Bloomberg: US Debt to exceed GDP in 2012

[Winehole23]

U.S.’s $13 Trillion Debt Poised to Overtake GDP


By Garfield Reynolds and Wes Goodman




June 4 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama (http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Barack+Obama&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1) is poised to increase the U.S. debt to a level that exceeds the value of the nation’s annual economic output, a step toward what Bill Gross (http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Bill+Gross&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1) called a “debt super cycle.”
The CHART OF THE DAY tracks U.S. gross domestic product and the government’s total debt, which rose past $13 trillion for the first time this month. The amount owed will surpass GDP in 2012, based on forecasts by the International Monetary Fund. The lower panel shows U.S. annual GDP growth as tracked by the IMF, which projects the world’s largest economy to expand at a slower pace than the 3.2 percent average during the past five decades.



“Over the long term, interest rates on government debt will likely have to rise to attract investors,” said Hiroki Shimazu (http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Hiroki+Shimazu&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1), a market economist in Tokyo at Nikko Cordial Securities Inc., a unit of Japan’s third-largest publicly traded bank. “That will be a big burden on the government and the people.”



Gross, who runs the world’s largest mutual fund at Pacific Investment Management Co. in Newport Beach, California, said in his June outlook (http://www.pimco.com/PIMCO_US.Site/Template/LateBreakingCommentary.aspx?NRMODE=Published&NRNODEGUID=%7b913CFD73-4A6A-4201-9FAB-A07D646B04E2%7d&NRORIGINALURL=%2fLeftNav%2fFeatured%2bMarket%2bCom mentary%2fIO%2f2010%2fBill%2bGross%2bJune%2b2010%2 bInvestment) report that “the debt super cycle trend” suggests U.S. economic growth won’t be enough to support the borrowings “if real interest rates were ever to go up instead of down.”



Dan Fuss (http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Dan+Fuss&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1), who manages the Loomis Sayles Bond Fund, which beat 94 percent of competitors the past year, said last week that he sold all of his Treasury bonds because of prospects interest rates will rise as the U.S. borrows unprecedented amounts. Obama is borrowing record amounts to fund spending programs to help the economy recover from its longest recession since the 1930s.



“The incremental borrower of funds in the U.S. capital markets is rapidly becoming the U.S. Treasury,” Boston-based Fuss said. “Do you really want to buy the debt of the biggest issuer?”


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aa0cI64Gx.4E

[boutons_deux]

dickhead: "(Repug) deficits don't matter"

US deficit hawks, wealthy enough to be mostly immune to the fucked enconomy, are continuing their scorched-earth class warfare by prolonging the Banksters Great Depression by stopping govt counter-cyclical spending.

[Winehole23]

That deficits don't matter is one thing you and dickhead agree on, I guess.

[boutons_deux]

An economy that is 70% consumers over-consuming shit ain't going nowhere, if the consumers don't have money to buy shit, and unemployed/under-employed people are making enough money to pay taxes to offset the counter-cyclical spending.

[Winehole23]

“Those countries with serious fiscal challenges need to accelerate the pace of consolidation,” it said. “We welcome the recent announcements by some countries to reduce their deficits in 2010 and strengthen their fiscal frameworks and institutions.”
These words were in marked contrast to the G20’s April communiqué, which called for support to be maintained until the recovery picked up steam.



After the meeting, finance ministers acknowledged the landscape had changed. George Osborne, British finance minister, claimed credit for this shift in tone.
Many other finance ministers accepted market realities had changed the G20’s policy. Christine Lagarde, France’s finance minister, said: “There’s a large majority for whom redressing the public finances is priority number one. For a minority, it’s supporting growth.”


Even Dominique Strauss-Kahn, managing director of the International Monetary Fund, who has championed fiscal stimulus since January 2008, recognised the world was suddenly different. Asked whether he felt comfortable with the change in tone, he replied: “Totally comfortable. I am not the champion of fiscal stimulus but the champion of right fiscal policy”.



But there were concerns around the G20 that the rush to reduce budget deficits would undermine recovery in the near term.



G20 officials said the US had been the most concerned about the new austerity drive and feared for the momentum for global growth. It had called in the meeting for China to revalue the renminbi and for Germany to boost domestic demand, officials said.
In a letter to the rest of the G20, Tim Geithner, US Treasury secretary, argued: “Concerns about growth as Europe makes needed policy adjustments threaten to undercut the momentum of the recovery”Erstwhile bankster Tim Geithner agrees with Boutons.

