Biden mass spending sparks warning of hyperinflation and market crash

[AntonToo]

Fed Bank inflates their balances, by "printing money" or "QE" or whatever you want to call it. IT DOES NOT REDUCE DEFICITS,

It does.......I'll let you try to figure out how.

Sure sure. Run along now, before you god forbid say something constructive.

 

[bripat9643]

No one knows for sure. We were certain of hyperinflation because of QE after the Meltdown.

If there is inflation it could be long and rough or it could be spiky and short lived.

No one knows for sure. Especially those whose perceptions are distorted by partisan ideology.

To be fair I think this is one of the times that it's not partisan ideology to realise that spending trillions and giving every endless free stuff would equate to hyperinflation and interest rates that will sink the economy. It's economics 1-0-1 that the biggest dummies like myself can understand.

I do agree though that hyperbole and ideology clouds folks views at the best of times, tho.

I have been screaming this on this site and I get crickets.

My only conclusion is that most Americans are really fucking dumb.

I have laid out the specific math....the response I get is...DERP!

BLACK LIVES MATTER!

As we become Greece.

This Republic is about to fall.

It's only a matter of time before the rest of the world realizes that they're subsidizing our cushy way of life and stops accepting the worthless pieces of paper we send them for the goods they actually create. We'll become a third world country overnight and you can say 'goodbye' to that 'thin veil of civility' that we're only barely holding on to as it is...

But if we print 30 trillion dollars, we can pay off the debt, right?

Wtf? You seriously need to go look at the difference between monetary policy and fiscal policy.

Debt is financed by gov bonds, meaning SOMEONE IS BUYING IT.

How much debt is too much?

"Too much" for what? For investors to stop buying American bonds?

If you knew anything at all you would know there is no way of knowing that.

No way of knowing what? The more bonds the government prints, the less interest investors are willing to pay.

It's as simple as that.

How is it possible for you to be sooo wrong, soo often?

Bonds are "printed" when they are bought ignoramus, they are just an "I-owe-you" note with interest the investors buy.

Interest rates are at historic lows, so obviously investors are VERY willing to buy at very low rates despite rapidly increasing national debt.

i mispoke. i mean the higher the interest rate they will demand. Rates are low now, but they are headed up. i recall what happened when Jimmy Carter was president. We had mortgage rates as high as 12%.

Yep, it was 12% interest despite very low national debt levels, so maybe you need to rethink your oversimplified understanding of that relationship.

Debt matters and ignoring it may one day end in a disaster for America, but to know exact debt level it happens at is more a matter of opinion than fact.

Carter was printing money to pay for his spending, dumbass.

Ironic for you to call someone a dumbass while saying dumbass nonsense.

Federal government does not "print money" to pay for spending. You are confusing monetary policy by the Federal Reserve Bank and fiscal policy that is taxing and spending.

National deficit is the difference between receipts and spending (inc interest spending), you cannot lower it by "printing money"

I didn't say the Federal Reserve prints money. I said it creates money. "Monetary policy" means creating money out of thin air. Are you claiming that the Federal Reserve isn't part of the Federal Government?

You can easily lower what the government owes by creating money. For one thing, debasing the currency lowers the value of what the federal government owes.

What else can I school you about, dumbass?

Federal bank does not print money to pay for Fed spending.

Get it? No? Ok it is what it is, you can get back to your regularly scheduled life of never ending bs and ignorance.

I said it creates money, and yes it does. People who don't understand that are brainwashed minions.

You read things but you can't seem to be able to understand them.

I wasn't nitpicking which exact way Fed Bank inflates their balances, by "printing money" or "QE" or whatever you want to call it. IT DOES NOT REDUCE DEFICITS, because deficits are simply a difference between what government recieves and spends.

During Carter's presidency defcit was only about 60 Billion (with very high inflation). You can compare to Reagan's 175billion dollar deficits(reduced inflation) and Bush Sr's 250 Billion (with normalized inflation).

Relationship simply has not been there in the modern history.

It certainly does reduce deficits, because the dollars used to pay off the debt are worth much less than the dollars that were borrowed to create it.

Once again, you prove only that you're a dumbass who doesn't know what he's talking about.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Fed Bank inflates their balances, by "printing money" or "QE" or whatever you want to call it. IT DOES NOT REDUCE DEFICITS,

It does.......I'll let you try to figure out how.

Sure sure. Run along now, before you god forbid say something constructive.

I'll just sit here while you continue to not understand. Laughing.

 

[AntonToo]

No one knows for sure. We were certain of hyperinflation because of QE after the Meltdown.

If there is inflation it could be long and rough or it could be spiky and short lived.

No one knows for sure. Especially those whose perceptions are distorted by partisan ideology.

To be fair I think this is one of the times that it's not partisan ideology to realise that spending trillions and giving every endless free stuff would equate to hyperinflation and interest rates that will sink the economy. It's economics 1-0-1 that the biggest dummies like myself can understand.

