TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- America's Debt = "We're Screwed!"
Pages (16): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 »
Good news, I received my tax assesment for my home, and it didn't rise. My taxes actually went DOWN a little!!!
***passes out, falls on floor***
However, today my kids flooded the upstairs bathroom! That's going to really help my resale value!
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lilith Oh! This old thread!  |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by zookeeper However, today my kids flooded the upstairs bathroom! That's going to really help my resale value! |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by LazFX OMG! that calls for a serious 'timeout'! |
This is a great editorial and Andy Laperriere and Tom Gallagher have been all over the housing issue.
| quote: |
| Questions for the Fed By ANDY LAPERRIERE April 3, 2008; Page A15 In recent months we've seen countless proposals introduced in Congress to protect borrowers from so-called predatory lending. On Monday, the Treasury Department announced a major overhaul of federal regulation of the banking and securities industries. So far the policy debate has centered on predatory lending and lax bank-regulatory supervision. Hillary Clinton and others have gone so far as to say that subprime loans were "designed to fail." While that makes for a tidy political narrative complete with a villain, it is not a very complete picture of what is happening. With companies like Bear Stearns and Countrywide (and many others) on their knees, it's clear that events have not turned out as their managements intended. Is it possible the root cause of the credit crisis – which has not been limited to the mortgage market – lies not just with a few sinister CEOs, but with broader policy mistakes by intelligent and well-intentioned officials at the Federal Reserve? Mortgage lenders, home builders, real-estate speculators and millions of average people who borrowed too much were caught up in a mania. They were responding to misleading market signals that told them to write more reckless loans, build more houses and borrow as much as the bank would lend them. After all, people who did these things during the boom profited handsomely year after year. If this all sounds strangely familiar, it's because the same kind of imprudent economic decisions and outright fraud occurred during the stock-market bubble just a few years ago. To be sure, there are many contributing factors to the recent housing and credit bubbles (and to the Nasdaq bubble), but a central ingredient in almost any mania is easy monetary policy. The housing boom began in earnest when the Fed slashed interest rates in response to the 2001 recession, and kept rates too low for too long. The lower interest rates cut monthly mortgage payments and fueled the first wave of home-price appreciation, which began to take on a life of its own. Artificially low interest rates reduced returns on safer investments like government and corporate bonds, so investors moved funds into riskier assets (like subprime loans) to increase returns. Low interest rates also made it profitable to borrow heavily in order to invest in mortgage-backed securities and other financial assets, and leverage grew at a breathtaking clip. Furthermore, the Fed's policy of ignoring asset bubbles on the way up but aggressively responding to cushion the blow when they inevitably collapse (widely know in financial markets as the "Greenspan put") caused investors to take on even greater risk. The adverse consequences of this loose monetary policy extend well beyond rising foreclosures and the other visible effects of the housing bust. The Fed's loose monetary policy has hurt the average American. Here's how: - Rolling asset bubbles have depressed wages by spurring unproductive investment, first in the tech and telecom sectors and more recently in housing. This has reduced the funds available for other, more productive investment that could have increased real economic output and raised wages and living standards. Austrian school economists call this "malinvestment," and it is an inevitable byproduct of credit bubbles. - The stock market and housing bubbles created windfall gains for some (who sold at the right time) and windfall losses for others (who bought at the peak). Many speculated or acted irresponsibly during both bubbles, and have reaped what they sowed. But others were innocent victims of the boom-bust dynamics. For example, young families who bought their first home in Florida or California during the past few years will suffer for years to come the economic consequences of buying at the peak of a historic bubble. (Proposals in Congress to offer temporary tax credits for purchasing homes would create more arbitrary windfall gains for a few at taxpayer expense, while doing little to alter the fundamentals of the housing market.) - The boom-busts have caused massive and unnecessary employment dislocation. Responding to market signals, many workers flocked to the tech and telecom sectors in the late 1990s and the housing-related sectors in recent years, only to earn a pink slip during the bust. Not only does this cause financial and emotional hardship, the waste of human capital hurts the economy overall. A flexible labor force is one of the great strengths of the U.S. economy, but policies that cause unnecessary dislocation are economically destructive. - The Fed's loose monetary policy is causing inflation and reducing the purchasing power of Americans' paychecks. Headline inflation is well above the Fed's target, and the reduced purchasing power is readily seen in the declining value of the dollar, and rising food and energy prices. Today the Senate Banking Committee will hold a hearing and examine the details of Bear Stearns's rescue by J.P. Morgan. This rescue was brokered by the Fed, which as part of the agreement put $29 billion in taxpayer funds at risk. Fed officials will surely receive some tough questions regarding its role in this agreement, and rightly so. Policy makers ought to question the criteria the Fed used in making its decision. But members of the Senate Banking Committee ought to ask a broader question: Has the Fed's approach to monetary policy during the last several years served