[Winehole23]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/786776b4-708f-11df-96ab-00144feabdc0.html

[Blake]

I think we have bigger things to worry about in 2012

http://thefauxistinternational.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/2012-doomsday-election-presidentielle.jpg

[boutons_deux]

Cameron Warns Britons of ‘Decades’ of Austerity

By SARAH LYALL

LONDON — Prime Minister David Cameron said Monday that Britain’s financial situation was “even worse than we thought” and that the country would have to make savage spending cuts to bring its swelling deficit under control.

Stern and grim-faced in a speech in Milton Keynes, just north of London, Mr. Cameron said, “How we deal with these things will affect our economy, our society — indeed our whole way of life.”

“The decisions we make will affect every single person in our country,” he said. “And the effects of those decisions will stay with us for years, perhaps decades, to come.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/08/world/europe/08britain.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

========

And not one gambling-addicted-/loser UK or US Bankster is fined or jailed.

[angrydude]

dickhead: "(Repug) deficits don't matter"

US deficit hawks, wealthy enough to be mostly immune to the fucked enconomy, are continuing their scorched-earth class warfare by prolonging the Banksters Great Depression by stopping govt counter-cyclical spending.

if you don't realize that what the govt is doing is only HELPING the bankers at the expense of everyone else than I don't know what to tell you.

[boutons_deux]

- SpeakEasy - http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy -

Genius Blue Dogs Curry Favor With Voters By Increasing Unemployment


Congress returns to session this week. In case you missed it, after passing Afghanistan war funding without battling an eyelash, last week Blue Dogs slashed an economic relief bill by nearly $100 billion. It was a glorious “victory” for them:

The Blue Dogs won a significant victory by forcing House Democratic leaders to cut $79 billion in spending, including subsidies to help laid-off workers buy health insurance and ease state budget cutbacks.

This is only a victory if self-immolation is considered a victory. Consider:

1. Blue Dogs slash aid to states;
2. In response, states will engage in massive layoffs of public sector workers;
3. These layoffs will exacerbate an already dismal employment picture;
4. Voters will likely turn against Democrats as a result;
5. More Democrats in vulnerable seats will lose re-election;
6. Blue Dogs are disproportionately from vulnerable seats.

So yes, truly a big victory for the blue Dogs. They managed to reduce their own chances of re-election. Awesome!

Of course, the Blue dogs don’t think they are doing this. Instead, they think they are following the will of the voters:

“We are hearing from the public, ‘You’re adding to the deficit, you’re adding to the deficit,’” said Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, a member of the conservative Blue Dogs who have held together against many proposals that require even more borrowing by the Treasury to pay for them.

Yeah, sure they are. That is why, when Americans are asked to list the biggest problem facing the country today, and are not prompted with a list of problems, only 5% cite the budget deficit:

CBS News/New York Times Poll. April 5-12, 2010. N=1,580 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

“What do you think is the most important problem facing this country today?”

Economy/Jobs: 49%
Health care: 8%
Budget deficit / National debt: 5%
Poverty / homelessness: 4%
War / Iraq / Afghanistan: 4%
Big government / bureaucracy: 2%
Moral values: 2%
Other: 21%
Unsure: 5%

The country cares a a lot more about jobs than about the deficit. So, naturally, to fulfill the will of the voters, Blue Dogs slash aid to states that will result in huge layoffs, all in the name of reducing the deficit.

Genius. The name “Blue Dog” derives from supposedly being choked blue by the left-wing of the party, but it seems to me that Blue Dogs are engaged in a self-asphyxiation right now.

URL to article: http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/06/07/genius-blue-dogs-curry-favor-with-voters-by-increasing-unemployment/

[ElNono]

We'll worry about it in 2013...

[boutons_deux]

"if you don't realize that what the govt is doing is only HELPING the bankers at the expense of everyone else than I don't know what to tell you."

Where do you see that I don't realize that?

The "govt" ie Exec and Legislature, is controlled by the finance sector's power aka $$$, then you have radical activist right-wing assholes on SCOTUS enabling corps to buy candidates, elections.

The entire conservative "hate govt" strategy is to dupe sheeple is to blind people that the real cuprits are the capitalists/corporate class warriors controlling govt, to deflect criticism from the string pullers.

[RandomGuy]

Time to raise taxes.

Hard to do that in the era of the Tea Party though.