I do agree though that hyperbole and ideology clouds folks views at the best of times, tho.

I have been screaming this on this site and I get crickets.

My only conclusion is that most Americans are really fucking dumb.

I have laid out the specific math....the response I get is...DERP!

BLACK LIVES MATTER!

As we become Greece.

This Republic is about to fall.

It's only a matter of time before the rest of the world realizes that they're subsidizing our cushy way of life and stops accepting the worthless pieces of paper we send them for the goods they actually create. We'll become a third world country overnight and you can say 'goodbye' to that 'thin veil of civility' that we're only barely holding on to as it is...

But if we print 30 trillion dollars, we can pay off the debt, right?

Wtf? You seriously need to go look at the difference between monetary policy and fiscal policy.

Debt is financed by gov bonds, meaning SOMEONE IS BUYING IT.

How much debt is too much?

"Too much" for what? For investors to stop buying American bonds?

If you knew anything at all you would know there is no way of knowing that.

No way of knowing what? The more bonds the government prints, the less interest investors are willing to pay.

It's as simple as that.

How is it possible for you to be sooo wrong, soo often?

Bonds are "printed" when they are bought ignoramus, they are just an "I-owe-you" note with interest the investors buy.

Interest rates are at historic lows, so obviously investors are VERY willing to buy at very low rates despite rapidly increasing national debt.

i mispoke. i mean the higher the interest rate they will demand. Rates are low now, but they are headed up. i recall what happened when Jimmy Carter was president. We had mortgage rates as high as 12%.

Yep, it was 12% interest despite very low national debt levels, so maybe you need to rethink your oversimplified understanding of that relationship.

Debt matters and ignoring it may one day end in a disaster for America, but to know exact debt level it happens at is more a matter of opinion than fact.

Carter was printing money to pay for his spending, dumbass.

Ironic for you to call someone a dumbass while saying dumbass nonsense.

Federal government does not "print money" to pay for spending. You are confusing monetary policy by the Federal Reserve Bank and fiscal policy that is taxing and spending.

National deficit is the difference between receipts and spending (inc interest spending), you cannot lower it by "printing money"

I didn't say the Federal Reserve prints money. I said it creates money. "Monetary policy" means creating money out of thin air. Are you claiming that the Federal Reserve isn't part of the Federal Government?

You can easily lower what the government owes by creating money. For one thing, debasing the currency lowers the value of what the federal government owes.

What else can I school you about, dumbass?

Federal bank does not print money to pay for Fed spending.

Get it? No? Ok it is what it is, you can get back to your regularly scheduled life of never ending bs and ignorance.

I said it creates money, and yes it does. People who don't understand that are brainwashed minions.

You read things but you can't seem to be able to understand them.

I wasn't nitpicking which exact way Fed Bank inflates their balances, by "printing money" or "QE" or whatever you want to call it. IT DOES NOT REDUCE DEFICITS, because deficits are simply a difference between what government recieves and spends.

During Carter's presidency defcit was only about 60 Billion (with very high inflation). You can compare to Reagan's 175billion dollar deficits(reduced inflation) and Bush Sr's 250 Billion (with normalized inflation).

Relationship simply has not been there in the modern history.

It certainly does reduce deficits, because the dollars used to pay off the debt are worth much less than the dollars that were borrowed to create it.

Once again, you prove only that you're a dumbass who doesn't know what he's talking about.

After all the expansion of Fedederal Bank balances since 2008 can you point to any such inflation?

No dummy, you can't, because again, your understanding of this relationship is laughable mickey-mouse club level.

Meanwhile, during Carter years of high inflation Fed balances were low. So when you said that Carter's debt was somehow lowered by Feds printing money you had no idea what you are talking about.

 

[bripat9643]

No one knows for sure. We were certain of hyperinflation because of QE after the Meltdown.

If there is inflation it could be long and rough or it could be spiky and short lived.

No one knows for sure. Especially those whose perceptions are distorted by partisan ideology.

To be fair I think this is one of the times that it's not partisan ideology to realise that spending trillions and giving every endless free stuff would equate to hyperinflation and interest rates that will sink the economy. It's economics 1-0-1 that the biggest dummies like myself can understand.

I do agree though that hyperbole and ideology clouds folks views at the best of times, tho.

I have been screaming this on this site and I get crickets.

My only conclusion is that most Americans are really fucking dumb.

I have laid out the specific math....the response I get is...DERP!

BLACK LIVES MATTER!

As we become Greece.

This Republic is about to fall.

It's only a matter of time before the rest of the world realizes that they're subsidizing our cushy way of life and stops accepting the worthless pieces of paper we send them for the goods they actually create. We'll become a third world country overnight and you can say 'goodbye' to that 'thin veil of civility' that we're only barely holding on to as it is...

But if we print 30 trillion dollars, we can pay off the debt, right?

Wtf? You seriously need to go look at the difference between monetary policy and fiscal policy.

Debt is financed by gov bonds, meaning SOMEONE IS BUYING IT.

