How Long Before the Next Crisis

[rayboyusmc]

Did this bill fix anything or did it just put a band aid on a cut that will shortly began to bleed again?

I think this was another Chicken Little ploy and we all got taken to the cleaners again.

Let's wait and see.

 

[WillowTree]

I give it less than 6 months.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Bandaid on a gushing aorta. Will not solve it. This bubble should have been allowed to burst naturally. In a couple of years we may be on the brink of collapse. This bill should have failed.

 

[eots]

Don'T worry..they are well prepared for the next crisis



According to a report published Monday by the Washington Post, the Pentagon has developed its first ever war plans for operations within the continental United States, in which terrorist attacks would be used as the justification for imposing martial law on cities, regions or the entire country.
The front-page article cites sources working at the headquarters of the military’s Northern Command (Northcom), located in Colorado Springs, Colorado. The plans themselves are classified, but “officers who drafted the plans” gave details to Post reporter Bradley Graham, who was recently given a tour of Northcom headquarters at Peterson Air Force Base. The article thus appears to be a deliberate leak conducted for the purpose of accustoming the American population to the prospect of military rule.

According to Graham, “the new plans provide for what several senior officers acknowledged is the likelihood that the military will have to take charge in some situations, especially when dealing with mass-casualty attacks that could quickly overwhelm civilian resources.”

The Post account declares, “The war plans represent a historic shift for the Pentagon, which has been reluctant to become involved in domestic operations and is legally constrained from engaging in law enforcement.”


Pentagon devising scenarios for martial law in US

 

[WillowTree]

I was dead wrong. California wants to borrow 7 Billion dollars..

 

[dilloduck]

I was dead wrong. California wants to borrow 7 Billion dollars..

We're tapped out---screw em.

 

[Mad Scientist]

I was dead wrong. California wants to borrow 7 Billion dollars..

On a deficit that's 15 billion or so. Let em' sink.

 

[eots]

I was dead wrong. California wants to borrow 7 Billion dollars..

crisis..what crisis..we can just print 7 billion dollars more .. and devalue the dollar and your savings..you can cover it with your labour and children's labour.. paper and ink is cheap....simple...no crisis

 

[doeton]

throw in New York saying they'll money too.

 

[dilloduck]

crisis..what crisis..we can just print 7 billion dollars more .. and devalue the dollar and your savings..you can cover it with your labour and children's labour.. paper and ink is cheap....simple...no crisis

We ? You mean the Fed. The Fed isn't we--it's our friendly banker.

 

[politicalguy]

I was listening to NYC Mayor Bloomberg today on WOR 710, a man who I respect for his business experience more than any of his other political attributes. Basically, he summed up what I fear for the markets.

This Bailout plan is a temporary relief plan, it is a band aid too small to cover the whole wound. All it is doing is telling banks that whenever they f-up (which is too numerous for comfort) the good ol' USA will bail them out. Furthermore, the real problem here is that there is a lack of confidence within the US now concerning the security of banks.

A fear that I believe is well supported by present circumstances. The Bailout Plan helps, but in the long run...what does it prevent?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

It's certainly coming. This bailout is only a short-term solution, it only adds to the long-term issues. Our next crisis is coming, and it will be much worse than this last one. I wonder if they'll still blame the free market.

 

[editec]

This problem simply leaves us with an even weaker economy thatn we had.

The next shock to the system will be even harder to deal with.

What will that next shock be?

Take your pick, it could come in mnay forms, natural disaster, another war we cannot afford, some brewing economic diaster in one of our trade partners, anothe dramtic spike in energy prices, are just a few possible things that could knock us over again.

Until we solve the problem of Americans who cannot find suitable work that pays a living wage, the root source of this problem (we're getting poorer as nation!) will continue to plague us.

If we started today, I submit to you all it would take at least a generation or two for us to climb out of the hole we've dug for ourselves,

And since I see NOBODY who is willing to tell Americans the hard facts about WHY Americans aren't making it, (they keep blaming the OTHER PARTY) I do not think we're really going to fix this problem.

 

[WillowTree]

This problem simply leaves us with an even weaker economy thatn we had.

The next shock to the system will be even harder to deal with.

What will that next shock be?

Take your pick, it could come in mnay forms, natural disaster, another war we cannot afford, some brewing economic diaster in one of our trade partners, anothe dramtic spike in energy prices, are just a few possible things that could knock us over again.

Until we solve the problem of Americans who cannot find suitable work that pays a living wage, the root source of this problem (we're getting poorer as nation!) will continue to plague us.