[MannyIsGod]

Its true. Everyone wants to lower the deficit but no one wants higher taxes. You cannot cut spending and bring down the debt. Taxes will have to go up along with budget cuts.

[Wild Cobra]

Time to raise taxes.

Hard to do that in the era of the Tea Party though.
Bullshit.

Taxes are already set to increase for 2011.

[Wild Cobra]

Its true. Everyone wants to lower the deficit but no one wants higher taxes. You cannot cut spending and bring down the debt. Taxes will have to go up along with budget cuts.
That's why we have to stop adding social programs, and scale back those we have.

[Winehole23]

http://reason.com/assets/mc/ngillespie/2010_06/debtchart22.jpg (http://american.com/archive/2010/june-2010/athens-on-the-potomac)

[Trainwreck2100]

Time to raise taxes.

Hard to do that in the era of the Tea Party though.

probably need to cut some entitlements too

[boutons_deux]

Best way to "raise taxes" is to get 20M people back to the employment rolls, and consuming shit so sales taxes go up.

Cutting the deficit should start with pulling out of Iraq and Afganistan, then cutting the defense budget by 40%.

[Winehole23]

Best way to "raise taxes" is to get 20M people back to the employment rolls, and consuming shit so sales taxes go up.Whatever the wisdom of this suggestion, there's no political will to do this. Another deflationary panic could change that, though.


Cutting the deficit should start with pulling out of Iraq and Afganistan, then cutting the defense budget by 40%.Should be on the chopping block along with entitlements. Defense spending is big government too.

[z0sa]

:lol @ raise taxes. Try not spending trillions of public dollars in private bailouts next time. Taxes should never be raised again, based on principle alone, until we are out of debt.

[RandomGuy]

probably need to cut some entitlements too [in addition to raising taxes]

I agree.

[Winehole23]

Taxes should never be raised again, based on principle alone, until we are out of debt.Given the magnitude of US debt plus unfunded liabilities, I doubt we can afford the principle. In order to get out of debt we'll have to slash spending and raise taxes, in spite of what this means for our standard of living.

[RandomGuy]

:lol @ raise taxes. Try not spending trillions of public dollars in private bailouts next time. Taxes should never be raised again, based on principle alone, until we are out of debt.

Soooo after we are out of debt, *then* we raise taxes? :lol

How about we raise taxes and keep them higher until we are pretty much out of debt, then scale back taxes as the interest charges drop?

Government debt is not all bad, as US Treasuries offer a rather valuable commodity: risk-free assets that earn some return, so I don't think getting rid of US government debt is an entirely good thing.

I do think we should get our debt to income ratio under control though. Under 50% would be my goal.

[scott]

Maybe just time to send politicians to a class on how to balance a checkbook.

[z0sa]

Soooo after we are out of debt, *then* we raise taxes? :lol

Taxes will be raised again. I never implied they should be or that's my plan.


How about we raise taxes and keep them higher until we are pretty much out of debt, then scale back taxes as the interest charges drop?

How about we eliminate every single other unnecessary expense from government spending first? Congress and the Senate could set up and vote on a committee, of non-representatives and non-senators, with that ability. I'm oversimplifying, of course.

I just don't see why the government can spend and borrow unconditionally while bailing out private entities with ungodly sums of public money, then turn around and raise taxes. It's unjust and I can't support it.




Government debt is not all bad, as US Treasuries offer a rather valuable commodity: risk-free assets that earn some return, so I don't think getting rid of US government debt is an entirely good thing.

Yes, being in debt you can actually pay off, and within a reasonable timeframe is fine. No ideas for decreasing the debt substantially or entirely exist that have any political merit all things considered, and a timeframe? LMAO. With the way parties go back and forth in popularity in this country, and both loving to spend spend spend $$$$$, it won't be long before that saved money in the bank is worth nada and our national debt is tens of trillions..

[z0sa]

Given the magnitude of US debt plus unfunded liabilities, I doubt we can afford the principle. In order to get out of debt we'll have to slash spending and raise taxes, in spite of what this means for our standard of living.

When does it ever stop, man? The future of the young worker is bleak. No jobs, high taxes, tons of competition.

[ChumpDumper]

When does it ever stop, man?When we slash spending, raise taxes and get out of debt.

[z0sa]

When we slash spending, raise taxes and get out of debt.

When's that?

[Winehole23]

When's that?In all likelihood, not until we're totally fucked.

[ChumpDumper]

When's that?Well, you never want to do that because it's too hard (or against your principles).

