Say Goodbye to the Mirage Economy

[Nbadan]

Living on credit and financing stupid wars is starting to catch up with the American economy...


The Fading of the Mirage Economy


Now that the housing bubble has burst, residential real estate is finding a new equilibrium, that place where supply and demand come back into a rough balance, and at a lower price. The dollar is also being repriced, after a long period of overvaluation. And don't think that those cheap airline tickets were anything but a mirage. That's another industry in a painful repricing.

Now that the housing bubble has burst, residential real estate is finding a new equilibrium, that place where supply and demand come back into a rough balance, and at a lower price. The dollar is also being repriced, after a long period of overvaluation. And don't think that those cheap airline tickets were anything but a mirage. That's another industry in a painful repricing.

Suddenly, it seems, we're getting hit from all directions.

Energy and food prices are soaring. The housing market continues to collapse. Government revenue is falling, and taxes are rising. Airlines are jacking up fares and fees while reducing service. Banks are pulling credit lines. Auto companies are cutting production once again. Even investment bankers are losing their jobs.

The tendency is to see these as separate developments, each with its own causes and dynamic. Fundamentally, however, they are all part of the same story -- the story of the global economy purging itself of large and unsustainable imbalances that for a time allowed many Americans to think they were richer than they really were.

Most of us understand that an overabundance of cheap, easy credit created a housing bubble that artificially inflated the price of land and housing, produced too many homes and homeowners, and persuaded too many Americans to dip into their home equity to support a lifestyle their income could not sustain. Now that the bubble has burst, we are coming to accept the reality of lower prices, reduced production, declining homeownership rates and the wisdom that a house is not an ATM or a substitute for a retirement fund.

Put another way, residential real estate is finding a new equilibrium, that magical place in the economist's imagination where supply and demand of houses and mortgages come back into some sort of rough balance at a lower price.

But the thing to remember is that it's not just residential real estate. The same factors that were behind the housing bubble were also at work, to varying degrees, in the auto bubble, the commercial real estate bubble, the travel bubble, the college tuition bubble, the retail bubble, the Web 2.0 bubble and most recently the commodities bubble. Unlike housing, which began losing steam two years ago, these other sectors have just begun the painful process of repricing and finding a new balance between supply and demand.

Take the case of the airline industry, which likes to blame its woes on skyrocketing fuel prices.

While there's an ongoing debate about why the price of oil has doubled over the past year, there is little doubt that the declining dollar is a significant factor. The decline is the result of years of large and growing U.S. trade deficits that should have caused the exchange rate to adjust years ago but didn't because so many of our trading partners in Asia and the Middle East were intent on linking their currencies to the dollar. In the process of maintaining those dollar pegs and reinvesting those surpluses in Treasury bonds and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac securities, they created a surfeit of cheap credit that spawned all those bubbles.

Now that the process is reversing itself, the overvalued dollar is being repriced. But in the short run, it has played havoc with the cost of commodities, most of which are priced in dollars. Producers have raised their dollar prices to prevent a decline in the global purchasing power from their commodities sales. At the same time, some of the excess credit that financed mortgages and corporate takeovers has been shifted to commodity speculation, turbocharging the swings in prices of everything from corn futures to jet fuel. At some point, that speculative bubble will burst and energy prices will plunge. When things finally settle down, the new equilibrium price is almost certain to be well above where it was last year at this time.

That said, jet fuel is hardly the airlines' only problem. The reality is that for too many years, airlines have sold too many tickets at prices that failed to reflect the real cost of providing the service passengers want and expect. That includes such things as cleaning planes; handling reservations, check-ins and baggage without undue waiting; serving a decent meal when necessary; and treating passengers fairly when flights are canceled. But they also include costs that may be less obvious, like keeping up with preventive maintenance, hedging fuel costs, paying a decent wage to front-line employees, investing in modern air traffic control systems, and paying a price that reflects the true value of scarce air space and landing rights.

Airline executives will say that if they were to charge enough to reflect all these costs, they would have many fewer passengers. That's the point: A sustainable equilibrium will inevitably involve a smaller industry with fewer planes, fewer flights, fewer passengers and fewer employees.

And what about that $199 round-trip fare from Washington to L.A.? Sad to say, it was no less a part of the previous economic mirage than the no-doc subprime loans, Google at $750 a share and takeover deals financed at 80 percent leverage.

What I've described is a double whammy for American households: the slower growth that comes with downsizing a number of key industries that expanded as a result of the credit bubble, along with rising prices for a food, energy, health care and almost everything imported. And you can add a third blow, this one from government.

Across the country, state and local governments are already hip-deep into budget crises in response to declining revenue from property assessments and real estate transfers. Here in Washington, a dramatic drop off in revenue from business profits and capital gains has wiped out any hope of reducing federal operating deficits that, under the likeliest political and economic scenarios, will exceed $500 billion a year for as far as the eye can see.

This is another example of an unsustainable equilibrium that has roots in the trade deficit and the credit bubble. Despite the happy talk you might be hearing from the presidential candidates, it presents Americans with a stark and unpleasant choice.

One option is to raise taxes and leave less money for private spending, which is what many state and local governments have begun to do. The other is to accept lower levels of government service and subsidies, which inevitably will lower the incomes of some households while forcing others to go without services or pay for them privately. Either way, it amounts to a lower standard of living than we thought we had achieved.

Is all this the end of the world? For the richest country on the planet, certainly not. But it does represent the end of a decade or more during which Americans were permitted and even encouraged by the rest of the world -- and by their own leaders -- to live way beyond their means. As a result, the United States has gone from being the largest creditor nation to the world's largest debtor. For the first time since the early 1980s, Americans will have to endure several years of uncomfortably slow growth and uncomfortably high inflation as the U.S. economy regains its balance and creates a foundation for more solid and sustainable growth.

Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052703077.html?hpid=topnews)

The really sad part is is that the people most responsible for putting into this financial mess - Republicans, will get to sit back and blame everyone (mainly Obama and democrats) else for rising taxes, less services and a declining standard of living...

[boutons_]

"Republicans, will get to sit back and blame everyone (mainly Obama and democrats) else for rising taxes, less services and a declining standard of living..."

The Repug/neo-cunt/PNAC goals were never about the USA, nor its citizens, nor the national well-being, nor national security, nor GWOT, but exclusively about the enriching and protecting the predatory, kleptocratic plutocracy, the modern equivalent of Robber Barons (but much more sophisticated, deceptive, invisible, even passive), that manipulates the USA as it pleases.

[xrayzebra]

The really sad part is is that the people most responsible for putting into this financial mess - Republicans, will get to sit back and blame everyone (mainly Obama and democrats) else for rising taxes, less services and a declining standard of living...

No, the really sad thing is that you believe what you said in
the above post. Really, really, sad.

[boutons_]

The Mirage Economy is plugged in to, and unpluggable from, the world economy.