How much debt is too much?

"Too much" for what? For investors to stop buying American bonds?

If you knew anything at all you would know there is no way of knowing that.

No way of knowing what? The more bonds the government prints, the less interest investors are willing to pay.

It's as simple as that.

How is it possible for you to be sooo wrong, soo often?

Bonds are "printed" when they are bought ignoramus, they are just an "I-owe-you" note with interest the investors buy.

Interest rates are at historic lows, so obviously investors are VERY willing to buy at very low rates despite rapidly increasing national debt.

i mispoke. i mean the higher the interest rate they will demand. Rates are low now, but they are headed up. i recall what happened when Jimmy Carter was president. We had mortgage rates as high as 12%.

Yep, it was 12% interest despite very low national debt levels, so maybe you need to rethink your oversimplified understanding of that relationship.

Debt matters and ignoring it may one day end in a disaster for America, but to know exact debt level it happens at is more a matter of opinion than fact.

Carter was printing money to pay for his spending, dumbass.

Ironic for you to call someone a dumbass while saying dumbass nonsense.

Federal government does not "print money" to pay for spending. You are confusing monetary policy by the Federal Reserve Bank and fiscal policy that is taxing and spending.

National deficit is the difference between receipts and spending (inc interest spending), you cannot lower it by "printing money"

I didn't say the Federal Reserve prints money. I said it creates money. "Monetary policy" means creating money out of thin air. Are you claiming that the Federal Reserve isn't part of the Federal Government?

You can easily lower what the government owes by creating money. For one thing, debasing the currency lowers the value of what the federal government owes.

What else can I school you about, dumbass?

Federal bank does not print money to pay for Fed spending.

Get it? No? Ok it is what it is, you can get back to your regularly scheduled life of never ending bs and ignorance.

I said it creates money, and yes it does. People who don't understand that are brainwashed minions.

You read things but you can't seem to be able to understand them.

I wasn't nitpicking which exact way Fed Bank inflates their balances, by "printing money" or "QE" or whatever you want to call it. IT DOES NOT REDUCE DEFICITS, because deficits are simply a difference between what government recieves and spends.

During Carter's presidency defcit was only about 60 Billion (with very high inflation). You can compare to Reagan's 175billion dollar deficits(reduced inflation) and Bush Sr's 250 Billion (with normalized inflation).

Relationship simply has not been there in the modern history.

It certainly does reduce deficits, because the dollars used to pay off the debt are worth much less than the dollars that were borrowed to create it.

Once again, you prove only that you're a dumbass who doesn't know what he's talking about.

After all the expansion of Fedederal Bank balances since 2008 can you point to any such inflation?

No dummy, you can't, because again, your understanding of this relationship is laughable mickey-mouse club level.

Meanwhile, during Carter years of high inflation Fed balances were low. So when you said that Carter's debt was somehow lowered by Feds printing money you had no idea what you are talking about.

 

[AntonToo]

No one knows for sure. We were certain of hyperinflation because of QE after the Meltdown.

If there is inflation it could be long and rough or it could be spiky and short lived.

No one knows for sure. Especially those whose perceptions are distorted by partisan ideology.

To be fair I think this is one of the times that it's not partisan ideology to realise that spending trillions and giving every endless free stuff would equate to hyperinflation and interest rates that will sink the economy. It's economics 1-0-1 that the biggest dummies like myself can understand.

I do agree though that hyperbole and ideology clouds folks views at the best of times, tho.

I have been screaming this on this site and I get crickets.

My only conclusion is that most Americans are really fucking dumb.

I have laid out the specific math....the response I get is...DERP!

BLACK LIVES MATTER!

As we become Greece.

This Republic is about to fall.

It's only a matter of time before the rest of the world realizes that they're subsidizing our cushy way of life and stops accepting the worthless pieces of paper we send them for the goods they actually create. We'll become a third world country overnight and you can say 'goodbye' to that 'thin veil of civility' that we're only barely holding on to as it is...

But if we print 30 trillion dollars, we can pay off the debt, right?

Wtf? You seriously need to go look at the difference between monetary policy and fiscal policy.

Debt is financed by gov bonds, meaning SOMEONE IS BUYING IT.

How much debt is too much?

"Too much" for what? For investors to stop buying American bonds?

If you knew anything at all you would know there is no way of knowing that.

No way of knowing what? The more bonds the government prints, the less interest investors are willing to pay.

It's as simple as that.

How is it possible for you to be sooo wrong, soo often?

Bonds are "printed" when they are bought ignoramus, they are just an "I-owe-you" note with interest the investors buy.

Interest rates are at historic lows, so obviously investors are VERY willing to buy at very low rates despite rapidly increasing national debt.

i mispoke. i mean the higher the interest rate they will demand. Rates are low now, but they are headed up. i recall what happened when Jimmy Carter was president. We had mortgage rates as high as 12%.

Yep, it was 12% interest despite very low national debt levels, so maybe you need to rethink your oversimplified understanding of that relationship.

