Great Socialist Personal Income Increases Already! (From Socialist Credit Market!)

Discussion in 'Economy' started by mascale, Aug 24, 2010.

  1. mascale
    Offline

    mascale VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,035
    Thanks Received:
    210
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +453
    Funny Money, from Christopher Columbus, Blackbeard The Pirate, and the original real estate agents on Manhattan Island: Is not what the United States economy is about.

    At Bureau of Economic Statistics, in the United States, far more than all the treasure of all the earth: Is just the 2007 Personal Income statistic of $11,894.1 bil. $11.0 tril is more money than Trump! Then for 2008, it was up to $12.0238 tril. Then in 2009, it dropped to $12.026 tril. So far, to June, the Personal Income account is at $12.5 tril. People can at least count(?) where the stimulus money seems to be going.

    It's not just those Senate seats for sale, that are big. . . . . deal anymore! There is serious Tuchis being saved, here.

    Someone with a maniac trigger finger will have to start Global Thermo-nuclear War: To have a double-dip kind of recession any time soon.

    GDP increase for 2007 was 2.1, 0.4% in 2008, when the bankers from hell were still in office--doing Christian things. In 2010, GDP increase will likely overtake the previous two years.

    Mostly, in August, investors seem to have taken the whole month off!

    "Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
    (Shiny round trinkets still work: For Many Nations--Even after Great B.I.A did free market, laissez-faire, kindnesses of rotted corn and poison blankets! American Conservatives know how these new-fashioned gulags are run!)
     
  2. loosecannon
    Offline

    loosecannon Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,888
    Thanks Received:
    263
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +264
    The money supply is reported to be shrinking at a rate o 6%/year because banks aren't lending and defaults are up.

    And approx $6 trillion in wealth has disappeared in real estate alone.

    Now of course that RE wealth.

    The money supply (S) is what matters, along with the velocity (V) of money. If S x V is falling ten wages must fall, GDP must fall and the value of the remaining dollars increase in value amongst a climate of hoarding.

    Basic deflation.

    Deficit spending does increase the money supply but for some reason even with deficits around 10% of GDP the money supply x velocity is still shrinking faster than the deficits can offset.

    If only we didn't have an economic system that was required to grow in order to maintain status quo.....

    Monetarism was SOOOOOO wrong.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. mascale
    Offline

    mascale VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,035
    Thanks Received:
    210
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +453
    According to LooseCannon Poster,

    "The money supply (S) is what matters, along with the velocity (V) of money. If S x V is falling ten wages must fall, GDP must fall and the value of the remaining dollars increase in value amongst a climate of hoarding."

    "Basic deflation. "

    S and V are variables. In the Credit Market, as opposed to GDP, The banks are virtually of no importance--If there are still other instruments. The banks underpin the instruments, but even the Chinese have learned to sell off the. . . . fine upstanding, "instruments." They actually have an S and V themselves. The U part they do not have, and soon there will be Lamborghinis for the masses(?).

    "Instruments" need to be repaid, unless they are federal, and thought valueable. So on a cursory basis, $14.0 tril. of federal "instruments," plus $12.5 tril of Personal Income, is about half the Total Credit Market outstanding: The other half(?), Hoping to be repaid.

    Even the Federal Reserve is slowly buying up "instruments" from the banks, who need to maintain "instruments" on balance sheets.

    So business lending is up! So Help Wanted Ads are Up! And for people longing for a return to Paulsonomics, House-Flipping Is Up, and nobody else is buying anything, anymore! It's just like the good old days, again!

    Consumers are taking the personal income, and paying off the loans. Prices are still caught in the computing trap that caused it all, but that goes back to what the teachers have been doing to the little kids, with the support of the adults, for all of history.

    Actually, a deflation with buyers means: "With increase of buyers, and decrease of prices: Anyone knows the outcome." Car dealers even learned this with, "Cash for Clunkers(?)!"

    So In a credit market environment, economic health goes back to the increase of personal income. Laissez-Faire is not involved. It was never involved, and that goes back to the computing problem, which the teachers have been doing to the little kids, and with the support of the adult, for all of history.

