Your opinion. But I read the articles.Smoothing ≠ preventing.
Not even a little.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Your opinion. But I read the articles.Smoothing ≠ preventing.
Not even a little.
They'll never hike rates to where they should be in a genuine free market.
All they're doing is raising them just enough to where it will cause stagflation.
This stuff isn't rocket science, Toddster. It's predictable.
Watch and see...
At the end of the day, there are no man-made "policies" that have the capability of revoking economic laws. The market will always decide fate. Always....
Your opinion. But I read the articles.
Some people would pick a fight over what to have for breakfast. Do have a pleasant afternoon and evening.If you have any articles from 1913 where they talked about the Fed
"preventing recessions", I'll be happy to read them.
Come on. Read it.What does an article with 2014 numbers have to do with their 1994 bankruptcy?
Wrong. If the court interprets your promise to pay as a contractual agreement, and says you breached the contract, your promise to pay becomes the baseline for what you owe in the breach.Winning in court doesn't turn my liability into debt.
Come on. Read it.
Wrong. If the court interprets your promise to pay as a contractual agreement, and says you breached the contract, your promise to pay becomes the baseline for what you owe in the breach.
That was the surface rationale given, but not the real reason.I am no expert by any stretch of the imagination on this topic. However, I suspect that the Fed started off as a notion of promptly addressing immediate fiscal and monetary problems in our economy upon the belief that Congress itself is too slow and cumbersome to be reactive fast enough.
Check out the source material in #5.....Everything is there, in language that a high schooler can understand (no offense).I believe this is the same underlying concern that allowed for the war powers act. (That is, since Congress is slow and cumbersome and some military actions urgently require responses before Congress can even meet, Congress delegates part of their exclusive war powers to the Executive on a “temporary” basis.)
Note: I’m not defending either of those things, here. I just assume the rationale is similar.
15 recessions in 56 years.
How many have we had in the last 56 years? (8)
What was their average length? (10.6)
I agree, Harding, Coolidge and Reagan are better than anyone we've had since.
Or the commies who insist that it can work if only the right commies are running the show.You sounds like there's a manmade global warming answer to the economy: if we turn over all control to the government, it will all go back to normal
The bankruptcy put the pensions at risk.Their 2014 pension liabilities did not cause them to declare bankruptcy in 1994.
If the court says that there was no detrimental reliance, then there would be no breach of contract and no judgment for the pensioners. How could that be a debt?Still doesn't make it debt.
What if the court allows you to not pay?
Is it debt then?
Yes. They declared bankruptcy.No. The county Treasurer bought some bad investments.
Absent consideration, there is no contract. So a mere promise is if no value.No it isn't. I promise to give you $1 million in 10 years.
What interest rate am I paying on that "debt"?
You sounds like there's a manmade global warming answer to the economy: if we turn over all control to the government, it will all go back to normal
The bankruptcy put the pensions at risk.
Yes. They declared bankruptcy.
That’s the risk. And people receiving the county government pension were plenty scared.So if they declare bankruptcy, they could discharge their pension liability?