we are indeed headed for a major recession/depression.) However, when I try to look at things from the other side of things it seems to come down to an election year jitters.

Could be that they are trying to make things look VERY bad so that in 2009, when they turn around, that they will be swearing in an incumbant in 2012 and not a new president. Kind of like the events of 911 triggering the war in Afhanistan. Sure, it happened after the fact but Bush's ratings went through the roof. Then when they were starting to die off they began the 'Iraq is evil and will put a nice mushroom cloud over and American city' chant. Low and behold, he is back in.

Then again, I guess Diebold could have had something to do with that.




posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by dariousg
 


Interesting theory, but I truly believe it is the other way around. A bad economy looks bad for McCain and better for Obama. I think the PTB are just trying to keep everything from unraveling right now.

I further believe that the only way to change this faulty system is to have crash and crash hard.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by TruthWithin
reply to post by dariousg
 


Interesting theory, but I truly believe it is the other way around. A bad economy looks bad for McCain and better for Obama. I think the PTB are just trying to keep everything from unraveling right now.

I further believe that the only way to change this faulty system is to have crash and crash hard.


Correct. We need housing prices to go down at least another 50% and we need a good crash. Prices have gone up way more than wages which has made people rely on credit. Now there is no money for that so we find ourselves in this situation now. We need a good crash.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 12:29 PM
link   


A bad economy looks bad for McCain and better for Obama.


not only do you beleive him, but you fail to realize he's either lying or doesn't realise his plan is flawed!

taxing companies and corporations and lowing our taxes isn't going to help. we BUY from the places he'll raise taxes at for our sake, and most of us get PAYCHECKS from places he'll effect negatively!!

don't be fooled neither of the candidates have a solution for our turmoil except another war!!!



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 12:46 PM
link   
Heres the thing the figure they gave 3 trillion dollars, excludes Entitled Debt, or whats known as projected obligations of Social Security and Medicare, both of those programs along with a few minor ones I can't even think of off the top of my head, top debt around 9 Trillion. So the biggest one owed for debt, is the US Citizen. Now the reason why Fannie mae and Freddie Mac were bailed out, was China and Most of Asia and other foreign investors, said they weren't going to continue buying Agency debt(Aka Fannie mae and Freddie mac are considered agency debt due to their GTE status). If both couldn't sell their short term debt to finance their current operations ontop of piling losses, they would fail instantly, so the US government had to act to appease it's foreign investor masters.

Not to say this wont piss off Treasury investors, as when the debt keeps piling up, its like giving a crackhead a new line of credit when he is about ready to bankrupt under the previous line of credit.
I expect US Treasuries if they go though with a complete Bailout to jump in instrest rates as the perceived risk of US defaulting can be considered far greater now then it was before, on top of economic growth slowing down, which mean tax reciepts are going to decline.

Its sad I think we are not in a capitalist society where even the Government must obey the mighty red ink, but a corporate socialism, where in the essence of "saving" minimal wage jobs and other low end work (ass kissing for the low end folk) we bail out huge corporations who made poor decisions. Seriously, republicans speak of more tax breaks for these companies. One argument made about tax cuts to oil companies, is with more cash available they can invest into more oil field etc. Which is utter bull#, if you look at the numbers, oil production from Western Oil companies are on the decline, the only reason they turn profits, is the price of oil going up make what little they do produce, even more valuable. So by giving them a tax break, we appease share holders, who contribute to our politicians.

Either case we are screwed, I agree with the general concenses that the US Gov will not bankrupt, before it runs printing presses on full speed.
I think one of the biggest reasons The Federal Reserve exists, is to bail its banker friends and to create a secondary market for US Gov Debt.


[edit on 12-9-2008 by StealthHawk]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by StealthHawk
 


I agree with you that the purpose of the Fed is to protect the financial interests of the private banking industry. Unfortunately, I fail to connect the service with something the tax-payers should be burdened with.

The rallying cry of those who justify profit is 'risk'. This action shows there was no 'risk'. (Especially if you consider the nature of 'fiat' currency and fractional reserve lending.)