If we started today, I submit to you all it would take at least a generation or two for us to climb out of the hole we've dug for ourselves,

And since I see NOBODY who is willing to tell Americans the hard facts about WHY Americans aren't making it, (they keep blaming the OTHER PARTY) I do not think we're really going to fix this problem.

You've said a mouthful there. No one is telling the truth, for about ten days the fought and argued and told us how urgent this bailout was needed, the president signed it the very same day. Then lo and behold, the congresscritters went on vacation, won't be back til after the election. So who is fixing the problem that was so urgent?

 

[KittenKoder]

Did this bill fix anything or did it just put a band aid on a cut that will shortly began to bleed again?

I think this was another Chicken Little ploy and we all got taken to the cleaners again.

Let's wait and see.

Anyone who thinks it's over is just hiding from it.

 

[heretic]

I'm sure there is going to be one just in time to expand the Federal Goverment's power some more. I'm guessing sometime in the spring.

As long as we have an electorate that votes based on what they feel instead of facts (what ever their conclusions are) this is all were going to get from Washington.

 

[editec]

Anyone who thinks it's over is just hiding from it.

Yup.

Oh we might have another period where the market ignore the obvious (as it has been for decades now) but eventually the flaws of this system cannot be hidden.

This economic disaster is not over, folks.

It will not be over until America is serious about putting AMERICANS back to work.

I think our government is just lying to us, now, folks.

Consider that the number of people working today is only 0.2% higher than it was when Bush II assumed office IN 2000.

Now in 2000 the rate of unemploment was about 4%.

In the last eight years how many new people came into the market seeking employment?

Can we assume that about two million people per year is about the right number of NEW WORKERS seeking work per year? (not including illegals, of course)

So if those (let's assume 16 million new workers since 2000, shall we?) entered the work force, and if now we've only got a .2% increase intotal people working, how can our unemployment rate have only increased 2% since 2000?

Acording to this site our current rate of unemployment is about 6%.

If we had 200,000,000 people in our workforce in 2000 (I think that's high but let's go with that guesstimate) , then a 16 million increase in that number (to 2016 million) in 2008 means that our unemployment number has got to be higher than a mere 6%

Year 2000

200,000 million potential workers x.96% employed = 192,0000,000 employed + 4% (8,000,000) unemployed

Year 2008

If our current employed workforce is ONLY .2% higher than in 2000 then
192,000,000 x 100.2 %= 195,840,000 people working today

195,840,000/216,000,000 = .90666 working or about a 8.3333% rate of unemployed workers...


Strange that I cannot find good numbers to tell me what the total workforce was in 2000 or in 2008, isn't it?

They must exist online, but damned if I could find them today. I looked but can only find numbers broken down by regions and metro areas.


I invite anyone with the real figures about total workforce, and average increases in workforce per year to bring us those real numbers so we can investigate what the REAL numbers actually are.

Something doesn't appear to be jibbing here in my numbers, folks.

Perhaps I am missing something obvious to explain the difference.

 

[slackjawed]

I invite anyone with the real figures about total workforce, and average increases in workforce per year to bring us those real numbers so we can investigate what the REAL numbers actually are.

Something doesn't appear to be jibbing here in my numbers, folks.

Perhaps I am missing something obvious to explain the difference.


I am interested in seeing these numbers too.

 

[WhiteLion]

Don'T worry..they are well prepared for the next crisis



According to a report published Monday by the Washington Post, the Pentagon has developed its first ever war plans for operations within the continental United States, in which terrorist attacks would be used as the justification for imposing martial law on cities, regions or the entire country.
The front-page article cites sources working at the headquarters of the military’s Northern Command (Northcom), located in Colorado Springs, Colorado. The plans themselves are classified, but “officers who drafted the plans” gave details to Post reporter Bradley Graham, who was recently given a tour of Northcom headquarters at Peterson Air Force Base. The article thus appears to be a deliberate leak conducted for the purpose of accustoming the American population to the prospect of military rule.

According to Graham, “the new plans provide for what several senior officers acknowledged is the likelihood that the military will have to take charge in some situations, especially when dealing with mass-casualty attacks that could quickly overwhelm civilian resources.”

The Post account declares, “The war plans represent a historic shift for the Pentagon, which has been reluctant to become involved in domestic operations and is legally constrained from engaging in law enforcement.”