That's the problem.

[z0sa]

Well, you never want to do that because it's too hard (or against your principles).

That's the problem.

Yeah, it's definitely against my principles to run up debt on someone else's bill then charge them extra for it like it's their fault. :lol Hopefully it's against yours too, no matter how necessary the impending tax increase shall be.

[z0sa]

In all likelihood, not until we're totally fucked.

At least show me some progress. Slash spending substantially before taxes are raised and maybe I wouldn't feel so hesitant trusting the best government money can buy.

[ChumpDumper]

Yeah, it's definitely against my principles to run up debt on someone else's bill then charge them extra for it like it's their fault. :lol Hopefully it's against yours too, no matter how necessary the impending tax increase shall be.It is all our faults. No one wants to accept any responsibility, including you.

That's the problem.

[z0sa]

It is all our faults. No one wants to accept any responsibility, including you.

That's the problem.

What am I responsible for in

a) driving down our national debt and

b) slashing government spending?

[ChumpDumper]

What am I responsible for in

a) driving down our national debt and

b) slashing government spending?Do you vote?

As far as I'm concerned we've been living off the largess of government spending for at least three generations. It's time to pay. Sucks to be us, but if we're serious about it, that's what needs to be done.

[z0sa]

Do you vote?

Being only 21 years old, I don't see how I could have changed, or should be blamed, for transgressions snowballing over decades OR held accountable for our stupid two party system, but yes I do.


As far as I'm concerned we've been living off the largess of government

Maybe you have.

[Winehole23]

It ain't fair, z. But who said life was fair?

[z0sa]

It ain't fair, indeed. When do I get my bailout?

[ChumpDumper]

Being only 21 years old, I don't see how I could have changed, or should be blamed, for transgressions snowballing over decades OR held accountable for our stupid two party system, but yes I do.You're responsible. Hell, even by not voting you'd be responsible. We all are responsible.


Maybe you have.As have you.

The problem now is that most people think like you. You don't really want to fix anything if it cuts into what you perceive should be your future lifestyle.

That's fine, just don't complain when things get worse.

[z0sa]

You're responsible.

In the tiniest, most miniscule, 1 out of 310 million people and a young one at that, who didn't vote in most of the men and women who put us in this predicament type of way, perhaps I am.


As have you.

Give some examples.

[ChumpDumper]

In the tiniest, most miniscule, 1 out of 310 million people and a young one at that, who didn't vote in most of the men and women who put us in this predicament type of way, perhaps I am.Yep.


Give some examples.Have you lived in the US?

[tp2021]

The problem now is that most people think like you. You don't really want to fix anything if it cuts into what you perceive should be your future lifestyle.

Yep. Don't want to fix anything, they just want it fixed. "They" meaning America (fuck yeah).

[z0sa]

Yep.

And what, specifically, am I at fault for?

[MannyIsGod]

You're not at fault for shit dude. There, feel better? Is your economic future any brighter?

WH, whenever we discuss this situation just realize that I feel that the vast majority of Americans are Zosas. Maybe then my comments come more into context.

[z0sa]

You're not at fault for shit dude. There, feel better? Is your economic future any brighter?

I'm not the one who ever pointed fingers. I didn't say it's anyone's fault. I didn't blame the left or the right. I said the government itself, needs limiting factors placed on itself.

Sorry you're so mad at yourself for no reason and I refuse to blame myself for corrupt politicians' actions.


WH, whenever we discuss this situation just realize that I feel that the vast majority of Americans are Zosas. Maybe then my comments come more into context.

The vast majority of Americans are z0sas? "Critical thinkers never over-generalize."

[ChumpDumper]

And what, specifically, am I at fault for?Living off the overall benefits of deficit spending.

It's been a great ride, hasn't it?

[z0sa]

Living off the overall benefits of deficit spending.

This is not a direct democracy, Chump. We have little control over federal and state spending from an individual level.

[ChumpDumper]

Do the politicians make the laws, or the people? This is not a direct democracy, Chump.No shit.

Don't worry z0sa, enough people feel the same way you do so nothing will actually change. Thirty years or so down the road, your kid can act all indignant and superior because you didn't do shit about it either.

[z0sa]

No shit.

So why are you having so much difficulty understanding that the American populace didn't make these decisions for themselves?

Blaming every American, whether they vote or not, whether old or young, for choices they didn't make is senseless.