Debt matters and ignoring it may one day end in a disaster for America, but to know exact debt level it happens at is more a matter of opinion than fact.

Carter was printing money to pay for his spending, dumbass.

Ironic for you to call someone a dumbass while saying dumbass nonsense.

Federal government does not "print money" to pay for spending. You are confusing monetary policy by the Federal Reserve Bank and fiscal policy that is taxing and spending.

National deficit is the difference between receipts and spending (inc interest spending), you cannot lower it by "printing money"

I didn't say the Federal Reserve prints money. I said it creates money. "Monetary policy" means creating money out of thin air. Are you claiming that the Federal Reserve isn't part of the Federal Government?

You can easily lower what the government owes by creating money. For one thing, debasing the currency lowers the value of what the federal government owes.

What else can I school you about, dumbass?

Federal bank does not print money to pay for Fed spending.

Get it? No? Ok it is what it is, you can get back to your regularly scheduled life of never ending bs and ignorance.

I said it creates money, and yes it does. People who don't understand that are brainwashed minions.

You read things but you can't seem to be able to understand them.

I wasn't nitpicking which exact way Fed Bank inflates their balances, by "printing money" or "QE" or whatever you want to call it. IT DOES NOT REDUCE DEFICITS, because deficits are simply a difference between what government recieves and spends.

During Carter's presidency defcit was only about 60 Billion (with very high inflation). You can compare to Reagan's 175billion dollar deficits(reduced inflation) and Bush Sr's 250 Billion (with normalized inflation).

Relationship simply has not been there in the modern history.

It certainly does reduce deficits, because the dollars used to pay off the debt are worth much less than the dollars that were borrowed to create it.

Once again, you prove only that you're a dumbass who doesn't know what he's talking about.

After all the expansion of Fedederal Bank balances since 2008 can you point to any such inflation?

No dummy, you can't, because again, your understanding of this relationship is laughable mickey-mouse club level.

Meanwhile, during Carter years of high inflation Fed balances were low. So when you said that Carter's debt was somehow lowered by Feds printing money you had no idea what you are talking about.

Yes moron, employment costs do go down during a GREAT FN RECESSION. Your graph clearly shows that employment costs in 2018 are on par with 2000, this despite huge increase in Fed's balance.

More unemployment means it's easier to find workers for less and like an idiot you are trying to substitute that for actual inflation index because we both know that if you were to post that your thesis would be contradicted.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No one knows for sure. We were certain of hyperinflation because of QE after the Meltdown.

If there is inflation it could be long and rough or it could be spiky and short lived.

No one knows for sure. Especially those whose perceptions are distorted by partisan ideology.

To be fair I think this is one of the times that it's not partisan ideology to realise that spending trillions and giving every endless free stuff would equate to hyperinflation and interest rates that will sink the economy. It's economics 1-0-1 that the biggest dummies like myself can understand.

I do agree though that hyperbole and ideology clouds folks views at the best of times, tho.

I have been screaming this on this site and I get crickets.

My only conclusion is that most Americans are really fucking dumb.

I have laid out the specific math....the response I get is...DERP!

BLACK LIVES MATTER!

As we become Greece.

This Republic is about to fall.

It's only a matter of time before the rest of the world realizes that they're subsidizing our cushy way of life and stops accepting the worthless pieces of paper we send them for the goods they actually create. We'll become a third world country overnight and you can say 'goodbye' to that 'thin veil of civility' that we're only barely holding on to as it is...

But if we print 30 trillion dollars, we can pay off the debt, right?

Wtf? You seriously need to go look at the difference between monetary policy and fiscal policy.

Debt is financed by gov bonds, meaning SOMEONE IS BUYING IT.

How much debt is too much?

"Too much" for what? For investors to stop buying American bonds?

If you knew anything at all you would know there is no way of knowing that.

No way of knowing what? The more bonds the government prints, the less interest investors are willing to pay.

It's as simple as that.

How is it possible for you to be sooo wrong, soo often?

Bonds are "printed" when they are bought ignoramus, they are just an "I-owe-you" note with interest the investors buy.

Interest rates are at historic lows, so obviously investors are VERY willing to buy at very low rates despite rapidly increasing national debt.

i mispoke. i mean the higher the interest rate they will demand. Rates are low now, but they are headed up. i recall what happened when Jimmy Carter was president. We had mortgage rates as high as 12%.

Yep, it was 12% interest despite very low national debt levels, so maybe you need to rethink your oversimplified understanding of that relationship.

Debt matters and ignoring it may one day end in a disaster for America, but to know exact debt level it happens at is more a matter of opinion than fact.

Carter was printing money to pay for his spending, dumbass.

Ironic for you to call someone a dumbass while saying dumbass nonsense.

Federal government does not "print money" to pay for spending. You are confusing monetary policy by the Federal Reserve Bank and fiscal policy that is taxing and spending.

