The Great 2008 Collapse

Discussion in 'Politics' started by georgephillip, Apr 23, 2011.

  1. georgephillip
    Offline

    georgephillip Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    26,428
    Thanks Received:
    1,265
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Ratings:
    +2,039
    The financial crisis of 2008 should have changed your mind about something. From Wiki:

    "The output of goods and services produced by labor and property located in the United States—decreased at an annual rate of approximately 6% in the fourth quarter of 2008 and first quarter of 2009, versus activity in the year-ago periods.[180]

    "The U.S. unemployment rate increased to 10.1% by October 2009, the highest rate since 1983 and roughly twice the pre-crisis rate.

    "The average hours per work week declined to 33, the lowest level since the government began collecting the data in 1964.[181][182]

    "The very rich lost relatively less in the crisis than the remainder of the population, widening the divide between the economic classes. Thus the top 1% who had a share of 34.6% of the nation's wealth in 2007 increased their share to 37.1% by 2009."

    The richest 1% of Americans then demanded taxpayer bailouts to ensure their "fair share" of the nation's wealth weren't compromised, and Republicans and Democrats in congress were happy to comply.

    What consequences did the crisis and bailout have on our level of national debt?

    "In early 2008, the CBO projected that debt as a percent of gross domestic product would fall from 36.8 percent to 22.6 percent at the end of 2018.

    "In contrast, the latest CBO forecast has debt soaring to 75.3 percent of GDP in 2018.

    "What caused this stunning reversal, which in dollar terms works out to a $10 trillion swing for end-year 2018 debt, from $5.1 trillion to $15.8 trillion?

    "Almost all of this increase is due to the severe recession that followed the financial crisis of late 2008.

    "This lowered output and employment, and therefore reduced tax revenue."

    The financial crisis of 2008 should have changed some conservative minds about how big business, big government and the richest 1% of Americans collaborate to socialize cost and privatize profits.

    Fiscal Conservatives Dodge $10 Trillion Debt: Simon Johnson - Bloomberg
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. midcan5
    Offline

    midcan5 liberal / progressive

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    10,794
    Thanks Received:
    2,367
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    Ratings:
    +3,306
  3. Douger
    Offline

    Douger BANNED

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2009
    Messages:
    12,323
    Thanks Received:
    915
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Not fucking there !
    Ratings:
    +915
    I escaped in 2005 so me no understanding.
     
  4. Mr. Shaman
    Offline

    Mr. Shaman Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2010
    Messages:
    23,892
    Thanks Received:
    817
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +819
    .....And, WHAT is it that Republicans/"conservatives"/Teabaggers keep tellin' everyone (ELSE) about....

    "Accepting Responsibility For YOUR OWN Actions."????

    [​IMG]

     
  5. georgephillip
    Offline

    georgephillip Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    26,428
    Thanks Received:
    1,265
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Ratings:
    +2,039
    Conservatives will always prefer the marketplace of emotions to the marketplace of ideas; however, the contempt Americans feel towards their government seems to be bipartisan:

    "Only 44 percent of voters approve of Obama's job performance, while 49 percent disapprove. That was down from 48 percent approval in January, and marked the 17th straight month that his approval has been below 50 percent;

    "- Only 34 percent of voters approve, and 61 percent disapprove, of the way he's handling the budget deficit, projected to total about $1.6 trillion this year;

    "- Only 30 percent approve of the way Republicans in Congress are doing their job, while 63 percent disapprove.

    "Underlying it all, Americans are in a pessimistic mood. Fewer than one in three - 32 percent of registered voters - think the country's headed in the right direction, while 63 percent think it's headed in the wrong direction.

    "Among all adults, including non-voters, the tally is 31-64 percent, the poorest since November 2007 at the onset of the Great Recession.

    "'We're going through a period of partisan bickering in Washington, lots of posturing and an economy that has not taken hold the way people want,' said Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion at Marist College in New York, which conducted the poll."

    Poll: Best way to fight deficits is to raise taxes on the rich - Politics Wires - MiamiHerald.com
     
  6. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,618
    Terrific think piece. This is definiiely worth the time it takes to read.

    It challenges many of my long held beliefs about macro-economic and society while supporting my POV in other cases.

    Among other things it shows us that even the EXPECTS can disagree about the data and if they do agree, what the data is telling them.

    So it is hardly surprising that we here cannot find agreement about what's happening to our economy, either.

    Give yourselves a pat on the back because no matter what you believe, some well known economist is apt to support your pet theory, and others are likely to think it's all wrong.

    Here's an encapsulation of the issue under consideration. First what is the threshold income of the very (they call it stinking) rich?

