Campaign Creations

Fun fact: Here in norway inflation is going crazy. you could buy a dollar for 5 kroner, not its a dollar for 7 kroner, so I actually have the opposite view on the dollar.

Desler wrote: Obama is also the one pushing for us to give automakers bailout money.  So I'm not sure if I have a whole lot of faith in him to solve this problem.  The automaker bailout might provide a short term bandaid and may appease and please the American people, but it sends a terrible message about the worth of an American dollar.

This is why we needed NADER, he is the only one with the capability to save the economy.

Desler wrote: This is a bad combination of posters.

You have mAc Chaos, who is easily offended.

Wait, since when am I easily offended?   Where did you get that from?

lawlz @ Negi.  You remind me of every other random kid who just finished his first course in some topic and thinks he's an expert now and has to EDUCATE THE UNWASHED MASSES who don't know anything.  You've done a good job of characterizing the position, at least for now, before they change it again, of the people who never saw this coming and were telling everyone it was great right up until the whole thing collapsed.  Now the same people who totally messed everything up are the people we're going to for a solution? lawlz, ok.  I will have to continue this later after I am not getting buried by homework, which apparently only comes when I want to post something.

I just couldn't think of anything for you.  I don't know you that well, despite the fact that you were here for years.  =)

Xenon wrote: We're going to end up with horrible inflation because the government is cranking out money like toilet paper to pay for the bailout. I'm seriously considering getting a new computer now, before it kicks in.

I'm sorry, but you're misinformed.  The problem we currently face is DEFLATION!!!!!

I could try to explain to you why you're wrong, but my arguments would probably be wasted.  If you want to know why you're wrong, just let me know.

mAc Chaos wrote:

Desler wrote: This is a bad combination of posters.

You have mAc Chaos, who is easily offended.

Wait, since when am I easily offended?   Where did you get that from?

lawlz @ Negi.  You remind me of every other random kid who just finished his first course in some topic and thinks he's an expert now and has to EDUCATE THE UNWASHED MASSES who don't know anything.  You've done a good job of characterizing the position, at least for now, before they change it again, of the people who never saw this coming and were telling everyone it was great right up until the whole thing collapsed.  Now the same people who totally messed everything up are the people we're going to for a solution? lawlz, ok.  I will have to continue this later after I am not getting buried by homework, which apparently only comes when I want to post something.

I'm basically explaining (2008 Nobel Prize Winner in Economics) Paul Krugman's views on the issues. He is just as critical of Paulson as anyone.  However, unlike your great gurus Jude Wanninski and Arthur Laffer, he actually saw this coming from 3-4 years away.  In fact, there are interviews where he predicts a recession in around 2009 from 2005.  And all for the right reasons, I might add.  So yeah. Get your facts straight.  If you want to argue with me, argue on substance, not on bullshit lies.  Don't dismiss me without allowing me to respond to your criticisms.  I'm sure I will be able to answer every one.

I knew there was a recession coming circa 2005 as well, it's not rocket science.

Negi wrote:
I'm sorry, but you're misinformed.  The problem we currently face is DEFLATION!!!!!

I could try to explain to you why you're wrong, but my arguments would probably be wasted.  If you want to know why you're wrong, just let me know.

No, it is definitely inflation.  The cost of goods go up because there is more money in circulation, thus money loses its value. 

Crank out money
Money becomes more common
Money loses value
Prices of general goods go up

Definition of inflation pretty much.

Here is the latest:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Failure-o ... 52316.html  (Auto Advocates Warn Fall of GM would spark economic catastrophe).

Now I have no doubt that a failing business isn't going to be a picnic for anyone.  But doesn't giving money to a failed business ultimately only enforce a bad business model that a segment of the community will continue to rely on?  When a fat crippled guys wheelchair breaks because hes too fat, you don't give him another wheelchair.  You put him on a treadmill. 

...

(yeah, I know, but you get what I am saying)

Failure is tough, but it breeds a new strength that rises up.  But these businesses are like spoiled children, relying on their parents to pick up the pieces every time they get in trouble.  Without the consequences of failure, we cannot possibly grow beyond this state.  I said before, but banks -have- to be bailed out, they are the backbone for the American economy.  But credit extension needs to either be significantly tightened.  We need higher qualifications to give out loans and credit, because the old system failed.

Desler wrote:When a fat crippled guys wheelchair breaks because hes too fat, you don't give him another wheelchair.  You put him on a treadmill.

This is the best explanation of anything ever.

Meanwhile, aaaaaaaa politics

@Negi: No one cares if you're wrong or right when you keep acting like a douche.

Why the fuck would you put a crippled man on a treadmill?

tipereth wrote: Why the fuck would you put a crippled man on a treadmill?

Wow I just noticed that too, time for a new analogy I think Desler.

tipereth wrote: Why the fuck would you put a crippled man on a treadmill?

I think it was meant in the way of morbidly obese people being considered disabled.

What if you gave him a wheelchair AND put him on a treadmill?

I said (yeah I know) immediately below that crippled fat guy / treadmill remark.  It was meant as a joke and as an analogy.

And it goes even further:  http://www.freep.com/article/20081112/N ... 1199/PRINT  (City of Detroit wants 10 billion bailout money)

Suddenly everyone needs bailout money?  Bailing out cities, not the best of ideas.  Hope this doesn't get approval..  Running a city is no easy or cheap task - schools, roads, etc.  Especially a city like Detroit, its just a big problem handed off to each new city administration.  But it again points to a larger problem, the need to refine spending habits and credit practices across the country.

Desler wrote:

Negi wrote:
I'm sorry, but you're misinformed.  The problem we currently face is DEFLATION!!!!!

I could try to explain to you why you're wrong, but my arguments would probably be wasted.  If you want to know why you're wrong, just let me know.

No, it is definitely inflation.  The cost of goods go up because there is more money in circulation, thus money loses its value. 

Crank out money
Money becomes more common
Money loses value
Prices of general goods go up

Definition of inflation pretty much.

Clearly you understand the term inflation in only the simplest sense.  Would you like me to tell you why you're absolutely wrong?

Actually, I will neglect my work to explain this to you.

Step 1.) Create a bubble
Step 2.) Wait for banks to get really involved in said bubble
Step 3.) Wait until people realize there is a bubble
Step 4.) Let the bubble pop
Step 5.) Watch as banks stop lending to each other because they don't know how bad their counterparties' balance sheets are. 
Step 6.) Watch as banks are forced to pay higher interest rates due to step 5
Step 7.) Watch as consumers and businesses are forced to pay higher interest rates on their debts and/or lose their loans (lines of credit, car loans, etc)
Step 8.) This is the crucial step.  Watch as the actual amount of money in the hands of the nonbank public dries up
Step 9.) As liquidity decreases, watch people begin to lose their jobs as companies are forced to close places of business and lay off workers.
Step 10.) You are in a depression.

If you accept that step 8 follows from step 7, then I am right. 

I have on hand two examples of this exact progression:
Great Depressoin
Japan's lost decade (1990s)

I guess you should just learn economics.
Because you're horribly misinformed.

So yeah, basically, the way to prevent this from happening is to encourage interbank confidence by partially nationalizing those banks that are marginally insolvent and fully nationalizing those that are completely insolvent.  Which is what the intention of the bailout is, j-j-j-junior.