National deficit is the difference between receipts and spending (inc interest spending), you cannot lower it by "printing money"

I didn't say the Federal Reserve prints money. I said it creates money. "Monetary policy" means creating money out of thin air. Are you claiming that the Federal Reserve isn't part of the Federal Government?

You can easily lower what the government owes by creating money. For one thing, debasing the currency lowers the value of what the federal government owes.

What else can I school you about, dumbass?

Federal bank does not print money to pay for Fed spending.

Get it? No? Ok it is what it is, you can get back to your regularly scheduled life of never ending bs and ignorance.

I said it creates money, and yes it does. People who don't understand that are brainwashed minions.

You read things but you can't seem to be able to understand them.

I wasn't nitpicking which exact way Fed Bank inflates their balances, by "printing money" or "QE" or whatever you want to call it. IT DOES NOT REDUCE DEFICITS, because deficits are simply a difference between what government recieves and spends.

During Carter's presidency defcit was only about 60 Billion (with very high inflation). You can compare to Reagan's 175billion dollar deficits(reduced inflation) and Bush Sr's 250 Billion (with normalized inflation).

Relationship simply has not been there in the modern history.

It certainly does reduce deficits, because the dollars used to pay off the debt are worth much less than the dollars that were borrowed to create it.

Once again, you prove only that you're a dumbass who doesn't know what he's talking about.

After all the expansion of Fedederal Bank balances since 2008 can you point to any such inflation?

No dummy, you can't, because again, your understanding of this relationship is laughable mickey-mouse club level.

Meanwhile, during Carter years of high inflation Fed balances were low. So when you said that Carter's debt was somehow lowered by Feds printing money you had no idea what you are talking about.

Yes moron, employment costs do go down during a GREAT FN RECESSION. Your graph clearly shows that employment costs in 2018 are on par with 2000, this despite huge increase in Fed's balance.

More unemployment means it's easier to find workers for less and like an idiot you are trying to substitute that for actual inflation index because we both know that if you were to post that your thesis would be contradicted.

Your graph clearly shows that employment costs in 2018 are on par with 2000,

Which part of the graph says that?

 

[OldFlame]

Democrats are just outright pillaging the country.

God forbid that ANYONE give money to people in need. Corporations and the wealthy are the only ones entitled to "free shit". Giving money to people makes them lazy.

You're not entirely wrong on this one, but one question, what is a corporation made of?

You're looking for me to say "people", but that's not the correct answer. People manage corporations, they work for corporations, and they own corporations, but they are NOT corporations. A corporation is a legal entity having all of the rights of a natural person to own property, and to conduct business, in the ordinary course.

A corporation is made up of a charter, or an constating document setting out the name, purpose, initial share structure, and limitations of the corporation, and it's initial directors. There is a capital structure, share certificates, and a corporate minute book containing the By-laws and Resolutions of the Directors and Shareholders, The corporation is made up of assets owned by the corporation and liabilities owed by it.

All stimulus monies should be paid to the tax payers. Not the corporations who had their tax bills nearly cut in half from 35% to 21% - a permanent 40% tax reduction. Large multinational corporations were allowed a one-time opportunity to bring home capital overseas subsidiaries at the nominal tax rate of 10%. Capital which had be sitting in offshore accounts for a generation was brought home and the taxes collected on these funds resulted in big jump in corporate taxes paid in 2018. This one time repatriation of funds covered up true costs of the corporate tax cuts.

Almost none of this gift to corporations ended up in the hands of workers. 40% of this money went straight to the shareholders.

These 91 companies paid no federal taxes in 2018

A new report from think tank says some of the biggest companies in the country had effective tax rates of 0% or less in 2018.

www.cnbc.com

.

These people don't need stimulus money, but their workers do.

Gasoline? 87 Octane, not "name brand".
$2.89 at 5:30 this morning as I passed the gas station.
$3.09 when I returned from grocery shopping.
Exhausted from racing to stay ahead of the crew increasing the shelf prices only to learn that the "new" and "improved" (read: "higher" prices) were already in the checkout computers.
Front end manager says the chain's M.I.S. department is perfecting software that will raise the prices of items with product codes ending in odd numbers on Mondays, Wednesdays qne Fridays. UPC's ending in even numbers on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays. They're arguing over whether on Sundays to leave all prices alone or just increase all prices at once.
Plan is to leave the percentage increase programmable up to midnight each night so a management team call review what Xiden said that day and how much room that gives them.

Think I'm kidding? Show on any three or rour (3 or 4, liberals) successive days; look at the UPC codes and prices.

Do you have any evidence that ANY of this is happening, or is this more right wing fear mongering.? I notice not one link is posted. It appears that the radical right has absolutely nothing to counter any of Biden's plan other than scare tactics.

You do understand that your food prices have gone up because there's no illegal immigrants to work in the fields or the processing plants, don't you? That the ONLY reason your food prices have been this cheap for this long is illegal immigration?

Or that your gas prices went up because OPEC cut production to drive up the price of gas?

Geezus Christo, she's loonier than I ever imagined. And that's saying something b/c I thought she was a loon BEFORE this response...