the interests of average Americans? Many will no doubt wince at the suggestion of "politicizing" monetary policy. But a sober review of monetary policy is not only sorely needed, it is Congress's responsibility. Federal law has long required the Fed to report to Congress every six months on its conduct of monetary policy. In recent years, a serious discussion of monetary policy has been almost completely absent at these semi-annual hearings, which have devolved into frivolous public relations forums where members of Congress try to get the Fed chairman to endorse their latest tax cut or spending program. Congress should not try to fine-tune the federal funds rate any more than it should dictate which drugs the FDA approves. However, like the FDA, the Fed is a creation of Congress. Just as Congress has a legitimate and important responsibility to review the policy decisions that determine which drugs are approved, it should also scrutinize the broad policy framework the Fed uses to determine monetary policy. The Fed has a very difficult job. Tight monetary policy risks recession, while loose monetary policy risks inflation and asset bubbles. Some Fed officials may be beginning to reflect on whether the Fed has struck the proper balance, as well as on the larger role monetary policy has played in the current housing and credit debacle. It's time for Congress to do the same. Mr. Laperriere is a managing director in the Washington office of ISI Group. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by zookeeper That's for a little less than two months. I heat with propane which is going right up with gasoline prices, about $2.89 per gallon, and I have a 500 gal underground tank. What can I say...I live in the country  And Rochester NY is usually about the same temperature AS Alaska, and I live on the shore of Lake Ontario, so I get BLASTED by Canadian wind. ...say, maybe I should look into wind power? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by zookeeper Nah, just a little story time... |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Shakka This is a great editorial |
Although this message comes on a relatively somber note,
I smiled when he said, "WE HAVE TO LEARN FROM HISTORY!"
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trancer-X Although this message comes on a relatively somber note, I smiled when he said, "WE HAVE TO LEARN FROM HISTORY!" |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Shakka Interesting. When was that video taken? He mentioned tax cuts expiring in 2002 in the future. Must've been right after the dot.com crash or so. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by jerZ07002 they talk about the bear sterns collapse. it was very recent. |
In my state of New York, the health care promises (made by the fmr. Gov. Pataki(R) administration), such as Child Health Plus and Family Health Plus, which seem to be a "prototype" for universal health care, have really put a serious strain on the State's ecomomy, even at the local town and village perspective. I am really concerned about this on a Federal level, if universal heath care becomes a reality, making promises we can't pay for.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by zookeeper In my state of New York, the health care promises (made by the fmr. Gov. Pataki(R) administration), such as Child Health Plus and Family Health Plus, which seem to be a "prototype" for universal health care, have really put a serious strain on the State's ecomomy, even at the local town and village perspective. I am really concerned about this on a Federal level, if universal heath care becomes a reality, making promises we can't pay for. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by jerZ07002 by changing laws. |
Maybe a little Armin: Going Wrong, will cheer us up..
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Shakka Interesting. When was that video taken? He mentioned tax cuts expiring in 2002 in the future. Must've been right after the dot.com crash or so. |
U.S. Comptroller General Resigns for More 'Aggressive' Policymaking Position
Walker to head newly established Peter G. Peterson Foundation
BALTIMORE, Feb. 19 /PRNewswire/ -- David M. Walker, Comptroller General of the United States and head of the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), has announced his resignation in order to accept the position of President and Chief Executive Officer of the newly established Peter G. Peterson Foundation.
"As comptroller general of the United States," says David Walker, also
a leader of The Concord Coalition's Fiscal Wake-Up Tour and star of the recently debuted documentary I.O.U.S.A., "there are real limitations on what I can do and say in connection with key public policy issues, especially issues that directly relate to GAO's client -- the Congress."
As head of the Peterson Foundation, Walker will have "the ability and
resources to more aggressively address a range of current and emerging
challenges facing our country, including advocating specific policy
solutions and courses of action." Chief among Walker's duties at the
Peterson Foundation will be the funding and advocating of projects that will enhance public awareness of fiscal imbalance, entitlement programs and health care.
"The foundation is also going to end up funding other related efforts," Walker told the Federal News Network in and interview, "designed to get the message out to millions of Americas ... because they need to know more in order to make more informed choices at the ballot box."
A feature-length documentary entitled I.O.U.S.A. featuring Mr. Walker
debuted at the Sundance Film Festival in Park City, Utah on Jan. 19th,
2008. The film documents Walker's efforts to educate the public on the
fiscal issues challenging the country and also boldly examines the rapidly growing national debt and its consequences for the United States and its citizens.
I.O.U.S.A., from Agora Entertainment, also features interviews with a
stunning selection of financial experts -- including legendary investor Warren Buffett, former Treasury secretaries Robert Rubin and Paul O'Neill, Congressman Ron Paul and noted economist Alice Rivlin. The film was directed by Patrick Creadon (Wordplay) and was inspired by the bestselling book "Empire of Debt," by Addison Wiggin and Bill Bonner.