============

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/logoprinter.gif (http://www.nytimes.com/)
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/ads/spacer.gifhttp://graphics8.nytimes.com/ads/fox/printerfriendly.gifhttp://graphics8.nytimes.com/ads/choke/choke_88x31.gif (http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_click.html?type=goto&page=www.nytimes.com/printer-friendly&pos=Position1&sn2=336c557e/4f3dd5d2&sn1=baf13917/82cb53fa&camp=foxsearch2008_emailtools_810904d-nyt5&ad=choke88x31&goto=http://www.foxsearchlight.com/choke/)

June 2, 2008
Op-Ed Columnist

The World Is Upside Down

By ROGER COHEN
RIO DE JANEIRO

For a while the world was flat. Now it’s upside down.

To understand it, invert your thinking. See the developed world as depending on the developing world, rather than the other way round. Understand that two-thirds of global economic growth last year came from emerging countries, whose economies will expand about 6.7 percent in 2008, against 1.3 percent for the United States, Japan and euro zone states.

The sharp rise in prices for energy, commodities, metals and minerals produced mainly in the developing world explains part of this shift. That has created the balance of payments surpluses fueling dollar-dripping sovereign wealth funds in the gulf and East Asia. They amuse themselves picking up a stake in BP here, a chunk of Morgan Stanley there, and why not a sliver of Total.

We of the developed-world Paleolithic species are fair game for the upstarts now, our predator role exhausted. The U.S. and Europe may one day need all the charity they can get.

To place this inversion in focus, it helps to be in Brazil, where winter (so to speak) arrives with the Northern Hemisphere summer, and economic optimism, as exuberant as the vegetation, increases at the same brisk clip as U.S. foreclosures.

Huge offshore oil finds, a sugarcane ethanol boom, vast reserves of unused arable land, mineral wealth and abundant fresh water contribute to Brazilian buoyancy. But natural resources are only part of the story. As in China and India, an expanding internal market is bolstering growth. So is increasing corporate sophistication and global ambition.

At the annual National Forum, a gathering of business leaders, I felt like a first-world pipsqueak as leaders of the national energy company Petrobras (bigger than BP, Shell and Total) and Companhia Vale do Rio Doce, or C.V.R.D. (the world’s second largest mining company), reeled off head-turning statistics.

Petrobras, which has spearheaded Brazil’s push to self-sufficiency from heavy dependence on imported oil 30 years ago, will more than double oil production to 4.2 million barrels a day in 2015 from 1.9 million barrels today.

“With the latest discoveries, the South Atlantic will become a huge oil producer,” predicted Jose Sergio Gabrielli de Azvedo, its chief executive.
Roger Agnelli of C.V.R.D. waved away the United States (“It’s full of debt”) to focus on the company’s ambitions in Asia. It was imperative to be there, he said, because that’s where growth, capital and ambition are. China, he noted, will account for 55 percent of iron ore consumption, 31.6 percent of nickel, and 42 percent of aluminum by 2012. Case closed.

Like many other big emerging-market corporations, C.V.R.D. has been on a buying spree. It’s not just sovereign wealth funds that are acquiring first-world companies these days. It’s the new giants of the NAN (Newly Acquisitive Nations).

Emerging-market mergers and acquisitions are up 17 percent this year to $218 billion, while for the rest of the world they’re down 43 percent to $991 billion, according to Thomson Reuters.

The 2007 Unctad World Investment Report said developing-world direct foreign investment totaled $193 billion in 2006, compared with a 1990s annual average of $54 billion. The U.S. 2006 figure was $216.6 billion.
C.V.R.D. bought Canada’s Inco, a nickel miner, for $17 billion in 2006. It came close to acquiring the Anglo-Swiss miner Xstrata for $90 billion this year. Just last week, India’s Vedanta Resources reached a $2.6 billion deal to buy U.S. copper miner Asarco.

That deal is being challenged by Grupo Mexico, creating a Latin-American-Asian fight for a U.S. company.

If you have trouble getting your mind around that, try standing on your head.

That’s also a good position from which to view India’s Tata Motors agreeing to buy Land Rover and Jaguar from Ford for $2.3 billion, or Tata Steel’s acquisition last year of the Anglo-Dutch Corus Group steel company for $12 billion.

Globalization is now a two-way street; in fact it’s an Indian street with traffic weaving in all directions.

“In an inverted world, not only have developing economies become dominant forces in global exports in the space of a few years, but their companies are becoming major players in the global economy, challenging the incumbents that dominated the international scene in the 20th century,” said Claudio Frischtak, a Brazilian economist and consultant.

A shift in economic power is under way to which the developed world has not yet adjusted. Of course the G-8 and the permanent membership of the U.N. Security Council need to be expanded to reflect this change. The 21st century can’t be handled with 20th-century institutions.

That’s obvious. Less obvious is how the United States, which underwrites global security at vast expense, begins to share this burden, so that the new multi-polarity of wealth is reflected in a multipolarity of security commitments.

Headstands are in order for the next U.S. president.

===============

I just can't imagine Old Sick McFlopPanderKeating doing headstands, physically or metaphorically. :lol

[BradLohaus]

I'm guessing that we won't be hearing any straight talk like that from the conventions.

I thought this was a surprising article the other day; Paul Volcker and the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia pretty much threw Greenspan and Bernanke under the bus regarding inflation.

The White Elephant That Could Destroy Your Portfolio
http://seekingalpha.com/article/78660-the-white-elephant-that-could-destroy-your-portfolio-part-i?source=wildcard


The financial crisis has recently made talking heads of several heavy hitters in the investment community. Most notable amongst them is Warren Buffett, who now appears on TV almost every other day offering his sage insight to where we are in the crisis.

Buffett, as he commonly states in public, is not a “macro” guy. And I’m sure he appreciates the opportunity to impress with his insights and draw attention away from his recent embarrassment— losing nearly $1 billion in derivatives trading after famously calling derivatives “weapons of mass destruction.”

However, to me, a far more significant character has recently joined the financial media roundtable. Unlike Buffett, he’s very much a macro guy. And he understands the Federal Reserve and its actions better than anyone: He was the last decent Fed Chairman we’ve had in 30+ years.

I’m talking about Paul Volcker.

For those of you who are unfamiliar with Volcker, he served as Fed Chairman from 1979 to 1987. Volcker came in when the US was experiencing the worst inflation since the Civil war and left when the Fed experienced the worst protests and political backlash since the Great Depression.

Simply put, Volcker kicked off a serious recession in order to slay inflation. From an objective standpoint, his decision made economic sense, but it was a political death knell. Volcker’s clearly aware of the fact, joking that the “greatest strategic error” in his life was not the recession, but taking his wife fly-fishing in Maine for their honeymoon.

Our country has long struggled because people make political decisions differently from economic decisions. Volcker’s decision to impose a temporary set-back — a recession — to stop a problem that could easily result in the long-term destruction of Americans’ quality of life — inflation — is a perfect example of this discrepancy. It stands in sharp contrast to later Fed Chairmen Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke’s decisions to stave off a recession at the expense of the dollar.

So to see Paul Volcker speaking to Congress and hinting that the Federal Reserve is screwing up, is a BIG deal. Unlike his successors, Volcker understands economics. And it’s clear he now has a better understanding of political backlash: His criticism is expressed more via hints and insinuations than outright accusations.

And what is Volcker’s real concern? His old arch-nemesis, and the white elephant in the living room of the financial media, inflation.