I'm surprised that anyone even reads her books, I always scroll by, based on the few that I've read, it's a complete waste of time to read her posts.

 

[danielpalos]

No one knows for sure. We were certain of hyperinflation because of QE after the Meltdown.

If there is inflation it could be long and rough or it could be spiky and short lived.

No one knows for sure. Especially those whose perceptions are distorted by partisan ideology.

To be fair I think this is one of the times that it's not partisan ideology to realise that spending trillions and giving every endless free stuff would equate to hyperinflation and interest rates that will sink the economy. It's economics 1-0-1 that the biggest dummies like myself can understand.

I do agree though that hyperbole and ideology clouds folks views at the best of times, tho.

I have been screaming this on this site and I get crickets.

My only conclusion is that most Americans are really fucking dumb.

I have laid out the specific math....the response I get is...DERP!

BLACK LIVES MATTER!

As we become Greece.

This Republic is about to fall.

It's only a matter of time before the rest of the world realizes that they're subsidizing our cushy way of life and stops accepting the worthless pieces of paper we send them for the goods they actually create. We'll become a third world country overnight and you can say 'goodbye' to that 'thin veil of civility' that we're only barely holding on to as it is...

But if we print 30 trillion dollars, we can pay off the debt, right?

Wtf? You seriously need to go look at the difference between monetary policy and fiscal policy.

Debt is financed by gov bonds, meaning SOMEONE IS BUYING IT.

How much debt is too much?

"Too much" for what? For investors to stop buying American bonds?

If you knew anything at all you would know there is no way of knowing that.

No way of knowing what? The more bonds the government prints, the less interest investors are willing to pay.

It's as simple as that.

How is it possible for you to be sooo wrong, soo often?

Bonds are "printed" when they are bought ignoramus, they are just an "I-owe-you" note with interest the investors buy.

Interest rates are at historic lows, so obviously investors are VERY willing to buy at very low rates despite rapidly increasing national debt.

i mispoke. i mean the higher the interest rate they will demand. Rates are low now, but they are headed up. i recall what happened when Jimmy Carter was president. We had mortgage rates as high as 12%.

Yep, it was 12% interest despite very low national debt levels, so maybe you need to rethink your oversimplified understanding of that relationship.

Debt matters and ignoring it may one day end in a disaster for America, but to know exact debt level it happens at is more a matter of opinion than fact.

Carter was printing money to pay for his spending, dumbass.

Ironic for you to call someone a dumbass while saying dumbass nonsense.

Federal government does not "print money" to pay for spending. You are confusing monetary policy by the Federal Reserve Bank and fiscal policy that is taxing and spending.

National deficit is the difference between receipts and spending (inc interest spending), you cannot lower it by "printing money"

I didn't say the Federal Reserve prints money. I said it creates money. "Monetary policy" means creating money out of thin air. Are you claiming that the Federal Reserve isn't part of the Federal Government?

You can easily lower what the government owes by creating money. For one thing, debasing the currency lowers the value of what the federal government owes.

What else can I school you about, dumbass?

Federal bank does not print money to pay for Fed spending.

Get it? No? Ok it is what it is, you can get back to your regularly scheduled life of never ending bs and ignorance.

I said it creates money, and yes it does. People who don't understand that are brainwashed minions.

You read things but you can't seem to be able to understand them.

I wasn't nitpicking which exact way Fed Bank inflates their balances, by "printing money" or "QE" or whatever you want to call it. IT DOES NOT REDUCE DEFICITS, because deficits are simply a difference between what government recieves and spends.

During Carter's presidency defcit was only about 60 Billion (with very high inflation). You can compare to Reagan's 175billion dollar deficits(reduced inflation) and Bush Sr's 250 Billion (with normalized inflation).

Relationship simply has not been there in the modern history.

It certainly does reduce deficits, because the dollars used to pay off the debt are worth much less than the dollars that were borrowed to create it.

Once again, you prove only that you're a dumbass who doesn't know what he's talking about.

Not when right wingers believe in tax cut economics instead of small government and cutting discretionary spending with no alleged wars on crime, drugs, or terror.

 

[AntonToo]

No one knows for sure. We were certain of hyperinflation because of QE after the Meltdown.

If there is inflation it could be long and rough or it could be spiky and short lived.

No one knows for sure. Especially those whose perceptions are distorted by partisan ideology.

To be fair I think this is one of the times that it's not partisan ideology to realise that spending trillions and giving every endless free stuff would equate to hyperinflation and interest rates that will sink the economy. It's economics 1-0-1 that the biggest dummies like myself can understand.

I do agree though that hyperbole and ideology clouds folks views at the best of times, tho.

I have been screaming this on this site and I get crickets.

My only conclusion is that most Americans are really fucking dumb.

I have laid out the specific math....the response I get is...DERP!

BLACK LIVES MATTER!

As we become Greece.

This Republic is about to fall.