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by StealthHawk
 


While I understand you point we most see other factors at fault here that also are piling up onto the tax payer.

Many of these so call financial institutions that has been bail out already are now under scrutiny for tax evasion, the irony, when they were doing the tax evasion they were at their peak now that they are bancrupt here comes the tax payer to bail them out.

Again the Irony.

Then we are right now on a budget crisis that neither Presidential canditate can do anything about but whomever wins the presidential seat will have to deal with this problem.

$53 trillion hole in the federal budget that wil affect from medicare to social security and every program for the nations citizens.

Then we have now more bailouts.

Again the Irony

How much is the burden now on the citizens of this nation?


That is the sum of the government's current liabilities and unfunded entitlement promises. It translates to $455,000 per American household - about 10 times the median annual income of these same households. As that number continues to grow, it means fewer tax dollars going to other services we need. It means much higher taxes in the future. It means mounting debt and interest payments many Americans will not be able to afford.


Can the tax payer be able to afford all this?, no, we no longer can.

www.pgpf.org...

www.abovetopsecret.com...'

I opened a thread on this issue.




[edit on 12-9-2008 by marg6043]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars
reply to post by StealthHawk
 


I agree with you that the purpose of the Fed is to protect the financial interests of the private banking industry. Unfortunately, I fail to connect the service with something the tax-payers should be burdened with.

The rallying cry of those who justify profit is 'risk'. This action shows there was no 'risk'. (Especially if you consider the nature of 'fiat' currency and fractional reserve lending.)



I never said that the Fed should exist or burden tax payers.

What I ment, is the Federal Reserve gives the allusion that Government debt is just as good as its federal Reserve notes (irony) by providing a secondary market. Legally the Federal Reserve can't purchase debt directly from the US treasury, however it can purchase debt that fails to be auctioned off.

As financial institutions make poor investments, they will quickly liquidate those assets and buy US Gov debt, knowing the Fed stands in to exchange it for its federal Reserve notes on the fly, that being said, it makes US Gov Debt seem quite appealing since exchanging it for Federal Reserve notes, even temporary grants them a life line if necessary.

Basically in my opinion (yes my opinion) The federal reserve instills a kind of comfort to investors in treasury paper, which allows the US Gov to go red every year. However this show will end soon enough, as there is only so much a foreign investor can ignore before they drop their dollar assets for something safer (E.g. Gold funds, Oil Funds, some kindof mineral rights). For those who are shifting their debt portfolios to Europe or Asia, consider most of those governments wont hesitate to run the print presses and that most of them are 100% or more in debt when comparing it to their GDP.

The way the world is currently financed is not stable and is only a fantasy for a banker who wishes to ignore the realities of the debt financing at this scale.

P.S. As far as social security is concerned, why the hell do we need more socialist intervention, we have seen it has poor results specially when managed by the Federal Government. There was a instresting argument about Social Security excess revenue used to buy US Treasuries.

Borrowing Aganst your own entitlement obligations is just going to cost the tax payer Instrest on top of the orginal obligation. Some would argue that Social Security in general isnt a trust fund, I agree with this assement for the fact that its all invested in more government spending via treasury debt.

I think such social programs cause more harm then their potental benefits,
1. Americans Save less for their own retirement
2. Personal disposable savings drops dramatically.
3. Taxing us for such benefits that are unsustainable is equal to a flat out additional tax, as the money goes towards the budget anyways..

Also what pisses me off is ford and GMC asking for loans, if we weren't in a corpote socialism, the corporation would either.. Invest in its self to adept to different business climate or Die... in a true capitliastic system. Instead what do most of those corporations do? Pump credit into their financing units to improve says, and not invest in its self and now beg congress (Which is broke) For more money LOL

[edit on 12-9-2008 by StealthHawk]

[edit on 12-9-2008 by StealthHawk]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by 2stepsfromtop
 


Agreed. If it's every man for himself I'm every man.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by 2stepsfromtop
 


don'y worry they will not be waiting for you to do that, they have residences in various places on the planet.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by StealthHawk
I never said that the Fed should exist or burden tax payers.