The mainstream financial media has talked our heads off about “bottoms,” GDP growth, recessions and other news items. Amazingly, inflation, which is currently in the double digits (more on this later), hardly gets any mention. When it does, it’s the usual blather that it’s “better” or “worse than expected.”

A far more informative approach — and one that would be much more helpful to investors — would be to stop discussing inflation relative to expectations and start talking about inflation relative to reality. The Fed has changed its measure of inflation twice in the last 30 years; both times it chose to become more lenient. In fact, if you measured inflation today as you did when Volcker was Fed Chairman, you’d find inflation was in the double-digits.



As you can see, the Fed’s current measure of inflation is beyond inaccurate; it’s outright fraudulent. In fact it’s so bad that both Paul Volcker and members of the Philadelphia Federal Reserve bank have publicly stated it is not the “best predictor of total inflation.” You know things are bad when even current members of the Fed are beginning to admit their measures are somewhat inaccurate.

If you haven’t taken steps to protect your portfolio from inflation, you need to do so immediately. I’ll explain how in Tuesday’s essay (financial markets will be closed Monday in observance of Memorial Day).

PS. You can see Paul Volcker’s recent testimony to Congress and his interview with Charlie Rose here and here.

11+% inflation currently if we use the Volcker era measurements. As the WP article said, the dollar is the correction mechanism that is adjusting our excess.

[Wild Cobra]

Living on credit and financing stupid wars is starting to catch up with the American economy...

War is coveed by constitution. Social programs are not. Cut the social programs first.



The really sad part is is that the people most responsible for putting into this financial mess - Republicans, will get to sit back and blame everyone (mainly Obama and democrats) else for rising taxes, less services and a declining standard of living...
How are they to blame? They didn't come to power until 1995, following the 1994 elections. Our two trade agreements that cause us the most grief were negotiated by a democrat controlled congress and sign into law by president Clinton in 1994.

Please check the facts before spewing propaganda. You should research NAFTA and FTAAP before you respond. The other agreements by republicans are miniscule in comparison.

Aren't we seeing more goods from China than elsewhere? This is a demonrat thing, and president Clinton banked out big on it. He sold us out.

[ChumpDumper]

Just because a war is constitutional it is good?
How are they to blame? They didn't come to power until 1995, following the 1994 elections. Our two trade agreements that cause us the most grief were negotiated by a democrat controlled congress and sign into law by president Clinton in 1994.

Please check the facts before spewing propaganda. You should research NAFTA and FTAAP before you respond. The other agreements by republicans are miniscule in comparison.So what did Republicans do to fix those errors when they controlled all three branches of government?

[Wild Cobra]

Just because a war is constitutional it is good?
Why do you read into what people say? War is never good. It's a necessary evil. We can disagree about the merit of this war. Fine. However, it is a constituitional power. Social programs are not.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.


So what did Republicans do to fix those errors when they controlled all three branches of government?
What can they do to nullify a treaty? Is there a way? I don't have that answer. Do you?

Please. I would like to know. How do you nullify a teaty?

[ChumpDumper]

Why do you read into what people say? War is never good. It's a necessary evil. We can disagree about the merit of this war. Fine. However, it is a constituitional power. Social programs are not.But war can be ended much easier than social programs.




What can they do to nullify a treaty? Is there a way? I don't have that answer. Do you?

Please. I would like to know. How do you nullify a teaty?There are any number of ways to nullify a treaty, but since your major bitch is about China, that is unnecessary.

Why did the Republicans do nothing about China?

[Wild Cobra]

But war can be ended much easier than social programs.

That's why the federal government should not be financing social programs. It becomes a never ending expenditure.



There are any number of ways to nullify a treaty, but since your major bitch is about China, that is unnecessary.

Why did the Republicans do nothing about China?
I don't know they can. Can they? How do you nullify the FTAAP treaty?

Again, how do you nullify a treaty?

Really. I don't know. What is the process? Is there one?

[ChumpDumper]

That's why the federal government should not be financing social programs. It becomes a never ending expenditure.Kind of like this war....



I don't know they can. Can they? How do you nullify the FTAAP treaty?Doesn't a treaty have to be ratified first?

When did the US Senate ratify the FTAAP?


Again, how do you nullify a treaty?

Really. I don't know. What is the process? Is there one?In the case of NAFTA:

Article 2205: Withdrawal

A Party may withdraw from this Agreement six months after it provides written notice of withdrawal to the other Parties. If a Party withdraws, the Agreement shall remain in force for the remaining Parties.

http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/nafta/chap-22.asp#A2205

All we have to do to get out of NAFTA is give six months' notice.

Why didn't the Republicans do that?

[Heath Ledger]

Oh no the sky is falling the sky is falling what will we do....

[Wild Cobra]

Doesn't a treaty have to be ratified first?

When did the US Senate ratify the FTAAP?

WOW... I missed that. I thought it was radified in 1994. My bad. Oh well, China has been under "Most favored Nation" status since the early 90's. Can you deny the Clinton's didn't benifit big?

Now I agree. Why didn't the republicans do something? Maybe because like I said before, they moved to the left...



In the case of NAFTA:

Article 2205: Withdrawal

A Party may withdraw from this Agreement six months after it provides written notice of withdrawal to the other Parties. If a Party withdraws, the Agreement shall remain in force for the remaining Parties.

http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/nafta/chap-22.asp#A2205

All we have to do to get out of NAFTA is give six months' notice.

Why didn't the Republicans do that?
If that is true, we probably should. Problem is, both parties are for more power. Not letting 'we the people,' have our own power.

Actually, I don't mind NAFTA so much. They are our immediate neighbor and I believe it benifits us to help their economy.


If their nation could increase it's living standards, we wouldn't need to worry about border control so much. We really have few problem between us and Canada. Wouldn't it be nice to have the same situation on the southern border?


I say we use NAFTA as leverage. We withdraw if Mexico continues to aide their people in getting here illegally.

[BradLohaus]

If the dollar falls lower in the coming years and the peso gets close to where it was before the '94 devalutation then they might just go home on their own.

Ford to open new plant in Mexico
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7428952.stm


US giant Ford is to invest $3bn (£1.5bn) in a new car plant in Mexico, the biggest investment in the country's manufacturing sector.

The move is a blow to American car workers who had hoped the factory would be built in the United States.

Ford has lost more than $15bn (£7.5bn) over the past two years and says the new facility is crucial to its future.

Mexican President Felipe Calderon hailed the announcement as a "turning point" for his country.

The new factory, and other changes to Ford's Mexican operations, are likely to create an estimated 4,500 jobs in Mexico, where car workers earn substantially less than their American counterparts.

Mr Calderon made the announcement with Ford president Alan Mullaly at the presidential compound in Mexico City on Friday.

"We want Mexico to be an automotive country, one that is competitive and with the most advantages so that the worldwide automotive industry will establish itself here," Mr Calderon said.

Mr Mullaly said: "We are convinced the geographic location as well as Mexico's highly qualified labour force and economic stability make this decision the right one for our business."

Environmental concerns

The factory will build Ford's new Fiesta sub-compact car, which is the company's attempt to shift towards the fast-growing market for smaller, more fuel-efficient cars.

It will be located near Mexico City and the plant is expected to start delivering the Fiesta to the US market in 2010.