It's only a matter of time before the rest of the world realizes that they're subsidizing our cushy way of life and stops accepting the worthless pieces of paper we send them for the goods they actually create. We'll become a third world country overnight and you can say 'goodbye' to that 'thin veil of civility' that we're only barely holding on to as it is...

But if we print 30 trillion dollars, we can pay off the debt, right?

Wtf? You seriously need to go look at the difference between monetary policy and fiscal policy.

Debt is financed by gov bonds, meaning SOMEONE IS BUYING IT.

How much debt is too much?

"Too much" for what? For investors to stop buying American bonds?

If you knew anything at all you would know there is no way of knowing that.

No way of knowing what? The more bonds the government prints, the less interest investors are willing to pay.

It's as simple as that.

How is it possible for you to be sooo wrong, soo often?

Bonds are "printed" when they are bought ignoramus, they are just an "I-owe-you" note with interest the investors buy.

Interest rates are at historic lows, so obviously investors are VERY willing to buy at very low rates despite rapidly increasing national debt.

i mispoke. i mean the higher the interest rate they will demand. Rates are low now, but they are headed up. i recall what happened when Jimmy Carter was president. We had mortgage rates as high as 12%.

Yep, it was 12% interest despite very low national debt levels, so maybe you need to rethink your oversimplified understanding of that relationship.

Debt matters and ignoring it may one day end in a disaster for America, but to know exact debt level it happens at is more a matter of opinion than fact.

Carter was printing money to pay for his spending, dumbass.

Ironic for you to call someone a dumbass while saying dumbass nonsense.

Federal government does not "print money" to pay for spending. You are confusing monetary policy by the Federal Reserve Bank and fiscal policy that is taxing and spending.

National deficit is the difference between receipts and spending (inc interest spending), you cannot lower it by "printing money"

I didn't say the Federal Reserve prints money. I said it creates money. "Monetary policy" means creating money out of thin air. Are you claiming that the Federal Reserve isn't part of the Federal Government?

You can easily lower what the government owes by creating money. For one thing, debasing the currency lowers the value of what the federal government owes.

What else can I school you about, dumbass?

Federal bank does not print money to pay for Fed spending.

Get it? No? Ok it is what it is, you can get back to your regularly scheduled life of never ending bs and ignorance.

I said it creates money, and yes it does. People who don't understand that are brainwashed minions.

You read things but you can't seem to be able to understand them.

I wasn't nitpicking which exact way Fed Bank inflates their balances, by "printing money" or "QE" or whatever you want to call it. IT DOES NOT REDUCE DEFICITS, because deficits are simply a difference between what government recieves and spends.

During Carter's presidency defcit was only about 60 Billion (with very high inflation). You can compare to Reagan's 175billion dollar deficits(reduced inflation) and Bush Sr's 250 Billion (with normalized inflation).

Relationship simply has not been there in the modern history.

It certainly does reduce deficits, because the dollars used to pay off the debt are worth much less than the dollars that were borrowed to create it.

Once again, you prove only that you're a dumbass who doesn't know what he's talking about.

After all the expansion of Fedederal Bank balances since 2008 can you point to any such inflation?

No dummy, you can't, because again, your understanding of this relationship is laughable mickey-mouse club level.

Meanwhile, during Carter years of high inflation Fed balances were low. So when you said that Carter's debt was somehow lowered by Feds printing money you had no idea what you are talking about.

Yes moron, employment costs do go down during a GREAT FN RECESSION. Your graph clearly shows that employment costs in 2018 are on par with 2000, this despite huge increase in Fed's balance.

More unemployment means it's easier to find workers for less and like an idiot you are trying to substitute that for actual inflation index because we both know that if you were to post that your thesis would be contradicted.

Your graph clearly shows that employment costs in 2018 are on par with 2000,

Which part of the graph says that?

Are you serious?

The part where 2000 and 2018 cost of employment index is about the same. DUH?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The part where 2000 and 2018 cost of employment index is about the same. DUH?

You think that shows the employment cost index is basically unchanged 2000-2018?

Seriously?

What do you think that's measuring? Be precise.

 

[AntonToo]

The part where 2000 and 2018 cost of employment index is about the same. DUH?

You think that shows the employment cost index is basically unchanged 2000-2018?

Seriously?

What do you think that's measuring? Be precise.

It's a basic 2 axis graph, what don't you understand about it?

2000 we see employment cost inex drop some from mild recession in 2001, climbed back up, then dropped big during Great Recession and now it's climbing back up again. What don't you get?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The part where 2000 and 2018 cost of employment index is about the same. DUH?

You think that shows the employment cost index is basically unchanged 2000-2018?

Seriously?

What do you think that's measuring? Be precise.

It's a basic 2 axis graph, what don't you understand about it?

2000 we see employment cost inex drop some from mild recession in 2001, climbed back up, then dropped big during Great Recession and now it's back up again. What don't you get?

It's a basic 2 axis graph, what don't you understand about it?