Sorry if it came off that way. I didn't mean to say you did.

I understand that this is just the way things are, for the moment.

Seems to me that the 'middlemen' are the only ones winning in this scenario; or at least, they don't seem to be.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by StealthHawk
 


Correct welcome to ATS and welcome to the Corporate States of America. The fact is the fed through the control of inflation causes these issues with the issuing and retraction of credit. Anyone who understands how our money system knows that anytime you issue large amounts of credit and then retract that credit you will have this problem every single time. Why? There is not enough money out there to pay for all of this credit and the interest attached to it. So there has to be bankruptcies to make the system right. So the government says ok average joe and average joes small business you guys are SOL but big bank, auto, and airline dont worry man we have your back and this is what happens. So then the banks and what not that DO get bailed out and get fresh capital can now go in and have a field day on all these nice cheap assets. Its a scam its not right and if the American people would wake up and understand money ......maybe something would change.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by StealthHawk

Also what pisses me off is ford and GMC asking for loans, if we weren't in a corpote socialism, the corporation would either..


I see that you keep with the news and what is going on behind the backs of the tax payer in this nation.

Glad to see you in the boards.

Yes they are getting their bail out thanks to Madam Pelosi.


Pelosi Joins White House in Approval of Big Three Bailout, The Bush administration took a step Tuesday toward backing up to $50 billion in loans sought by the auto industry on the same day that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she'd push for approval of the aid package.


Yes I guess we the American people should start lining up on Washington to get our bail outs too.

www.freep.com.../20080910/BUSINESS01/809100342&imw=Y


The proposed package would amount to $50 billion in loans to General Motors, Ford and Chrysler, all of which have struggled amid lagging sales and massive debt. The automakers have argued that they require government assistance if they are to retool their manufacturing to emphasis the small, light, fuel-efficient cars of the future and regain their competitiveness with brands such as Toyota and Honda.


Well we are becoming the nation of the bail out give away.

www.economyincrisis.org...





[edit on 12-9-2008 by marg6043]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Whats sad about this whole mess, is the US Government cant really afford to bail out these corporations. In all honesty I borrow quite alot from the Austrian school of economics., The Federal Reserve inflates to bail out the US gov and financial institutions. A instresting read is from one of my favorite authors Murry Rothbard History Of Money

Regarding the role of the Central bank is to allow the US gov to wage war and other agenda but I wont go into that in this thread.

What I can say is when credit is expanded, it allows economically unsound investments to be made, and hence things get over produced, or things that dont really have much reason to be produced, to be created and false wealth. Then when the credit reigns are tighten, we have a massive liquidation cycle, which causes all those wonderful projects ( i mean that in a sarcastic way) to be bankrupt and liquidated.

I personally think we should all go back to a gold standard, and im revering to the world, as this would prevent a Government from printing even more, and to also put the reserve status at banks to 100% so they can operate more like gold merchant's storing our money, not lending it out. Which of course they need to be paid for that convenience but thats it. But no... this would make it very lucrative .

the flow of gold going in and out of a nation would balance out supply and demand in the country. Gov spending would drop like a rock (as people would begin to revolt if they rise taxes necessary to cover their inflationary attitudes.

P.S. Thanks for the introduction, Shupo brought me here =)



[edit on 12-9-2008 by StealthHawk]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 04:00 PM
link   
This is an interesting article.

The possibility exists that the US is already bankrupt. We have the existing debt but we also have the coming retirement of the baby boomer generation. In about 2018, the social security system will no longer bring in enough money to cover their costs of funding the baby boomer retirement.

That's when they are supposed to be able to reach into the "lock box" that politicians lover to talk about. The problem is that the only thing that exists in the lock box is a bunch of IOUs from the general fund.

The money is gone!!

So, what do you do at that point?

Raise taxes? Raising taxes has a negative effect on the economy and government risks having an even smaller revenue?