The BBC's Duncan Kennedy in Mexico City says Ford, the second largest car manufacturer in the US, is being hit by the slowdown in consumer spending and soaring oil prices.

Drivers are moving away from Ford's traditional stable of bigger trucks and Sports Utility Vehicles because of rising fuel prices, plummeting house prices and concerns about the environment, he says.

The decision to invest in Mexico will be a blow to the United Auto Workers union, which reached a cost-cutting agreement with Ford in a bid to make US plants more competitive.

The company had also hoped its programme of slashing cut-price vehicles to car hire companies would help ease its financial woes.

But earlier this month, Ford announced it was abandoning its goal of making its loss-making North American business profitable next year.

Ford's plans in Mexico also include moving one of its factories from large truck to small car production, and opening a new diesel engine line at another plant.

[balli]

Ford to open new plant in Mexico
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7428952.stm

And I already thought American made cars were shitty.

[boutons_]

"they might just go home on their own."

Just like anybody else, they follow the money, for a better life.

Where's the crime in that, esp when US businesses fully encourage and reward the illegals for crossing over? Cheap illegals illegally/cheaply exploited and drugs, two MX imports in huge demand in USA. It's a conservative's wet dream of "free market", supply/demand naturally servicing each other. The conservative's real agenda is racism, not illegal immigration.

That Ford is going to build a plant in MX (where exactly?) is not as important as whether Ford will build cars the market wants. They haven't been too good at that vs Toyota in recent years, no matter where the factory or what the costs.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

"Republicans, will get to sit back and blame everyone (mainly Obama and democrats) else for rising taxes, less services and a declining standard of living..."

The Repug/neo-cunt/PNAC goals were never about the USA, nor its citizens, nor the national well-being, nor national security, nor GWOT, but exclusively about the enriching and protecting the predatory, kleptocratic plutocracy, the modern equivalent of Robber Barons (but much more sophisticated, deceptive, invisible, even passive), that manipulates the USA as it pleases.

Do you honestly believe that the Democratic power brokers feel any differently than their Republican counterparts?

Question.

[Clandestino]

dan and boutons think the u.s.a is so fucked up, but they sit on their asses constantly bitching and complaining. i love it! hahaha.

[possessed]

The important question is how do we get Obama to pay our mortgages for us? When is he going to bail us out of our house payments anyway? I could use the extra dough to add an in-ground pool and rec room.

[balli]

dan and boutons think the u.s.a is so fucked up, but they sit on their asses constantly bitching and complaining. i love it! hahaha.


What are they supposed to do? Overthrow the government by force? Give up their lives and families here and move to Venezuela? Get a clue.

And nobody thinks the USA is fucked up, only half of it's citizenry. (the southern half primarily)

[PEP]

dan and boutons think the u.s.a is so fucked up, but they sit on their asses constantly bitching and complaining. i love it! hahaha.

Yeah, I like how bufoon keeps saying how bad it is in Iraq and all that is wrong with GWOT but he wont ever answer me if he's actually been there on the ground to see the progress, I just got back from spending a few weeks over there and I dont see what the fuck he ever talks about.

I'd be more than happy to take them both with me next time I go. :)

[Clandestino]

What are they supposed to do? Overthrow the government by force? Give up their lives and families here and move to Venezuela? Get a clue.

And nobody thinks the USA is fucked up, only half of it's citizenry. (the southern half primarily)

well, if the usa is so, soo, sooo fucked up as they alwasy try to say how are they still able to sit around and post all day?

and why are half the citizens fucked up? you may be one of the losers...baillijuana??? wtf is that about?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

What are they supposed to do? Overthrow the government by force? Give up their lives and families here and move to Venezuela? Get a clue.

And nobody thinks the USA is fucked up, only half of it's citizenry. (the southern half primarily)

So by southern half do you mean anyone who's conservative? Because I can play the same game and say all the liberal northerners and easterners are fucked up.

It's just as baseless as your claim. Man, that was easy.

[Clandestino]

have you guys seen the northerners eating from the trash lately? i forget the term for them.

[Don Quixote]

Oh no the sky is falling the sky is falling what will we do....

I know! Let's let the government handle our health care. And our income. And while we're at it, let's let them buy our mortgages for us, and turn our corn into fuel while we have tons of oil in the ground.

Sounds like a plan!

[boutons_]

"Let's let the government handle our health care"

if not the govt, who else the corps who rip us off now? Give them s/s, medicare/caid, our waters, our highways, the military?, the police/fire, all privatized and unregulated?

[Clandestino]

boutons is such a lost little boy... hates the government, but then wants it to do everything for him as well...

[boutons_]

clanny, go fuck yourself.

What are you doing, with your stinking ass, to correct all the fuckups of the dubya and his henchmen?

I didn't say I hate government (provide link), and I'm not surprised you make yet another huge mistake in basic comprehension.

I hate the Repugs' willfully incompetent govt, how they disrespect and fuck up the govt under their control, always to the advantage of their paymasters, in every single dept, weakening rules, violating rules, ignoring rules, not enforcing rules. Citizens and the environment are always the losers, business mgmt and capitalists always the winners under the Repugs.

It's not saying much, but govt can be done a lot better than the Repugs' destruction of govt. The govt AIN'T NEVER going away, so we better make the best of it, as eternally hard as that is.

Handing govt to business is one sure way to fuck it up even more (see current health care system, see unregulated private investment banks and markets, etc, etc).

[balli]

have you guys seen the northerners eating from the trash lately? i forget the term for them.


So by southern half do you mean anyone who's conservative? Because I can play the same game and say all the liberal northerners and easterners are fucked up.

It's just as baseless as your claim. Man, that was easy.


Fuck the South. Fuck 'em. We should have let them go when they wanted to leave. But no, we had to kill half a million people so they'd stay part of our special Union. Fighting for the right to keep slaves - yeah, those are states we want to keep.

And now what do we get? We're the fucking Arrogant Northeast Liberal Elite? How about this for arrogant: the South is the Real America? The Authentic America. Really?

Cause we fucking founded this country, assholes. Those Founding Fathers you keep going on and on about? All that bullshit about what you think they meant by the Second Amendment giving you the right to keep your assault weapons in the glove compartment because you didn't bother to read the first half of the fucking sentence? Who do you think those wig-wearing lacy-shirt sporting revolutionaries were? They were fucking blue-staters, dickhead. Boston? Philadelphia? New York? Hello? Think there might be a reason all the fucking monuments are up here in our backyard?

No, No. Get the fuck out. We're not letting you visit the Liberty Bell and fucking Plymouth Rock anymore until you get over your real American selves and start respecting those other nine amendments. Who do you think those fucking stripes on the flag are for? Nine are for fucking blue states. And it would be 10 if those Vermonters had gotten their fucking Subarus together and broken off from New York a little earlier. Get it? We started this shit, so don't get all uppity about how real you are you Johnny-come-lately "Oooooh I've been a state for almost a hundred years" dickheads. Fuck off.

Arrogant? You wanna talk about us Northeasterners being fucking arrogant? What's more American than arrogance? Hmmm? Maybe horsies? I don't think so. Arrogance is the fucking cornerstone of what it means to be American. And I wouldn't be so fucking arrogant if I wasn't paying for your fucking bridges, bitch.