[ChumpDumper]

So why are you having so much difficulty understanding that the American populace didn't make these decisions for themselves?They merely accepted them and refused to do anything about them.

And still refuse to.

[z0sa]

They merely accepted them and refused to do anything about them.

"They"? You're suddenly not part?

Where was our choice in the matter?


And still refuse to.

Refuse to do... what?

[ChumpDumper]

"They"? You're suddenly not part?We. I am as responsible as anyone.


Where was our choice in the matter?There are no choices in any aspect of our lives?


Refuse to do... what?You are saying nothing can be done?

Resignation -- refusal -- end result is the same.

[z0sa]

There are no choices in any aspect of our lives?

Did I say that?

What I'm asking is, how would choosing repub/democrat instead of repub/democrat have changed anything? And if it would, wouldn't that imply some are not at fault, while some are more at fault than others?


You are saying nothing can be done?

Resignation -- refusal -- end result is the same.

No. I'm legitimately asking what we're refusing to do.

Take the Obama campaign, for instance. He promised change and Americans wanted change, and guess what? Obama won comfortably.

Americans, in this case, overwhelmingly went with change, the best way they knew how. Are they at fault now if Obama goes down as someone who did little to aid American progress?

[MannyIsGod]

Zosa who doesn't even vote apparently lecturing others on the lack of power of the American people. Amazing.

[z0sa]

Zosa who doesn't even vote

What are you talking about?

[MannyIsGod]

Zosa let me ask you this, when was the last time you spoke with your state representative and state senator? When was the last time you spoke with your US congressman and senators? When was the last time you were involved with any organizations involved in politics? When did you engage in the political process outside of this forum?

[z0sa]

You don't really care, you're just looking to insult me anyway you can, Manny.

Why are you such a nice guy until you see a post by me? I mean, really, it's pretty bad. You don't give anyone as much as shit as me. I don't even think you're a bad guy and never will, just has it out for me for whatever reason.

[ChumpDumper]

Did I say that?

What I'm asking is, how would choosing repub/democrat instead of repub/democrat have changed anything? And if it would, wouldn't that imply some are not at fault, while some are more at fault than others?Who said you have to choose Republican/Democrat?


No. I'm legitimately asking what we're refusing to do.

Take the Obama campaign, for instance. He promised change and Americans wanted change, and guess what? Obama won comfortably.

Americans, in this case, overwhelmingly went with change, the best way they knew how. Are they at fault now if Obama goes down as someone who did little to aid American progress?Depends on what change they wanted. They certainly weren't voting to raise taxes, slash spending and eliminate the debt.

[MannyIsGod]

Insults? Its not about insults. Maybe you feel they are insults because the answers obviously expose how stupid your powerless comments are. At least you feel shame at your stupidity even if you dance around it and never admit how stupid you're being.

The American people aren't powerless. They're apathetic.

[z0sa]

Insults? Its not about insults. Maybe you feel they are insults because the answers obviously expose how stupid your powerless comments are. At least you feel shame at your stupidity even if you dance around it and never admit how stupid you're being.

The American people aren't powerless. They're apathetic.

Manny, you were only looking to undermine my takes by pointing out a lack of experience. Why? Apparently so you could call them "powerless."

BTW, I've argued before, with you, over American people's powerlessness, and how I thought the people still had all the say when it came right down to it.

You argued Big Business has way more voting power than the American populace.

[z0sa]

Who said you have to choose Republican/Democrat?

So you're blaming the two party system? Or you think independent candidates wouldn't have done any deficit spending before paying off our outstanding debt?

Neither is guaranteed, and both would imply it's more some people's faults than others, some being relatively spotless, thus disproving your theory of "equal blame."


Depends on what change they wanted. They certainly weren't voting to raise taxes, slash spending and eliminate the debt.

Says who?

[ChumpDumper]

So you're blaming the two party system?Are you?


Or you think independent candidates wouldn't have done any deficit spending before paying off our outstanding debt?Depends on the candidate and whether he/she would have been elected.


Neither is guaranteed, and both would imply it's more some people's faults than others, some being relatively spotless, thus disproving your theory of "equal blame."If some people are more to blame than others, that absolves no one. What have you done and what do you plan to do to stop all this? Whine on a message board? Hope?


Says who?Says me.

Do you know of anyone who was voting for Obama to raise taxes, slash spending and pay off the debt?

Please tell me who these people are.

[z0sa]

Are you?

Please answer the question.


Depends on the candidate and whether he/she would have been elected.

