I had to come and write this because I found it too important to just keep to myself.
To start, I know a lot of people won't watch the video's, or read the full OP, but I believe that this is something that will be well worth your
I should explain who Peter Schiff is. He is the man who called the 2008 financial collapse. In fact, he even wrote a book about it before it happened.
I don't want to go into to much detail into his credentials, but here is his Wiki page
Peter_Schiff He is very well educated on the subject.
I want to start with a video from august 17th, in which he speaks of the Ryan plan, the Federal reserve, and Obama's policies.
As you can see, Ryan's plan is not a fiscally conservative as he plays it up to be.
Not only will it not create jobs, but it will just keep things going in the wrong direction.
Because Ryan's plan just doesn't do anything to really cut anything.
Not that Obama's plan is any better. People here seem to think that somehow Ryan's financial plan will fix the economy, and create jobs, but it
I think the only thing that plan will actually create, is a false sense of safety.
In this video he adresses the coming of QE3 (Quantative Easing (that means stimulus)), he explains how this is will actually weaken the economy in the
long run, and how the Federal reserve is taking drastic action to ignore the core of the problem. He also addresses, the Gold Standard and explains it
a little better.
( I should mention QE1 was by Bush and QE2 was by Obama)
There is a serious problem, and neither of the main two candidates will address it.
There is a financial collapse coming, and maybe it won't happen tommorow, but it is better to not stick your head in the sand and ignore it. Both the
two main candidates have no real fiscal plan to fix the economy.
If you take a quick look at the numbers, then you can see that there are 4 areas, where the majority of spending of the Federal Government is
focused. Spending US-Federal
Social Security------------------ 675 Billion
Homeland Security------------- 598 billion
Health and Human services--345 billion
These four areas compromise the large majority of the budget. Without large slashing to these four areas, there can be no change. It is economically
With that said
Neither of the two main candidates want to make any large cuts to any of these four areas.
Why, because you don't win an election saying your going to make huge cuts.
Ron Paul tried to run on this platform, and everyone called him crazy. He was the only one who addressed this.
He was also the only one who was fighting to put the US back on the gold standard, and everyone said he's crazy.
One of the Main issues is the devaluation of currency. With continued QE it is not a possibility, but a matter of time. It doesn't matter if it is
Romney or Obama, there will be QE3, and most likely QE4. The reason is simple, because neither of the two candidates are offering to cut enough to
make a difference. The real danger of QE is that it props up the failing financial sector. Always a good indicator of how things are doing is the Gold
It's not perfect, but you can usually get a good sense of how the year is playing out. So far it has been "wonky". Gold Index charts 10yrs
ETA- This is a video interview with Nobel winning economist Edward C. Prescott warning of the coming collapse and the problem with the current banking
In closing, I know this seems like alot of information to take in. The video's are a little long.
There is also alot for people to find for themselves. Try to find out more about the Ryan plan for yourself.
Find out about the real economic situation.
My personal Opinion- I think we are already in the early stages of the collapse, but like a person suffering from a heart attack, the symptoms seem
mild until it really kicks in. I think 3rd quater 2013 will be when it starts to fall apart clearly. I also firmly believe that Ron Paul has the ONLY
real financial plan, and if you want anyting to change, and are voting for Romney or Obama, you are wasting your vote. If you are voting for the Ryan
plan, you are wasting your vote. If you are voting for Obamacare, you are wasting your vote.
But,there is a bright side, at least I'm not American.
edit on 30-8-2012 by KingAtlas because: ETA
edit on 30-8-2012 by
KingAtlas because: G&S proly missed some still
Would it change your analysis any to use different numbers? The ones you list are only contracts issued by the various departments, not total
spending. SS, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, and other entitlements are 62% of the budget, defense is 19%.
Erskine Bowles, appointed to the Simpson-Bowles debt reduction commission by President Obama, has declared Ryan's plan, honest and straightforward.