All those Federal taxes you love to hate? It all comes from us and goes to you, so shut up and enjoy your fucking Tennessee Valley Authority electricity and your fancy highways that we paid for. And the next time Florida gets hit by a hurricane you can come crying to us if you want to, but you're the ones who built on a fucking swamp. "Let the Spanish keep it, it’s a shithole," we said, but you had to have your fucking orange juice.

The next dickwad who says, "It’s your money, not the government's money" is gonna get their ass kicked. Nine of the ten states that get the most federal fucking dollars and pay the least... can you guess? Go on, guess. That’s right, motherfucker, they're red states. And eight of the ten states that receive the least and pay the most? It’s too easy, asshole, they’re blue states. It’s not your money, assholes, it’s fucking our money. What was that Real American Value you were spouting a minute ago? Self reliance? Try this for self reliance: buy your own fucking stop signs, assholes.

Let’s talk about those values for a fucking minute. You and your Southern values can bite my ass because the blue states got the values over you fucking Real Americans every day of the goddamn week. Which state do you think has the lowest divorce rate you marriage-hyping dickwads? Well? Can you guess? It’s fucking Massachusetts, the fucking center of the gay marriage universe. Yes, that’s right, the state you love to tie around the neck of anyone to the left of Strom Thurmond has the lowest divorce rate in the fucking nation. Think that’s just some aberration? How about this: 9 of the 10 lowest divorce rates are fucking blue states, asshole, and most are in the Northeast, where our values suck so bad. And where are the highest divorce rates? Care to fucking guess? 10 of the top 10 are fucking red-ass we're-so-fucking-moral states. And while Nevada is the worst, the Bible Belt is doing its fucking part.

But two guys making out is going to fucking ruin marriage for you? Yeah? Seems like you're ruining it pretty well on your own, you little bastards. Oh, but that's ok because you go to church, right? I mean you do, right? Cause we fucking get to hear about it every goddamn year at election time. Yes, we're fascinated by how you get up every Sunday morning and sing, and then you're fucking towers of moral superiority. Yeah, that's a workable formula. Maybe us fucking Northerners don't talk about religion as much as you because we're not so busy sinning, hmmm? Ever think of that, you self-righteous assholes? No, you're too busy erecting giant stone tablets of the Ten Commandments in buildings paid for by the fucking Northeast Liberal Elite. And who has the highest murder rates in the nation? It ain't us up here in the North, assholes.

Well this gravy train is fucking over. Take your liberal-bashing, federal-tax-leaching, confederate-flag-waving, holier-than-thou, hypocritical bullshit and shove it up your ass.

And no, you can't have your fucking convention in New York next time. Fuck off.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

"Let's let the government handle our health care"

if not the govt, who else the corps who rip us off now? Give them s/s, medicare/caid, our waters, our highways, the military?, the police/fire, all privatized and unregulated?

Hey crackhead, err boutons. Name me one branch of the government that is the model of efficiency, tight budgetary controls, and always puts our taxpayer dollars to good use.

Bureacracy sucks, and you want to us to be buried by one. Wake the fuck up kid. Didn't mommy teach you any of this shit in home school?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Well this gravy train is fucking over. Take your liberal-bashing, federal-tax-leaching, confederate-flag-waving, holier-than-thou, hypocritical bullshit and shove it up your ass.

And no, you can't have your fucking convention in New York next time. Fuck off.

Congrats, you just found your way onto my ignore list, first person ever. I can't believe you're this spiteful.

And we can't have a convention in New York? Oh no! What ever will we do?

Fine, we'll take everything south of the Mason-Dixon line. And that includes all oil deposits in Texas, the Gulf, and we're going to start tapping the oil off the coast of Florida too.

Oh, and by the way, gas will now cost you $10 a gallon. Have fun!

Oh yeah, one more thing...

It's my money, not the government's money.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

clanny, go fuck yourself.

What are you doing, with your stinking ass, to correct all the fuckups of the dubya and his henchmen?

I didn't say I hate government (provide link), and I'm not surprised you make yet another huge mistake in basic comprehension.

I hate the Repugs' willfully incompetent govt, how they disrespect and fuck up the govt under their control, always to the advantage of their paymasters, in every single dept, weakening rules, violating rules, ignoring rules, not enforcing rules. Citizens and the environment are always the losers, business mgmt and capitalists always the winners under the Repugs.

It's not saying much, but govt can be done a lot better than the Repugs' destruction of govt. The govt AIN'T NEVER going away, so we better make the best of it, as eternally hard as that is.

.

I'm just curious, if you are pissed about Republicans catering to their 'masters', then what do you think of Democrats who came out today and said they want to nationalize the property insurance industry against hurricane damage in the south?

Basically, they want to make all taxpayers in this country financially accountable for the rich having ocean front views and having to rebuild after hurricanes.

Those evil Republicans! Oh wait, they're democratic politicians! *gasp*


Handing govt to business is one sure way to fuck it up even more (see current health care system, see unregulated private investment banks and markets, etc, etc)

Because growing the federal bureaucracy has ever worked out well anywhere in our nation's recent (last 30 years) history :tu

[balli]

Oh, and by the way, gas will now cost you $10 a gallon. Have fun!


Good. I'd prefer higher. Minus a few airplane trips to Missouri and road trips to go backpacking in Southern Utah, I haven't bought or used a drop of gas since I sold my landcruiser back in 05.

[Nbadan]

Hey crackhead, err boutons. Name me one branch of the government that is the model of efficiency, tight budgetary controls, and always puts our taxpayer dollars to good use.

Errrr.........social security....even if we change nothing...enough money now sits in the Trust Funds to get us to 2041, according to the program’s trustees report.

[j-6]

Fuck the South. Fuck 'em. We should have let them go when they wanted to leave. But no, we had to kill half a million people so they'd stay part of our special Union. Fighting for the right to keep slaves - yeah, those are states we want to keep.

And now what do we get? We're the fucking Arrogant Northeast Liberal Elite? How about this for arrogant: the South is the Real America? The Authentic America. Really?

Cause we fucking founded this country, assholes. Those Founding Fathers you keep going on and on about? All that bullshit about what you think they meant by the Second Amendment giving you the right to keep your assault weapons in the glove compartment because you didn't bother to read the first half of the fucking sentence? Who do you think those wig-wearing lacy-shirt sporting revolutionaries were? They were fucking blue-staters, dickhead. Boston? Philadelphia? New York? Hello? Think there might be a reason all the fucking monuments are up here in our backyard?

No, No. Get the fuck out. We're not letting you visit the Liberty Bell and fucking Plymouth Rock anymore until you get over your real American selves and start respecting those other nine amendments. Who do you think those fucking stripes on the flag are for? Nine are for fucking blue states. And it would be 10 if those Vermonters had gotten their fucking Subarus together and broken off from New York a little earlier. Get it? We started this shit, so don't get all uppity about how real you are you Johnny-come-lately "Oooooh I've been a state for almost a hundred years" dickheads. Fuck off.

Arrogant? You wanna talk about us Northeasterners being fucking arrogant? What's more American than arrogance? Hmmm? Maybe horsies? I don't think so. Arrogance is the fucking cornerstone of what it means to be American. And I wouldn't be so fucking arrogant if I wasn't paying for your fucking bridges, bitch.

