patrick.net

Where have you been Wogster?

Contemplating the end of the world?

BTW it ain't happening until 2030

The end is nigh for Krugman and his sheisters. The debt is $18 trillion and counting and will likely never be repaid and wealth disparity has been growing like it has been in Japan after embarking on Abenomics. How's Gold looking?

"How's Gold looking?"

^ real gold price, 2009 dollars

still in bubble range

"The debt is $18 trillion and counting and will likely never be repaid"

Good! It's just owed mostly to rich people anyway. Pay them their 2-3% pa and call it a day.

Bellingham Bill says

"The debt is $18 trillion and counting and will likely never be repaid"

Good! It's just owed mostly to rich people anyway. Pay them their 2-3% pa and call it a day.

I don't necessarily disagree with that. It's foolish to assume US debt is safe, so you should assume the risk of default as with any regular bank where you have money parked over the insured limit. However it's very possible that they will serve their masters and inflate their way out of it, reaming the already decimated middle-class into oblivion. And Krugman will have their blood on his hands.

mell says

The end is nigh for Krugman and his sheisters. The debt is $18 trillion and counting and will likely never be repaid and wealth disparity has been growing like it has been in Japan after embarking on Abenomics. How's Gold looking?

Sir,

Once Manufacturing went down below 10%, there was little tax reciepts for all the local diversity that fed the manufacturing of parts, and 2ndary and terciary subcontractors:

Have shown this chart below, but lets review what the US leadship has done.

In 1997 after cuts in the DOD and other cuts after the cold war, we thought that further cuts in manufacturing and defense could be supported. This though was borne in both political parties. Then the CRA came along for easier loans, and then contaiged the same into private sector loans. We dont need to remind ourselve of the exact opposite effect occurred -; as loans became easier to get, housing went up for ~9 years, and in 2003-4 there was a chance to subdue the bubble, but the supported denied, and banksters/dems and even Bush doubled down.

After the Bubble and the slapping of the wrists of the Friend of Pres's (both groups), we entered the "bail out the irresponsble" phase, so that their BMWs could be kept. After years of printing money, zero interest rate, and even more manufacturing cuts, record deficits, I dont think that a panacea exists.

In 2008 we had a chance for self reflection. Instead we doubled down on a most non-specific campaign "Hope and Change". Even though the country is filled with people with higher education, one skilled in the art of Politics might have asked "specifically what do you mean by hope and change, and what do you plan to achieve"?

We didnt - and a skilled barrister bluffed the US populace.

http://articles.latimes.com/1987-07-26/books/bk-1591_1_inexact-science

Or as Bubba Bear puts it we done ate the seed corn, and then wonder why there ain't no crops...

In summary, while populist presidents tried to juice up the GDP based upon the economical equivalent of a sugar high, if the $5T dollars that vanished due to the CRA and its related easy loans, were instead invested in new technologies, (not just alt. eng.) the US might be in better shape today. Houses nationwide might be worth 20-30% less to the chagrin of housing investors, but the growth would have been sustainable.

Those who object against huge social engineering practices by the government stating that often the achieved effect is opposite of the goals have been proven correct.

Entitlemented says

http://articles.latimes.com/1987-07-26/books/bk-1591_1_inexact-science

I would argue Japan's primary tool for growth was mercantilism. However the question in my mind is does Cohen and Zysman argument of the Keiretsu trump comparative advantage? Me thinks not and the Americans have this right.

Also without considering capital goods this argument seems skewed.

Entitlemented says

if the $5T dollars that vanished due to the CRA and its related easy loans, were instead invested in new technologies, (not just alt. eng.) the US might be in better shape today.

Sactly.