So, a hypothetical. Why are you blaming the American people for a hypothetical way out? One they could have taken that may not even have existed? One that you can't even identify?


If some people are more to blame than others, that absolves no one.

So it definitely not of equal blame, then, depending on circumstances.

How many elections have you participated in? Include congressional and senatorial.


What have you done and what do you plan to do to stop all this? Whine on a message board? Hope?

I think we should clarify how much blame everyone has, according to you, before we decide (based on your criteria of blame) who should fix it and how.


Says me.

Cool. What qualifies you to speak for everyone who voted Obama in 08?

You didn't even vote Obama, did you?

[ChumpDumper]

Please answer the question.No.

Are you? Please answer the question.


So, a hypothetical. Why are you blaming the American people for a hypothetical way out? One they could have taken that may not even have existed? One that you can't even identify?It certainly did exist and was identifiable. It was the way that didn't spend so much money.


So it definitely not of equal blame, then, depending on circumstances.Some I would see being more directly responsible, others by ignorance, acquiescence, apathy, etc.


How many elections have you participated in? Include congressional and senatorial.Define "participate."


I think we should clarify how much blame everyone has, according to you, before we decide who should fix it.Why? Many of those to blame are dead. What good does affixing a percentage of blame do in that case?

And who will do the clarifying?

You?

To what end?

Protecting your own interest?



Cool. What qualifies you to speak for everyone who voted Obama in 08?Can you give me any example of any voter voting for Obama to slash spending, raise taxes and eliminate the entire national debt?

Any?


You didn't even vote Obama, did you?No. I thought neither candidate would eliminate the national debt. Can you find any example of any voter who claimed they thought Obama would?

[Winehole23]

For Manny:


Japan's new prime minister warned Friday that his country could face a financial mess like that of Greece if it did not deal urgently with its swelling national debt. Naoto Kan, speaking in his first address to Parliament after taking office Tuesday, said Japan, the world's second-largest economy, cannot continue to let government debt swell while state finances are under pressure from an aging and declining population.

"It is difficult to sustain a policy that relies too heavily on issuing debt. As we have seen with the financial confusion in the European community stemming from Greece, our finances could collapse if trust in national bonds is lost and growing national debt is left alone," he said.

Japan has the largest public debt among industrialized nations at 218.6 percent of its gross domestic product in 2009, according to the International Monetary Fund.

Kan, who became Japan's sixth prime minister in four years after a short stint as finance minister, promised his government would work closely with the Bank of Japan to avoid an increase in deflation and would focus on developing a "strong and comprehensive" policy.
http://www.startribune.com/business/96116674.html?elr=KArks:DCiU1OiP:DiiUiacyKUUr

[Winehole23]

What's that about Japan again, Manny?

[Winehole23]

Zosa let me ask you this, when was the last time you spoke with your state representative and state senator? When was the last time you spoke with your US congressman and senators? When was the last time you were involved with any organizations involved in politics? When did you engage in the political process outside of this forum?z0sa:MIG put me through that very same wringer once upon a time. It passes. It ain't a real bad idea if you like it. I don't.

[Winehole23]

Manny: Our erstwhile talk, did not have the intended effect. I don't temporize with officialdom, absent some fucking emergency. That's me.

Sorry I couldn't be more like you, all up in their grills all the time. That ain't me. Maybe it's ok for somebody else.

[boutons_deux]

"Deficits don't matter" -- dickhead

Hawking the deficit NOW is just anoter tactic of the VRWC strategy to destroy govt, at all levels, and game the system even more for the kleptocratic plutocracy.

Notice how the super wealthy are still super wealthy and detached from the Banksters Great Depression while the Real Economy, ie the one that provide jobs, services, products, is still in a deep hole and will be for many years. It's all part of VRWC plan, the results of Repug/consersative "philosophy" to suck wealth out govts and people.

Continuous warfare is another tactic to transfer taxpayer dollars to the MIC, leaving the taxpayers on the hook for govt debt and interest for decades.

Watch the Congress whores gut the financial reform bill so Blanche Lincoln's anti-casino section and the Volcker Rule will be loopholed to meaninglessness if not actually excluded. Banks will still be able to gamble with taxpayers' money, will still be TBTF, and will continue sucking the wealth out of the real economy.

Has anyone noticed how despearte counties and municipalities are selling homeowners utility bills, property tax debts to predatory capitalists who then add on a few 10s of $1000 of "collection fees" then foreclose the property?