All those Federal taxes you love to hate? It all comes from us and goes to you, so shut up and enjoy your fucking Tennessee Valley Authority electricity and your fancy highways that we paid for. And the next time Florida gets hit by a hurricane you can come crying to us if you want to, but you're the ones who built on a fucking swamp. "Let the Spanish keep it, it’s a shithole," we said, but you had to have your fucking orange juice.

The next dickwad who says, "It’s your money, not the government's money" is gonna get their ass kicked. Nine of the ten states that get the most federal fucking dollars and pay the least... can you guess? Go on, guess. That’s right, motherfucker, they're red states. And eight of the ten states that receive the least and pay the most? It’s too easy, asshole, they’re blue states. It’s not your money, assholes, it’s fucking our money. What was that Real American Value you were spouting a minute ago? Self reliance? Try this for self reliance: buy your own fucking stop signs, assholes.

Let’s talk about those values for a fucking minute. You and your Southern values can bite my ass because the blue states got the values over you fucking Real Americans every day of the goddamn week. Which state do you think has the lowest divorce rate you marriage-hyping dickwads? Well? Can you guess? It’s fucking Massachusetts, the fucking center of the gay marriage universe. Yes, that’s right, the state you love to tie around the neck of anyone to the left of Strom Thurmond has the lowest divorce rate in the fucking nation. Think that’s just some aberration? How about this: 9 of the 10 lowest divorce rates are fucking blue states, asshole, and most are in the Northeast, where our values suck so bad. And where are the highest divorce rates? Care to fucking guess? 10 of the top 10 are fucking red-ass we're-so-fucking-moral states. And while Nevada is the worst, the Bible Belt is doing its fucking part.

But two guys making out is going to fucking ruin marriage for you? Yeah? Seems like you're ruining it pretty well on your own, you little bastards. Oh, but that's ok because you go to church, right? I mean you do, right? Cause we fucking get to hear about it every goddamn year at election time. Yes, we're fascinated by how you get up every Sunday morning and sing, and then you're fucking towers of moral superiority. Yeah, that's a workable formula. Maybe us fucking Northerners don't talk about religion as much as you because we're not so busy sinning, hmmm? Ever think of that, you self-righteous assholes? No, you're too busy erecting giant stone tablets of the Ten Commandments in buildings paid for by the fucking Northeast Liberal Elite. And who has the highest murder rates in the nation? It ain't us up here in the North, assholes.

Well this gravy train is fucking over. Take your liberal-bashing, federal-tax-leaching, confederate-flag-waving, holier-than-thou, hypocritical bullshit and shove it up your ass.

And no, you can't have your fucking convention in New York next time. Fuck off.

I married a little Long Island princess and subsequently came into possession of a bunch of Yankee relatives from the land of the self-absorbed. This is the rant that they go off with right before bitching about how high their state income taxes are, super premium for the Benz running 4.70 a gallon, and how a garden home now in Nassau County costs what an apartment on the Lower East Side goes for.

(Enjoyable read, though.)

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Errrr.........social security....even if we change nothing...enough money now sits in the Trust Funds to get us to 2041, according to the program’s trustees report.

So what happens in 2041 when we run out of money? Does that mean until December 31,2040 that social security was run correctly, but on Jan. 1, 2041 it suddenly is a bureaucratic mess?

Give me a fucking break Dan.

[balli]

(Enjoyable read, though.)

Thanks, wish I could take credit, but I didn't write it (nor do I fully subscribe to it's opinions). I was just trying (successfully) to piss a couple of people off with the most inflammatory thing I could find and I forgot to wrap tags around the shit. I should probably fix that.

http://www.fuckthesouth.com/

[Nbadan]

So what happens in 2041 when we run out of money? Does that mean until December 31,2040 that social security was run correctly, but on Jan. 1, 2041 it suddenly is a bureaucratic mess?

...by that time the balance between payment coming into the system and payments going out should lead to further surpluses....remember that we only have about a ~30 year time-frame (the baby boomer generation) where expected payments are going to be more than expected receipts....and we can cover any shortfall by 1. raising the retirement age for full benefits 2. raising the income cap on paying into the system 3. means testing...

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

...by that time the balance between payment coming into the system and payments going out should lead to further surpluses....remember that we only have about a ~30 year time-frame (the baby boomer generation) where expected payments are going to be more than expected receipts....and we can cover any shortfall by 1. raising the retirement age for full benefits 2. raising the income cap on paying into the system 3. means testing...

Dan, we're already going to start paying out more than we're taking in by 2014. That's six years from now. Remember that you're full of crap if you think this problem is going to magically fix itself when you've got a liberal presidential candidate that wants to grossly expand the powers and responsibilities of the federal government.

Your solution is to raise the retirement age? :lmao Sweet, we can all work until we're 85 now, then get some SS benefits if there's any left. Too bad our companies will fire us all well before that.

Means testing? How in the hell is that magically going to fix the problem. Less money coming in than being paid out = an insolvent system, no matter what shell games you want to play.

Raising the cap won't do shit, it's a drop in the bucket.

For someone who bitches and moans on this forum about Americans living beyond their means financially, you sure don't have a problem explaining away our sorry ass politicians doing the same thing with our federal budget.

[Anti.Hero]

Errrr.........social security....even if we change nothing...enough money now sits in the Trust Funds to get us to 2041, according to the program’s trustees report.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[Nbadan]

Dan, we're already going to start paying out more than we're taking in by 2014. That's six years from now. Remember that you're full of crap if you think this problem is going to magically fix itself when you've got a liberal presidential candidate that wants to grossly expand the powers and responsibilities of the federal government.

Let's say that the government fails to pay-back it's obligations to the Social Security trust fund...than what? those aren't just IOU's sitting in those accounts those are promissory notes from the U.S. government.....what happens is our monetary system collapses and it wouldn't matter how much you have sitting in a personalized savings account because it would all be worthless...

[Nbadan]

Your solution is to raise the retirement age? Sweet, we can all work until we're 85 now, then get some SS benefits if there's any left. Too bad our companies will fire us all well before that.

With the advances in medicine and science people are very active beyond 65...there no reason full benefits can't be stepped up to 70...

[Nbadan]

Raising the cap won't do shit, it's a drop in the bucket.

Raising the income cap to $1 million would make SS solvent forever...

[Nbadan]

For someone who bitches and moans on this forum about Americans living beyond their means financially, you sure don't have a problem explaining away our sorry ass politicians doing the same thing with our federal budget.

I think we spend way too much on defense.....10 times what the rest of the world spends combined...wouldn't 5 times be enough if we spent it more efficiently? ....after all, how many nuclear weapons do we need to destroy ourselves?

[Wild Cobra]

Raising the income cap to $1 million would make SS solvent forever...

Psssst.....

Your ignorance is showing Dan.

SS is paid on earned income. Not capital gains, dividends, etc. Just how much extra do you think is out there?

[Nbadan]

Psssst.....

Your ignorance is showing Dan.

SS is paid on earned income. Not capital gains, dividends, etc. Just how much extra do you think is out there?

No, I'm talking about earned income....increase the Social Security cap to $1 million....