    "Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred"
    (Great Venice Beach Osprey, Soar to Fllight of Seagulls: Never again to be seen among living life, for the generations--of low-income car-wash attendants, who are employed, and busy. . .even again!)
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2010
  4. loosecannon
    Offline

    loosecannon Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,888
    Thanks Received:
    263
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +264
    Nice post, not that I was able to follow all of it.

    This did not compute, for me:

    I simply have no idea what you are referring to.

    Banks are, imo, a critical bottleneck in expansion of or contraction of the money supply. While hoarding vs spending and investing accounts for velocity.

    What other instruments besides deficit spending are you referring to?

    And if you are referring to the bond markets or the carry trade please explain why that matters. The carry trade only effects the economy at large in a very inefficient way like maybe 10% efficiency at best.

    Bubbles.

    Thanks
     
  5. mascale
    Offline

    mascale VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,035
    Thanks Received:
    210
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +453
    Total Net Debt, in the historical data series, is actually different from the Federal Reserve Board Flow of Funds. They tend to be similar in scale, when the BEA publishes totals, called "Total Net Debt." They stopped doing that a long time ago, but maybe that is now history(?)

    FRB: Z.1 Release--L.1--Credit Market Debt Outstanding--June 10, 2010

    This is the Flow of Funds most recent link. Like would be expected, Line 1 is fairly constant, and even contracting, in 2009.

    Personal Income ittself is now increasing. Line 1, however, is also well over four times personal income. The BEA, Total Net Debt tables: Were showing that at about two times personal income in 1952. It had been at 3.something, times personal income, in 1932. By the Reagan Administration, Total Net Debt would have been about 2.5 times Personal Income.

    In the Ford Administration era, it was possible to suggest $300.0 bil. annual federal deficits to prevent a severe downturn in the 1980 time-frame, or $300.0 bil. annual deficits to get back to the relative balance of the 1952 numbers: After the 1980 time-frame. Big Problem: In the Ford Administration, a $30.0 bil. annual federal deficit would have created mass assassination attempts of federal officials. National Scandals were already famous in the Republican Party, of well-armed cadres. Federal deficits were a part of it.

    The federal funds are different, now, in fact: Subsequent Social Security "Reform." Flow of Funds is a reasonable substitute table. Ronald Reagan created the first $1.0 tril., federal-deficit-ridden, Administration: With assurances that the military woud prosper, instead of the Tea-Party forerunners. After Bush I, then Clinton would finally get an annual federal deficit up to $290.0 bil. or so--varying with how much was being stolen from the Social Security, widows and orphans fund. Clinton would at least not need an invasion to create low unemployment.

    Anyone notices, concurrent with the data, that Widows and Orphans have become relatively burdensome, of late. Notice has been taken in the Courts. Even a California Judge can note a change coming about, in regular penis between the loins kinds of behavior. California Supreme Court has suggested a creative alternative, as opposed to the more original, Jewish, kind of concept.

    For proof of the contempt in which penis between the loins kinds of activities are regarded, visit any school, their antiquated grading policies, curriculua, pay raise methodologieis, and private vs. public sources of funding. Notice that they tend to create even more superfluous graduate degree types, rather than fewer. Probably "Diversity," has something to do with it. We have now, the MMM-Bah, (MBA), for example.

    People without doctorates are actually allowed to work, in fact, even the schools! People seem to think that the little kids will actually learn concepts that will work. . . .and have worked(?), in those places, run like that!

    "Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred"
    (Many nations invite squaws to ancestral lands--and provide them with round, shiny, funny-money instead. Many stay busy--leaving warriors of white-eyes, to be busy, themselves! Great Half-Wit Father In Washington create anti-aircraft funding instead. Car-Wash attendants get trained and high-tech employed, even as seagull problem is solved! Many squaws get speeding tickets, for state and local governments, on way to tribal lands(?)! "Guy Thing(?)," avoided!)
     
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2010

Share This Page