I understand plenty.....mostly that your claim.... "2000 and 2018 cost of employment index is about the same" is hilariously, stupendously wrong.

 

[Concerned American]

As we become Greece.

Greece had the EU to bail them out--who is going to bail out the US? Nobody! The Great Depression will be a blip on the screen compared to the one that is coming.

 

[AntonToo]

The part where 2000 and 2018 cost of employment index is about the same. DUH?

You think that shows the employment cost index is basically unchanged 2000-2018?

Seriously?

What do you think that's measuring? Be precise.

It's a basic 2 axis graph, what don't you understand about it?

2000 we see employment cost inex drop some from mild recession in 2001, climbed back up, then dropped big during Great Recession and now it's back up again. What don't you get?

It's a basic 2 axis graph, what don't you understand about it?

I understand plenty.....mostly that your claim.... "2000 and 2018 cost of employment index is about the same" is hilariously, stupendously wrong.

I see, and how would you describe what you see in the graph for 2000 labor cost index vs 2018?

 

[bodecea]

No one knows for sure. We were certain of hyperinflation because of QE after the Meltdown.

If there is inflation it could be long and rough or it could be spiky and short lived.

No one knows for sure. Especially those whose perceptions are distorted by partisan ideology.

To be fair I think this is one of the times that it's not partisan ideology to realise that spending trillions and giving every endless free stuff would equate to hyperinflation and interest rates that will sink the economy. It's economics 1-0-1 that the biggest dummies like myself can understand.

I do agree though that hyperbole and ideology clouds folks views at the best of times, tho.

I have been screaming this on this site and I get crickets.

My only conclusion is that most Americans are really fucking dumb.

I have laid out the specific math....the response I get is...DERP!

BLACK LIVES MATTER!

As we become Greece.

This Republic is about to fall.

I've given you a lot more than 'derp', and I haven't taken a side either. As a Canadian I couldn't give a lick which side wins. I'm more in favour of the fight continuing until it's been completely destructive of America's global hegemony.

An ace in the hole for the Trump side is in the fact that the very wealthy right has convinced many working people to put all their chips in the stock market. Therefore the false notion of a stock market crash will be promoted.

You threw alot of words out there...that mean nothing, Go shoot a Caribou and fuck off.

You really hate that the economy is chugging along under Biden and didn't crash like your orange god predicted.

 

[Donald H]

You really hate that the economy is chugging along under Biden and didn't crash like your orange god predicted.

You read me entirely wrong. I'm a Canadian and of course I'm of the opinion that Biden is new hope for America. He's been given a leg up by the crazy extremism of Trump.

It's just that I see it as about equal odds on America choosing social change, or choosing fascism under another Trump regime.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The part where 2000 and 2018 cost of employment index is about the same. DUH?

You think that shows the employment cost index is basically unchanged 2000-2018?

Seriously?

What do you think that's measuring? Be precise.

It's a basic 2 axis graph, what don't you understand about it?

2000 we see employment cost inex drop some from mild recession in 2001, climbed back up, then dropped big during Great Recession and now it's back up again. What don't you get?

It's a basic 2 axis graph, what don't you understand about it?

I understand plenty.....mostly that your claim.... "2000 and 2018 cost of employment index is about the same" is hilariously, stupendously wrong.

I see, and how would you describe what you see in the graph for 2000 labor cost index vs 2018?

See the right side where it says YoY?
That means year-over-year.

So, first, you mistook the NFIB Small Business Compensation Plans, at 21.0, as the cost
index and then you thought that meant "employment costs in 2018 are on par with 2000"

The most recent change in employment costs, on that graph, was +2.7% YoY in 2018.

Since Q2001, the increase is nearly 70%. (143.7/84.7=1.69657)

Employment Cost Index: Total compensation: All Civilian | FRED | St. Louis Fed

Graph and download economic data for Employment Cost Index: Total compensation: All Civilian from Q1 2001 to Q1 2023 about ECI, cost, compensation, civilian, headline figure, employment, indexes, and USA.

fred.stlouisfed.org

If there is anything else you have no clue about, feel free to ask me before you broadcast your ignorance. I'm always happy to help.

 

[Donald H]

The question on how much success Biden will have with his 'big gifts' the the working class is not likely to be considered as how it relates to established politics.

It needs to be considered as a sure cause of a 'market crash'.

However, the flaw in that thinking is the fact that the market has been proven to be quite independent of the success or failure of big business.

The Stock Market has become the property of the very wealthy and has now become of no consequence to the lack of wellbeing of the American people.

Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life | News

For the fifth year in a row, Canada is ranked the #1 country in the world in 2020 for Quality of Life, according to a global ranking from US News.

dailyhive.com

America's quality of life for the people continues to fall, at the same time as the markets boom.

Biden's success or failure depends on what has been pumped into the American brain by the wealthy ruling class. All their money belongs to them only!

 

[Donald H]

Concerned Citizen, I never fail to notice when you disagree.
However, you may want to consider that I take them as compliments and proof that you're paying attention.