Pentagon devising scenarios for martial law in US

True, what do you think the 3000 or so FEMA compounds spread all over the USA are for??? Most of which were converted from the WWII era, complete with full railway access, with containment capacities anywhere from 20,000 and some as high as 200,000 people. Far as im aware any USA president from the late 1940's thru early 1950's to date has 10 main martial law excutive orders to restrain a mass USA population...google REX84. Our true rights went out the door 60 years ago...Upon presidential Martial Law excutive orders, the USA CONSTITUTION BECOMEs NULL AND VOID!!! and is reverted to a defacto regime("of the fact" or "in practice" but not ordained by law)..its coming, not a matter of if, simple matter of when...Why do you think theyve been spending the last 20 years dumbing down the first and second amendments. Do the citizens need any protection from the government, isnt that partially what the second amendment was for??? Its my belief that Guantanamo bay was nothing more than an idea to desensitize the American public to the idea of torture...weather or not it was needed. However I guarentee WATERBOARDING will just be a slap on the rist in those days...CALL YOUR CONGRESSMEN BEFORE ITS TO LATE, TELL THEM TO ABOLISH THE PATRIOT ACT AND THE HOMELAND SECURITY GOLOUG ALONG WITH ANY BILL THAT HAMPERS THE ABILITY OF THE AMERICAN CITIZENS RIGHT TO PROTECT AND ARM THEMSELVES, and threaten to vote them OUT, vote them OUT ASAP...Once Martial Law is nationalized it'll be to late. We're not running out of time for freedom folks, we're already out of time..i firmly believe these will be the case.

Anti-Federalist Patrick Henry during the opening debates of the Virginia Ratification Convention stated his strong belief that arms are required to secure rights and freedoms from those that would take them away

Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined. … O sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people! Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone; … Did you ever read of any revolution in a nation, brought about by the punishment of those in power, inflicted by those who had no power at all? … Will your mace-bearer be a match for a disciplined regiment?[39]

George Mason during that debate also showed his distrust of Congress and the possibility that it would not fund the arming for the militia as an excuse for the creation of a standing army, which could later to be used as an instrument of tyranny by Congress.

The militia may be here destroyed by that method which has been practised in other parts of the world before; that is, by rendering them useless—by disarming them. Under various pretences, Congress may neglect to provide for arming and disciplining the militia; and the state governments cannot do it, for Congress has an exclusive right to arm them, &c. … Should the national government wish to render the militia useless, they may neglect them, and let them perish, in order to have a pretence of establishing a standing army. … But when once a standing army is established in any country, the people lose their liberty. When, against a regular and disciplined army, yeomanry are the only defence,—yeomanry, unskilful and unarmed,—what chance is there for preserving freedom?[40]

Patrick Henry during debate also states:

The militia, sir, is our ultimate safety. We can have no security without it.[

 

[chopcrazy]

Yup.

Oh we might have another period where the market ignore the obvious (as it has been for decades now) but eventually the flaws of this system cannot be hidden.

This economic disaster is not over, folks.

It will not be over until America is serious about putting AMERICANS back to work.

I think our government is just lying to us, now, folks.

Consider that the number of people working today is only 0.2% higher than it was when Bush II assumed office IN 2000.

Now in 2000 the rate of unemploment was about 4%.

In the last eight years how many new people came into the market seeking employment?

Can we assume that about two million people per year is about the right number of NEW WORKERS seeking work per year? (not including illegals, of course)

So if those (let's assume 16 million new workers since 2000, shall we?) entered the work force, and if now we've only got a .2% increase intotal people working, how can our unemployment rate have only increased 2% since 2000?

Acording to this site our current rate of unemployment is about 6%.

If we had 200,000,000 people in our workforce in 2000 (I think that's high but let's go with that guesstimate) , then a 16 million increase in that number (to 2016 million) in 2008 means that our unemployment number has got to be higher than a mere 6%

Year 2000

200,000 million potential workers x.96% employed = 192,0000,000 employed + 4% (8,000,000) unemployed

Year 2008

If our current employed workforce is ONLY .2% higher than in 2000 then
192,000,000 x 100.2 %= 195,840,000 people working today

195,840,000/216,000,000 = .90666 working or about a 8.3333% rate of unemployed workers...


Strange that I cannot find good numbers to tell me what the total workforce was in 2000 or in 2008, isn't it?

They must exist online, but damned if I could find them today. I looked but can only find numbers broken down by regions and metro areas.


I invite anyone with the real figures about total workforce, and average increases in workforce per year to bring us those real numbers so we can investigate what the REAL numbers actually are.

Something doesn't appear to be jibbing here in my numbers, folks.

Perhaps I am missing something obvious to explain the difference.

Check out this website Table A-1. Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age

Are you accounting for the people that leave the labor force each year (retire, become a stay at home parent, die, enroll in school, etc.)?

Also, your math is in error. 1 - .90666 = 9.33% not 8.33%