[Don Quixote]

Thanks, wish I could take credit, but I didn't write it (nor do I fully subscribe to it's opinions). I was just trying (successfully) to piss a couple of people off with the most inflammatory thing I could find and I forgot to wrap tags around the shit. I should probably fix that.

http://www.fuckthesouth.com/

Thanks for reminding me what, apparently, alot of people think of us.

I need the reminder every so often. :toast

[balli]

Thanks for reminding me what, apparently, alot of people think of us.

I need the reminder every so often. :toast


Really I have no room to talk and I was more just being inflammatory for the sake of doing so. I live in the reddest state in the nation, albeit not in the south.

Why did you need the reminder though? To solidify embitterment or to broaden your perspective?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I think we spend way too much on defense.....10 times what the rest of the world spends combined...wouldn't 5 times be enough if we spent it more efficiently? ....after all, how many nuclear weapons do we need to destroy ourselves?

Actually a lot of our defense spending is on smart weapons and ROVs because liberals like you bitch about collateral damage and things like that.

Fight a war to win, not to pussy foot around everyone.

[Don Quixote]

Really I have no room to talk and I was more just being inflammatory for the sake of doing so. I live in the reddest state in the nation, albeit not in the south.

Why did you need the reminder though? To solidify embitterment or to broaden your perspective?

Well ... I wasn't coming after you, really. I knew you were exaggerating.

But I do need to be reminded every so often just what my (political) opponents think of me and people like me. Not to make myself bitter, because I am not. It's just good to know.

[Wild Cobra]

No, I'm talking about earned income....increase the Social Security cap to $1 million....

You lost me. Please explain.

If you mean taxing the 6.2% (12.4% total) up to $1M, that won't really help. The extra money from even completely removing such caps would generate very little more. These ideas come from angry poor people who are jealous of people who have made the American dream happen. Very few people make enough income to stop paying SS tax. Of the 5% or less that do, most of them don't make much SS taxable income above the current cap. The current cap is at $102,000. How many individuals will make more than this, as SS taxable income, for 2008?

Please show me some numbers.

The only proper fix for SS would be to both mean test the payouts, and increase the SS tax. I am one to start by doubling the SS tax and reducing income tax. I would then rename it a "social tax" that everyone pays an equal percentage to. Yes, it would be regressive. I see taxing the poor the only way to make them think come voting time if they want candidates and policies that will affect their tax rates. As it stands, about 47% of the wage earners pay no federal taxes because they get it all back at the end of they year. Their pet politicians who promise more services do not affect their net income, therefore, they are willing to steal my money! When social programs are reduced, the tax rate is reduced. This type of limited government can only occur when a majority of the people want it to happen. As it stands now, with 47% paying no tax and another 20% being generous with the public funds, America is doomed without serious reform. We will likely implode before SS runs out of meney.

[TeyshaBlue]

Good. I'd prefer higher. Minus a few airplane trips to Missouri and road trips to go backpacking in Southern Utah, I haven't bought or used a drop of gas since I sold my landcruiser back in 05.

Pssst. That coke you just drank? It probably took a truck to get it to the store so you could walk down there and buy it.

You're using a ton of gas because our entire economic infrastructure is built on the (shaky) premise of an uninterruptable supply of oil.

[BradLohaus]

Let's say that the government fails to pay-back it's obligations to the Social Security trust fund...than what? those aren't just IOU's sitting in those accounts those are promissory notes from the U.S. government.....what happens is our monetary system collapses and it wouldn't matter how much you have sitting in a personalized savings account because it would all be worthless...

Amero to the rescue!

So how much of the SS trust fund is "real" and how much is made up of IOUs? And what about our unfunded Medicare and Medicaid liabilities? I always thought the Medi's will be what breaks us.

The website at the bottome says that unfunded SS liabilities amount to $7 trillion and unfunded Medicare/aid liabilities amount to $50 trillion, and they link to this from the US Comptroller General last summer:

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/united_states/article2120735.ece

This month Mr Walker described the US as suffering from a “fiscal cancer'” because of the massive long-term healthcare liabilities that the nation faces. The financial burden caused by healthcare entitlements has increased from about $20 trillion to $50 trillion over the past six years, representing a $440,000 bill for every American household, he explained. He also added that in 2005 and 2006, Americans spent more money than they took home, the first such pattern since 1933.


America's total debt report
http://mwhodges.home.att.net/nat-debt/debt-nat-a.htm

Lots to chew on there.

[Ignignokt]

I'm a fuckwad!

You know what you idiot? The south gave an abundance of lives in WW2 moreso than anyother region to combat nazism. W/o the south, Mexico would have owned Utah and Texas to Cali, because the North had all the sissy industrial rich sons.

Poverty says alot about divorce rates. Divorce rates have nothing to do with infidelity or cheating automatically. So to say that a couple divorced, thus there was infidilelity is pretty idiotic.

I don't give a shit about the north. The rich white lilly pristine north with lower percentage of blacks, who are just as racist and suspicous of them as the south are pretty hippocritical.

You see bitch, if the north is so wonderful, why are all of you moving over here?

Why?

It's because you love that southern dick that's why. Now go shove your replica liberty bell up your greasy guido ass!

[Ignignokt]

Amero to the rescue!

So how much of the SS trust fund is "real" and how much is made up of IOUs? And what about our unfunded Medicare and Medicaid liabilities? I always thought the Medi's will be what breaks us.

The website at the bottome says that unfunded SS liabilities amount to $7 trillion and unfunded Medicare/aid liabilities amount to $50 trillion, and they link to this from the US Comptroller General last summer:

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/united_states/article2120735.ece

This month Mr Walker described the US as suffering from a “fiscal cancer'” because of the massive long-term healthcare liabilities that the nation faces. The financial burden caused by healthcare entitlements has increased from about $20 trillion to $50 trillion over the past six years, representing a $440,000 bill for every American household, he explained. He also added that in 2005 and 2006, Americans spent more money than they took home, the first such pattern since 1933.


America's total debt report
http://mwhodges.home.att.net/nat-debt/debt-nat-a.htm

Lots to chew on there.


Go smoke a doobie.

There will be no amero.

[DarkReign]

Go smoke a doobie.

There will be no amero.


Can I quote you on that?

Oh wait....

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Amero to the rescue!

So how much of the SS trust fund is "real" and how much is made up of IOUs? And what about our unfunded Medicare and Medicaid liabilities? I always thought the Medi's will be what breaks us.

The website at the bottome says that unfunded SS liabilities amount to $7 trillion and unfunded Medicare/aid liabilities amount to $50 trillion, and they link to this from the US Comptroller General last summer:

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/united_states/article2120735.ece

This month Mr Walker described the US as suffering from a “fiscal cancer'” because of the massive long-term healthcare liabilities that the nation faces. The financial burden caused by healthcare entitlements has increased from about $20 trillion to $50 trillion over the past six years, representing a $440,000 bill for every American household, he explained. He also added that in 2005 and 2006, Americans spent more money than they took home, the first such pattern since 1933.


America's total debt report
http://mwhodges.home.att.net/nat-debt/debt-nat-a.htm

Lots to chew on there.