    Is race or gender at the root of the change in income? Apparently not, or at least not much


    STill...I wonder

    As women entered the workforce in higher skilled areas, they tend to marry men also working at higher skilled jobs. The difference therefore in family incomes between skilled working families and unskilled can be very signficant


    The above doesn't really surprise me at all.

    It oughtn't not to surprise anybody who pays attention. Dem admins result in marginally better outcomes for working families than Republican admins.

    The above is really describing the growth of governance by SPECIAL INTEREST bribery. The above is easy to see happening, but I suspect it's damned hard to assign a metric that qualtifies the net effect of this corruption of our goverment on income distributions


    The above also suggests that the GOP's policies are outright hostile to unions and workers generally. Again, how much that is effecting income distribution isn't clearly quantified.

    The above truly challenges my POV about this economy.

    Of course I remember clearly what it was like when factory work paid well and was plentiful, too.

    So the two paths to great wealth apparently are now, become the baddest corporate tool so you can be an highly paid CEO or go into showbusiness.


    Now that's just plain sad.

    And the above is truly tragic. My generation got a much better education and much more opportunity to get a hihger education than my son's generation is getting.

    That is a VERY foolish thing to allow to happen. Of course our right wing cranks like to blame teacher for it, but that's absurd on it face.

    The above seems fairly logical. But it really doesn't remotely address the income distribution changes between the lower 90% and the tope 10%, and it makes even less sense when comparing the top 10% to the top 1`$ and even LESS sense when evaluating the top 1% to the top 1/10th of 1%.

    Not a whole lot of confidence about their percentage estimates, but I'm on board with the theories behind their estimates

    I've been writing essantially the same on this board ever since I got here.

    DEBT is pernicious, not benign. Compound interest is a soubel edged swaord that exacerbates income inequity as one small but smugly happy class reaps the benfits of compounding interest while the vast majority of society takes it on the neck paying that interest.

    And compounding debt doesn't just mean a lack of money today, but paying it off tdoay, means that it has an OPPOPRTUNITY COST that cannot ever be recovered, too.
     
  7. auditor0007
    Offline

    auditor0007 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    12,566
    Thanks Received:
    2,255
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Toledo, OH
    Ratings:
    +3,218
    And this is exactly why we should have cut taxes even more for the wealthy, so they could create more jobs for us poor folk.
     
  8. percysunshine
    Offline

    percysunshine Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2011
    Messages:
    16,742
    Thanks Received:
    2,263
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Sty
    Ratings:
    +5,892
    I guess people are finally figuring out that Obama is a fascist.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. initforme
    Offline

    initforme VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Messages:
    5,519
    Thanks Received:
    466
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +1,345
    It all comes down to the fact, the cold hard fact.


    America = Management and Corporations VERSUS their workers. It always has. It's nothing more than this. Right now Corporations are winning. Will this lead to more jobs? Not a chance. As a small business owner its very easy to see.
     
  10. georgephillip
    Offline

    georgephillip Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    26,428
    Thanks Received:
    1,265
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Ratings:
    +2,039
    Ask the question why we had such a severe recession with such crippling fiscal consequences and Republicans AND Democrats go mute.

    "When you press politicians and their advisers on this, you will hear three kinds of responses in candid moments.

    "First is the notion that banking crises are rare. This is a favorite of the Treasury Department. Perhaps that was true in the past, but our big banks have become bigger, and too-big-to- fail banks have major incentives to take on very high levels of risk. After all, the downside isn’t their problem.

    Second is the idea that we fixed it with the Dodd-Frank Act, a line heard most often from Democrats on Capitol Hill. Almost no one holds to that view, including William Dudley, president of the New York Federal Reserve, and Sheila Bair, head of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

    "Both have expressed concerns that the roadmap for closing a large troubled bank remains elusive...

    "Third, 'Let the markets evolve the way the markets evolve.' This was a recent quote from Anthony Santomero, former president of the Philadelphia Fed and current Citigroup Inc. director.

    "Citigroup has blown up repeatedly in the past 30 years, not surprising for a complex and unwieldy megabank with 260,000 employees worldwide.

    "Each time, it was saved through some form of external assistance, usually from the government, in part because responsible policy makers feared what Citigroup’s collapse would do the broader economy.

    "Do we really think that the next time a bank with 200 million clients worldwide gets in trouble that the U.S. will let it go bankrupt, regardless of the consequences? Is that what Vikram Pandit, the chief executive officer, or Timothy Geithner, the Treasury secretary, argued for in 2008 or will argue for next time?"

    During the much smaller looting of the S&Ls in the 1980s hundreds of bankers were prosecuted and more than a few went to prison for their crimes.

    Why aren't we seeing the same reaction from government today?

    And what does that mean for the next Wall Street crime wave?

    Fiscal Conservatives Dodge $10 Trillion Debt: Simon Johnson - Bloomberg
     

Share This Page