He has also said that it will reduce the debt by $4 trillion, but Bowles wishes it would reduce the debt even faster. He called Obama's plan a
Okay so I wanted to add this video where they are speaking about how inneffective QE3 is actually going to be.
The bond market isn't doing great. Economic growth is not hitting the marks everyone was hoping for.
It seems that the reasons they are doing this is on the hope that it will prop up Economic growth, to make it seem more stable so the markets don't
More simply, Fed wants banks to lend, if they slow lending, growth freezes, then they need QE to prop up growth.
That is also why they keep interest rates so low. It's a cycle that can't run forever. I doubt it will change until after the collapse.
The problem is that Ryan is assuming Economic growth of 4% every year...
That is how he gets his numbers. How do you grow the economy by 4 % every year...
by lowering taxes?? I mean it won't hurt to lower corperate taxes, but unless he is going to get rid of them all together, there won't be a huge
growth like that...
There are too many emerging markets right now.
Look at it this way, would you invest in a market on the start of their growth cycle, or on a declining market trying to maintain past
This is a great explanation of Quantative Easing and how it influences the market.
Although that particular video was about QE2, it is still the general idea.
Of course, it still won't work. Didn't work the first to times..let's try 3...lucky number 3 right....
Anyways..QE could work, given the right circumstances. These are not them.
The funny part to me is that when all the Bonds the Fed are buying comes to term, will they get paid?
So if they don't keep proping up the economy, those bonds are worth a lot less, no matter how secure they are.
They have to cover their investments just like any other company.
I agree that 4% is optimistic, but I don't think it's unreasonable. Here's an interesting chart which allows you to set any to dates from 1947 to
2012. It will then provide you with a graph of the GDP for that period. www.tradingeconomics.com...
From 1947 to 2012 (yes, including our current miserable numbers) the average GDP growth rate has been 3.3%.
I don't see 4% growth as impossible. (Actually, it looks pretty possible considering the hole we're in at the moment.)
edit on 30-8-2012 by charles1952 because: added link.
I understand that is an optimistic point of view.
I also agree it is not impossible.
I do disagree with you however on the point that it is likely because of the hole that the US economy is currently in. In what sectors is this growth
going to come in?
Large companies are all lowering their US positions.
Where are the jobs going to come from?
Lowering corprate tax rate will free up some capitol for businesses, but they won't spend it fortifying their US positions, they will invest it in
the large emerging markets, and their will be jobs created there.
Jobs are outsourced to cheaper labour pools.
The products are assembled in china, and sold through the internet from india, to people all over the world.
Alas, here you go beyond my powers to predict. I'm not sure that that level of growth is likely, but I can't see us even approaching it without
some new economic policies.
If I may offer a few commonplaces? I believe the corporate rate can be lowered sufficiently to attract foreign companies. The US still has a number
of appealing aspects to it as a home for manufacturing. Kia surprised people when they announced they were shutting down in the US because the trend
was all the other way, expansion of auto manufacturing in the US.
If other policies such as tax and regulatory were "improved" (whatever that means) it might be an additional draw for foreign companies. They would
probably be delighted to escape Europe if we can sweeten the deal a little.
Sure, third world manufacturing is a problem, but I think the US may still have a slight edge in reputation for quality.
As we get older, as a nation, demand will shift into health care and the service sectors. I have no idea what might pop up as areas for growth, but
an improved business climate may make American start ups more likely.
In short, I just don't know, but you gotta have hope.
Yes it is very hard to predict where growth would come from.
I am glad you mentioned the auto industry, assembling the final product in the US is steady, but the problem is all the pieces are made over seas.
As for healthcare, it would be great if the growth came there, but I cannot see it, without proper jobs, how will people pay for this healthcare? They
have to drastically cut health services to keep from having a complete financial collapse... so there goes medicare...
Everyone loves tech, but the only things that are done in the US is R&D and programming.
Tech is heavily dependent on consumers.
I do however make an exception for the video game industry, and internet providers. Very successful.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.