And clearly the solution to all this is to ignore the problem and elect Obama, who wants to come over the top of that with a couple hundred billion a year in universal health care :shootme

[Ignignokt]

Can I quote you on that?

Oh wait....

yes.

[ElNono]

And clearly the solution to all this is to ignore the problem and elect Obama, who wants to come over the top of that with a couple hundred billion a year in universal health care :shootme

I don't hear you bitching about the 9-12 billion a month being spent in Iraq alone...

[BradLohaus]

Go smoke a doobie.

There will be no amero.

I'm talking about 15-20 years from now because...


And clearly the solution to all this is to ignore the problem and elect Obama, who wants to come over the top of that with a couple hundred billion a year in universal health care

...the dollar will be toast in the years to come. Devaluing the dollar will be the only way to pay for all of our obligations without large tax increases.

If in the 2020s gas costs $8 a gallon, and everything at the grocery store has doubled in price from today, while the average income has only gone up, say, 25-40% from today, then nobody will give a damn what their dollars are called, US or NA.

Anyway,the same people who run the Federal Reserve would run a Bank of North America, with a few elite Canadian and Mexican bankers thrown in the mix.

[Ignignokt]

I'm talking about 15-20 years from now because...



...the dollar will be toast in the years to come. Devaluing the dollar will be the only way to pay for all of our obligations without large tax increases.

If in the 2020s gas costs $8 a gallon, and everything at the grocery store has doubled in price from today, while the average income has only gone up, say, 25-40% from today, then nobody will give a damn what their dollars are called, US or NA.

Anyway,the same people who run the Federal Reserve would run a Bank of North America, with a few elite Canadian and Mexican bankers thrown in the mix.


You're not an economist, nor could you predict the economic future. Instead of preaching gloom and Alex jones doom, present solutions.

Voting for obama wont strengthen the dollar.

no president will.

[BradLohaus]

You're not an economist, nor could you predict the economic future. Instead of preaching gloom and Alex jones doom, present solutions.

Like everybody else, I'm just saying what I think will happen. How are we going to pay for these huge and growing obligations without really sinking the dollar or taxing the hell out of everybody? You asked for a possible solution, but I already mentioned it. And you can call it Alex Jones doom and gloom if you want, or you can call it US Comptroller General doom and gloom. I only linked to a statement from one of them in this thread.



Voting for obama wont strengthen the dollar.

no president will.

Well we agree on that.:toast

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I don't hear you bitching about the 9-12 billion a month being spent in Iraq alone...

I don't feel like searching for it, I've already said we need to bring our troops home. It doesn't matter if we stay five more years or fifty, the day after we leave all hell's going to break loose there.

The sooner we bring our boys home and out of the line of fire, the better (and cheaper).

[RandomGuy]

I'm talking about 15-20 years from now because...

...the dollar will be toast in the years to come. Devaluing the dollar will be the only way to pay for all of our obligations without large tax increases.

If in the 2020s gas costs $8 a gallon, and everything at the grocery store has doubled in price from today, while the average income has only gone up, say, 25-40% from today, then nobody will give a damn what their dollars are called, US or NA.

Anyway,the same people who run the Federal Reserve would run a Bank of North America, with a few elite Canadian and Mexican bankers thrown in the mix.

Bull-puckey.

I would be willing to bet a good six figures on the fact that there will not be an "Amero" in 15-20 years.

Gas in the 2020's will cost waaay more than $8 per gallon. I would project at least $16/gallon if not more as of 2020. Americans are in for a shock in that regard, but there will still be no North American common currency.

Conspiracy dorks predicting this have been predicting this since the early 1990's. When it doesn't happen they always push back the dates, like cheap fortune tellers backpedaling when their predictions don't come out right.

First it was going to happen in 2000, then 2008, then 2012.

I have a standing bet with one conspiracy guy about 2012, we'll see if he pony's up in 3.5 years.

[boutons_]

Americans are extremely sensitive to and paranoid about any change in their currency.

They won't even give up a $1 bill and $5 paper bill for much more practical $1 and $5 coins.

Replace US$ with Amero? Never. The US$ used as currency elsewhere, is more probable.

[BradLohaus]

You'd bet six figures against a single North American currency by the end of the 2020's but you think gas will cost >16$ per gallon by then? If you really believe the second part then that's pretty bold, IMO.

I actually haven't read many predictions about a NA currency coming anytime soon, other than on blogs, message board comments and such. I've heard many - probably from people that are like the guy you have the bet with. I have read articles from the think tanks about how we need, or they would like to see, an NA currency by a particluar date. And yes, some of them have been disappointed for about 8 years now.

I go off of the not uncommon opinion that the dollar is in very deep trouble in the long term, articles from academics, think tanks, the CFR and so on, statements from Vicente Fox and the former head of the Bank of Canada, who said about a year ago that a single NA currency would be a good thing. You now have to pay for the Canadian article that I saw back then, but here's this one.

http://www.coinbooks.org/esylum_v10n21a20.html

"Dodge's comments add to a growing list of comments from Canadian
economists, academics and government officials supporting the
idea of creating the amero as a North American common currency.

"Dodge argued a common North American currency would help buffer
the adverse effects of exchange rate fluctuations between the
Canadian dollar and the U.S. dollar.

Dodge has said that he does not see an Amero, but the dollarization of the continent. I agree completely; that way Americans aren't giving up our currency at all; we're expanding it. How easy would that be to sell to the public? Later it could be changed to NA dollar. And here's one I hadn't heard of before:

"In October 2006, El Universal, a Mexican newspaper published in
Spanish, reported in a little-noticed article the then-president-elect
of Mexico and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper in their first
meeting together shared a vision of a future North America united
under a common currency.

I don't even see it as a conspiracy, considering that it's talked and written about openly. Just an idea and a contigency plan in case the dollar really goes down the tubes, taking the Canadian and Mexican economies with it.

Hell, if gas costs 16$ a gallon at some point in the 2020s then I might be out on the streets handing out pro Amero/NA dollar pamphlets.

[CosmicCowboy]

Much more likely short term is that the middle east oil powers will de-link oil and their currencies from the dollar. When the dollar bottoms out they will come in and buy up US assets at the fire sale.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Americans are extremely sensitive to and paranoid about any change in their currency.

They won't even give up a $1 bill and $5 paper bill for much more practical $1 and $5 coins.

Replace US$ with Amero? Never. The US$ used as currency elsewhere, is more probable.

How is a coin more practical than a dollar? The dollar sure fits in my wallet a lot better than a coin would, as well as in a stripper's g-string.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Bull-puckey.

I would be willing to bet a good six figures on the fact that there will not be an "Amero" in 15-20 years.

Gas in the 2020's will cost waaay more than $8 per gallon. I would project at least $16/gallon if not more as of 2020. Americans are in for a shock in that regard, but there will still be no North American common currency.

Conspiracy dorks predicting this have been predicting this since the early 1990's. When it doesn't happen they always push back the dates, like cheap fortune tellers backpedaling when their predictions don't come out right.

First it was going to happen in 2000, then 2008, then 2012.

I have a standing bet with one conspiracy guy about 2012, we'll see if he pony's up in 3.5 years.

How is it a conspiracy when politicians and federal bank types from Mexico, the U.S., and Canada have all openly talked about it?