i know we gave the banks like 800 billion dollar bailout and i know there were more, i hear some people saying the deficit is like 20 trillion now how did it get so high?. can somebody elaborate on this?
Printable View
i know we gave the banks like 800 billion dollar bailout and i know there were more, i hear some people saying the deficit is like 20 trillion now how did it get so high?. can somebody elaborate on this?
It is a complicated subject. People write books about it. The federal reserve pretty much just bought up a bunch of bad assets with money it didn't even have. Or at least money we didn't think they had. Some of the details of the collapse are even difficult for financial majors to understand. You have a lot of research to do.
In the meanwhile you can watch the clock tick: http://www.usdebtclock.org/
To research how our national budget is calculated, I suggest you start at the Congressional Budget Office's homepage: http://www.cbo.gov/
good post
While a $800 billion Bailout looks bad on paper, consider the alternative...
Would taxpayers be more satisfied with the collapse of the entire banking sector and thus the entire economy?
And yeah, the US deficit is a monster fuck up that is almost impossible to remedy.
Good luck with that guys.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sense-A
thanx 4 this
hahahaahahhahaahah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
the total debt is 56 TRILLION
TOTAL NATIONAL ASSETS ARE 72 TRILLION!!!!!!
HAHAHHAA
ILLUMINATI IS ABOUT TO OWN EVERYTHING !!!!!!
http://nimbintelevision.files.wordpr...illuminati.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by PALEHORSE
I like to subscribe to the austrian school of economics. You can find some really good free economics literature at www.mises.org
I know that there are some socialists and communists on this forum, whom i hope to talk some sense into. I am a firm believer in Laissez faire capitalism and the free market. Meaning that I would have let many of the businesses in need of bailouts fail and go bankrupt only to allow someone in the free market to eventually take their place. The media will like you to believe that things would have been worse if not for the bailouts. I believe that things would have only temporarily been worse during a transitional period however things would have been better in the long run without the bailouts.
The debtclock page that i previously referred to...check out how much our medicare and Social security systems are failing us. Our medicare liability alone is more than our nation's total assets! Do you really believe that Obamacare is going to save us money? There is little evidence of any broad Federal entitlement program that actually runs on a balanced budget. The social security trust fund has already been robbed and raided. I consider SS a ponzi scheme.
Many drastic political measures were also taken following the Great Depression under the presidency of Franklin Roosevelt. Look up "new deal" and you will find a wealth of political policy that was enacted to address the depression at that time. Drastic measures have taken place this time as well. Depressions of this magnitude do not occur often enough for economists to have any strict idea how to react or else prevent them from happening.
The end effect, in my opinion, is that federal government is getting a larger stake and power over the free market system and making a powergrab at the health sector, auto sector, banking sector, etc. The more the government controls and regulates, the less freedom you have. Regulation is a necessary evil in my opinion and should be limited. The free market regulates itself to a decent extent. The SEC has dropped the ball many times in the last few years.
The bailouts were excessive. It was a conflict of interests to have Henry Paulson orchestrating much of the first bailout in 2008 under the approval of GWB. Paulson also worked for goldman sachs which has some powerful political influence via their lobbying and influences on wall street and in the banking sector. TARP, passed under Obama shortly after getting in office, has actually been better managed than GWB's hurried bailout before leaving office.
And the bonuses that executives of failing bailed-out corporations received is just evidence of the disconnect between the shareholders and the board of directors. So many shareholders are not holding the shares long enough or participating in their opportunities to vote. I own several shares of stock and get thick annual reports and cards requesting that i vote on many key decisions that the corporation must make moving forward. Also just about every corporation has an annual meeting that most shareholders don't attend. Corporate management is required to act in the best interest of its shareholders but I suspect that doesn't always happen.