Decrease Benefits? Seems the most logical way out of the problem. Of course those retirees without income aren't going to be too happy and they tend to vote.

Print more money!!! Thus giving the impression that the government is meeting its financial obligations. But this devalues the dollar.

Any way that I see it, we are in for a wild ride.

My advice if you don't have a lot of money is to buy silver. Buy silver dollars, fifty cent pieces and quarters. Silver will have value in the future even if the dollar doesn't. Most of us don't have enough money to purchase hundreds of ounces of gold but you may have enough money to buy hundreds of ounces of silver since it's only $10.60 per ounce right now.

Have fun.......



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by StealthHawk
 


I like Ron Paul have to argued for a gold standard but more and more Im for basing money on production. Right now we have it based on debt whereas Im for production. The idea was given to me here... start the video at around 4 minutes



To me this makes quite a bit of sense.

[edit on 12-9-2008 by mybigunit]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Frankly it's amazing how simple the 'theory' is;

Industrialists and wealthy business, banks, and whatnot overthrow the government by using their wealth and influence to either infiltrate or corrupt public servants. It works out so well that they remain in power and bgin to aspire to greater wealth and power. Greedy as they are they refuse to invest in long term technology or socially relevant research unless it yields immediate profit. There industry fails, there plans fail to adapt and guess what? They are in power, they just make US pay for it all.

Our 'Government' is no longer of the people. Our government is of the corporation, for the corporation. and by the corporation. They ALL insist the country be run like a business - predator and prey. Guess who gets to be prey?

There will be NO major industry or monopoly that will not fail AND BE BAILED OUT. For all the names of banks and institutions that are 'failing' has anyone considered that the money all these failures represent is NOT REAL? It represents there own numbers game, their 'theory' of economics to which we are all involuntarily bound.

I hope there are at least a few readers who may reseaarch this further and discover the pattern of abuse to which the American people have been subjected for over the last century or so.

The Robber Barons won. The self-proclaimed 'elite' must be shunned. They are too much in love with themselves to be entrusted to stewardship of the planet. I imagine that sounds silly, but frankly, I suspect this transnational corporate society of mega wealthy elites actually does represent 'the enemy' in a very real 'World War III'. The fight is for the planet, they have the defenders' advantage, and most of us haven't even realized what's at stake.

Oh, but I rant..., forgive me if I offend.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


Bravo!!!!!!!!!Bravo, because I am in the same tune as you I understand very well what you are saying because that is the same thing I have been preaching in ATS for while when it comes to the economic woes plaguing our nation.

The sad point is that most Americans has no clue as why we are in the mess we are.

And when you try to explain they just look at you like you are talking in another language because in America things like that doesn't happen.

We are a nation of plenty, good will and strong democracy, what people doesn't understand is that the American dream has been death a long time ago along with our Republic and our democracy.


[edit on 12-9-2008 by marg6043]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by mybigunit
reply to post by StealthHawk
 


I like Ron Paul have to argued for a gold standard but more and more Im for basing money on production. Right now we have it based on debt whereas Im for production. The idea was given to me here... start the video at around 4 minutes



To me this makes quite a bit of sense.

[edit on 12-9-2008 by mybigunit]



Very instresting Video series I enjoyed it. It does bring up alot of good points, but one thing is if we allow the government absolute power to coin currency, where there still not be lobbyists and other instrest groups in the government to begin with? Would they not "spend" the money on projects beneficial, like picking one construction company over another, the same bullcrap we are facing now? There is no ideal solution, I still think a gold standard would be eaiser to maintain and use, but cornering of market can occur still, but so is our fiat money of today or the gov's publicity to mint money for special projects.

Very good points indeed =)



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by StealthHawk
 


Well the constitution says the government is to issue and set the value of currency. That is not how we do business now though. Right now a private bank does this and hence the situation of the big bubbles and big bursts and then the power grabs afterwords. I agree the government is corrupt also and really needs an overhaul but really gold or the other idea is really better than what we have now and that is robbery of a different sort. A wealth redistribution through the power or the currency.




top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join