wagner Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 Thanks Obama! http://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-cutting-jobs-maintenance-due-budget-fears-official-170708494--business.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not Brian Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 Furlough is the word of the month at work on base. They're talking about laying off gov workers one day a week (instead of one big chunk) for a few months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trouble Maker Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 Furlough is the word of the month at work on base. They're talking about laying off gov workers one day a week (instead of one big chunk) for a few months. I'm not saying the budget thing is not an issue, but I see no issue with this. Right after the automotive crash my company did a very similar thing. Better to keep the talent you have than lay off and have to rehire non-trained workers 6-12 months later. If it's a foreseeable temporary issue it's the best solution for all sides imho. Bigger picture, we need to reign in spending in EVERY area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not Brian Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 heck yeah I'd love to work 4 days a week for a small pay cut. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wagner Posted January 25, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 Bigger picture, we need to reign in spending in EVERY area. This is the key to the puzzle that our leaders have put in their asses rather than in the right spot on the board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trouble Maker Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 This is the key to the puzzle that our leaders have put in their asses rather than in the right spot on the board. Hey man, what they do in their own bedrooms is their own business. If they like shoving things up their own asses that's fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trouble Maker Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 heck yeah I'd love to work 4 days a week for a small pay cut. Is a 20% pay cut 'small'? :gabe: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwishiwascool Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 Thanks Obama! http://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-cutting-jobs-maintenance-due-budget-fears-official-170708494--business.html "The House passed the Budget Control Act on August 1, 2011 by a vote of 269–161. 174 Republicans and 95 Democrats voted for it." The republicans that voted against it felt it did not go far enough. Republicans are the ones that want to enact austerity during a downturn. Genius. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Karacho1647545492 Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 "The House passed the Budget Control Act on August 1, 2011 by a vote of 269–161. 174 Republicans and 95 Democrats voted for it." The republicans that voted against it felt it did not go far enough. Republicans are the ones that want to enact austerity during a downturn. Genius. You only say that because you're a Muslim Commie Nazi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trouble Maker Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 Bigger picture, we need to reign in spending in EVERY area. Republicans are the ones that want to enact austerity during a downturn. Genius. Although I agree with this too. I should clarify that I was talking longer term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wagner Posted January 25, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 "The House passed the Budget Control Act on August 1, 2011 by a vote of 269–161. 174 Republicans and 95 Democrats voted for it." The republicans that voted against it felt it did not go far enough. Republicans are the ones that want to enact austerity during a downturn. Genius. So what are the other options on the table then? I want to hear a useful way to get this budget and fiscal mess under control. I am being serious, don't care what of the two parties of fail does it, but somebody needs to do something other than let the fed print money. I have yet to see anybody provide this, outside of these cuts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
10phone2 Posted January 26, 2013 Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 so spending money we don't have is now a good thing? I thought I heard a liberal politician rambling about it on cnn in the middle of the night, I just didn't think it was possible. The good thing is we can get so far in the hole that we can create even more welfare programs so we will all be taken care of at the end of the day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwishiwascool Posted January 26, 2013 Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 So what are the other options on the table then? I want to hear a useful way to get this budget and fiscal mess under control. I am being serious, don't care what of the two parties of fail does it, but somebody needs to do something other than let the fed print money. I have yet to see anybody provide this, outside of these cuts. Ill get there in a few posts... But before I do, when you say "Printing money", does this mean that you are worried about a surplus of liquidity; that current policy is causing inflation? so spending money we don't have is now a good thing? When you say "we", who do you mean. Who do you think has the "money we don't have"? The good thing is we can get so far in the hole that we can create even more welfare programs so we will all be taken care of at the end of the day. You willful ignorance and lack of intellectual curiosity is going to make this fun for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trouble Maker Posted January 26, 2013 Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 You willful ignorance and lack of intellectual curiosity is going to make this fun for me. This 10phone2 guy is part potato, I really don't think it's going to be as fun as you think it's going to be. He probably thinks economics is something you contract from a dirty sex partner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwishiwascool Posted January 26, 2013 Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 This 10phone2 guy is part potato, I really don't think it's going to be as fun as you think it's going to be. He probably thinks economics is something you contract from a dirt sex partner. Damn it. I guess I'll just go back to working. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trouble Maker Posted January 26, 2013 Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 Damn it. I guess I'll just go back to working. Well.... let's see what he retorts back with. I'm not expecting much but you never know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wagner Posted January 26, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 Ill get there in a few posts... But before I do, when you say "Printing money", does this mean that you are worried about a surplus of liquidity; that current policy is causing inflation? When you say "we", who do you mean. Who do you think has the "money we don't have"? You willful ignorance and lack of intellectual curiosity is going to make this fun for me. From what I understand increasing the money supply will raise the possibility of inflaction correct? This mixed with quantitative easing really can't be good. I will be the first one to tell you that I am far from an expert, but there is a bunch going on right now that does not pass the sniff test to me. http://www.forbes.com/sites/johntamny/2012/12/08/ben-bernankes-quantitative-easing-the-monetary-policy-of-the-adolescent/ How can it be a good idea to not slash spending when we are not taking the same, or even close to the same amount in revenue? At some point you have to pay somebody for all this money you borrowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwishiwascool Posted January 26, 2013 Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 From what I understand increasing the money supply will raise the possibility of inflaction correct? This mixed with quantitative easing really can't be good. I will be the first one to tell you that I am far from an expert, but there is a bunch going on right now that does not pass the sniff test to me. http://www.forbes.com/sites/johntamny/2012/12/08/ben-bernankes-quantitative-easing-the-monetary-policy-of-the-adolescent/ How can it be a good idea to not slash spending when we are not taking the same, or even close to the same amount in revenue? At some point you have to pay somebody for all this money you borrowed. It doesn't pass the sniff test because people conflate macroeconomics with their own microeconomics ideals, along with the moral burdens of debt that go along with it. Debt is a function of economic solvency, a reaction to a stimulus. It should not be the catalyst to an equal and opposite reaction. You are right that reasonable measures must be taken at some time. The time is absolutely not in a deflationary period with anemic growth. When people say "we are going to end up like Europe", they are absolutely right. If, and only if, we enact the irresponsible austerity measures that they were beholden to as a result of a common currency. That article is so wrong in so many ways that it is better for you just to forget it than for me to refute it. That dude has less than an elementary understanding of fiduciary policy. Thus the op/ed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
10phone2 Posted January 26, 2013 Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 Ill get there in a few posts... But before I do, when you say "Printing money", does this mean that you are worried about a surplus of liquidity; that current policy is causing inflation? When you say "we", who do you mean. Who do you think has the "money we don't have"? You willful ignorance and lack of intellectual curiosity is going to make this fun for me. I'm glad that you feel special for a play on words and avoid statements at the same time. We all get the liberal stance, cutting spending will crash the economy and just printing money will fix everything. Makes perfectly good sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwishiwascool Posted January 26, 2013 Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 I'm glad that you feel special for a play on words and avoid statements at the same time. We all get the liberal stance, cutting spending will crash the economy and just printing money will fix everything. Makes perfectly good sense. Answer the questions and we'll have a conversation where I make statements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
10phone2 Posted January 26, 2013 Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 (edited) How is military spending cut today worse then the base closing of the 90's/early 2000s? My honest big concern is that we will continue to allow the military to stay at current spending when we are no longer facing the same strain on the military as of 5 years ago. Let's use the housing bubble that busted for example. According to your logic we should have allowed it to continue and kept everything status quo so no one will have a tough day. The problem is that the longer it was allowed to continue, the more lives were ruined by it years down the road. Edited January 26, 2013 by 10phone2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2highpsi Posted January 26, 2013 Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 Ill get there in a few posts... But before I do, when you say "Printing money", does this mean that you are worried about a surplus of liquidity; that current policy is causing inflation? Growing holding reserves would be necessary for surplus liquidity. Im not sure the money is even stopping between printing and payment (to many different debt holders). Do you believe that any monetary system could handle huge injections of currency into circulation without causing inflation? If you do, then why don't we just print 17 trillion real quick and take care of the National Debt with one swift swoop? When you say "we", who do you mean. Who do you think has the "money we don't have"? Are you a magician. I haven't seen such a blatant redirect since the last David Blaine show I caught. Incase you weren't being facetious I'll spell it out for you. We = The United States and it's citizens Who has the "money we don't have" = Some of it we borrow, some of it we steal (from funded programs), and some of it we just print because we have borrowed and stole all we can. You willful ignorance and lack of intellectual curiosity is going to make this fun for me. Make it more interesting. I'll be your Huckleberry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwishiwascool Posted January 26, 2013 Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 Hi Jordan, didn't we meet once or more through CDSM? You are a finance major, a financial adviser and I'm sure Edward Jones taught you a lot; I respect you plenty enough that you don't need to be a Huckleberry or Wyatt Earp. I asked those "David Blaine" questions not to redirect the conversation but to establish a platform; a foundation for reasonable discourse. After all, a debate must be built on fact and reason. If an opponent doesn't know that the Fox news narrative that we are "Beholden to China" and they own a majority of debt is a gross misrepresentation of reality, then we aren't building argument on a bedrock of truth; right? Just so you and I are clear too, when you say that "we steal (from funded programs)", what are you specifically referring to? I'll address your notion that surplus liquidity relies on Fed holdings after your retort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2highpsi Posted January 26, 2013 Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 Pretty sure we have, which may be why I had full confidence you could provide an intellectual debate. (Not sure if my desire for one last night was spurred by boredom, the few drinks I had, or my fear for humanity after reading every imstock2 thread) *unrelated side note - Jones doesn't teach much on economics. (I was disappointed about that too) You mean China doesn't hold all our debt?????? (Kidding, don't answer that. It's sad it needs pointed out, but I know it's necessary) When I mentioned stealing from funded programs, a good example would be when we "borrow" from the Social Security Trust Fund. This is where I might be over my head..... Yes I believe SURPLUS liquidity relies on central bank holdings. Like I said, more in the mood last night. Just kind of blah today. I didn't see you address the issue of inflation, and honestly that's what I'm most interested to get your view on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wagner Posted January 26, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 I like where this thread is going, educate me, I would like to know more than what the "media" puts out there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.