For more information about I.O.U.S.A, visit
http://www.agorafinancial.com/iousa.html
source
I thought that this was pretty interesting as well
----------------------------------------------------------------
GAO Seeks Review of Spy Agencies
The Outgoing Chief Auditor Makes a Pitch on Capitol Hill
By Paul Kane
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 7, 2008; Page A15
As he leaves his post as the nation's top auditor, David M. Walker is again asking Congress to give the Government Accountability Office the power to review the finances of the CIA and other intelligence agencies.
Walker, whose 10-year term as comptroller general concludes Wednesday, is supporting legislation that would give the GAO access to the last major area of the federal government not subject to its audits and investigations.
With some support on Capitol Hill, Walker said he is fighting powerful legislative patrons of intelligence agencies, especially the CIA, who have resisted examinations of how taxpayer dollars are spent.
"Everybody's for accountability in Washington until they're the ones subjected to it," Walker said in an interview. "There are a lot of forces that are vested in the status quo."
The GAO, Congress's investigative arm, has the power to review the finances and management of most government agencies. But the Justice Department issued a ruling in the early 1990s that restricted oversight of the CIA to House and Senate select committees on intelligence.
That authority has been a sensitive topic since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, when information sharing between the CIA and law enforcement agencies that might have revealed the plot was bungled. More recently, the corruption scandal involving former congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif.), who used his influence to steer intelligence contracts in return for bribes, has added to calls for more oversight.
Prompted by recommendations from the 9/11 Commission, the House and Senate in 2004 reorganized the way their committees oversee intelligence and homeland security issues. But the lawmakers have never pushed to allow the GAO to examine CIA spending. They have questioned whether the GAO is too closely aligned with the congressional majority and whether its investigators have the proper clearances to handle classified intelligence matters.
"You can't just sort of wander in and do this stuff like you're investigating FAA weather stations," said Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), chairman of the Senate intelligence committee. Rockefeller called GAO investigations of the intelligence world a "rather bad idea" and suggested his committee should have more oversight authority, including the power to appropriate funds to intelligence agencies.
"The GAO does precisely what the majority [in Congress] asks them to do. It follows what the majority asks," said Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), who chaired the intelligence committee before Rockefeller. "I don't want any further politicization of intelligence."
Walker, however, said he is not asking to look into the "sources and methods" used by spy agencies. Instead, he wants the GAO to look into "basic management transformation challenges" such as how the CIA recruits and retains top talent and, more important, how the agency has allocated its multibillion-dollar budget.
The GAO is already empowered to examine the finances of the Defense Intelligence Agency, and it has highlighted many examples of waste, fraud and abuse. Walker said. "I have little doubt that those challenges exist within the intelligence community," he said.
The CIA disagrees. Mark Mansfield, a spokesman for the agency, said that in 2007, CIA officers testified at more than 60 hearings on Capitol Hill, gave more than 500 briefings, delivered 100 "congressional notifications about our most sensitive programs" and answered more than 1,200 on-the-record questions posed by members of Congress.
"That's hardly a culture of rejecting oversight. It's a recognition of the importance of it," Mansfield said. He said CIA critics have no basis for alleging that the agency is littered with waste.
Sen. Daniel K. Akaka (D-Hawaii), sponsor of the bill that would give the GAO access to the intelligence community, said there is no way to know about problems unless the GAO can wade into CIA finances and management strategies. But in a brief interview, Akaka said he doubts the bill can clear the chamber given the bipartisan questioning it faces.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...8030603773.html
| quote: |
| Originally posted by zookeeper WOW!  Like the thread title says: "We're Screwed!" I have never been an optimistic person, but geeeze  The state of California is going to be in big trouble, and I can't see this getting any better in the near future.This bleak outlook reminds me of the Carter years of the 1970's, when interest rates for mortgages were around 13% and fuel hit $1.00 I'm more concerned with fuel, right now (after paying heating costs of 852.00) but these two factors, happening at the same time, is like a one-two punch and we are wide open to a three-four punch which will be a K.O. to the U.S. I am starting to shake  |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trancer-X One of my best friend's gas and electric bill was over $900 last month and we had a really mild winter here this year in Maryland. I've been trying to talk him into getting a pellet stove. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trancer-X a pellet stove. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Shakka Does your friend live in a museum or something? I can't even fathom a $900 power bill (is that gas and power combined?). Maybe he should invest in better insulation! Kidding aside, it's amazing how bad inflation is yet how much our government wants us to believe it's not as bad as it seems. I spent $52 filling up the gas tank yesterday. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Shakka Does your friend live in a museum or something? I can't even fathom a $900 power bill (is that gas and power combined?). Maybe he should invest in better insulation! Kidding aside, it's amazing how bad inflation is yet how much our government wants us to believe it's not as bad as it seems. I spent $52 filling up the gas tank yesterday. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by jerZ07002 my electricity bill is $30 a month in the winter |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.