- #106
mgb_phys
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
- 7,902
- 15
You know the economy is in trouble when you can't tell the difference between the WSJ and The Onion http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123120525879656021.html
That's billion not trillion.WhoWee said:...plus, Obama says we'll need to borrow about $775 Trillion now to stimulate the economy
This is what really worries me. And Obama made some statement about exerting some discipline on federal spending.WhoWee said:...and over a $Trillion per year for years to come.
mheslep said:That's billion not trillion.
I think that explains how the whole thing happened?WhoWee said:...typo...sorryThat's billion not trillion
Astronuc said:This is what really worries me. And Obama made some statement about exerting some discipline on federal spending.
We already pay more than $400 billion in interest on the debt. It looks like we'll end up paying more than $500 billion or $600 billion . . . . ! Does that make sense?
Perhaps the government will just print up $1 or 2 Trillion.
I was wondering this morning that AIG is supposed to repay their load of billions. Aren't the current bailouts suppose to be repaid with interest as well?
WhoWee said:This report shows $451Billion in 2008...up from $214Billion in 1988.
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm
There's an old adage..."you can't borrow your way out of debt"...more true than ever now. Maybe the adage should be changed to "borrow or print" for the government?
Gross debt as a percentage of GDP has increased substantially since 1988:misgfool said:The (nominal) GDP in 1988 was $5.1 trillion and in 2006 $13.2 trillion. So debt costs as percentage of GDP are at about the same level...
Perhaps they did, perhaps they didn't - perhaps they lied, perhaps they were overconfident. None of that is relevant here: that statement of yours is completely useless because we don't know what they said, much less if it was true!Skyhunter said:I understand Russ.
And thanks for the Wiki link.
I am fairly confident that they disclosed their production costs to the http://www.nanosolar.com/blog3/?p=138"
We'll know if it is true, we won't know if it isn't. That's how these scams work.Either way we will know this year, since that is when their consumer product will become available.
Well, it seems to me that that point requires evidence and what you provided, if true, would have been that evidence. Since you are unable to provide evidence, your point is therefore not valid, or rather, not verified: Maybe we are at a tipping point and maybe we aren't. We just plain don't have any evidence to suggest that we are. And given a situation where we have no evidence of an extrordinary event, it is prudent not to assume that the extrordinary event has happened.My underlying point is still valid. We are at the technological and economical tipping point.
That is absolutely true. My concern, however, is that we'll spend a couple of trillion dollars over the next 10 years and end up with essentially nothing to show for it. This is a serious concern.The size and scale of rebuilding our energy infrastructure is such that the solar industry alone could provide 5 million new jobs in the next two years Especially if you include all of the support such an industry would require in raw materials, transportation, logistics, sales, installation, and maintenance. Then there is the secondary jobs as the 5 million spend their money for goods and services.
He's going to spend money to create jobs, yes. Whether that fixes the economy or not is debateable.Bottom line is the way Obama is going to fix the economy is by creating jobs.
We shall see. So far, it does not appear that that is the case.And he will create jobs by smart investment in sustainable energy technologies and infrastructure.
DrClapeyron said:I believe the best thing the US could do now to fix its economy is to sell as many weapons as it can to the Middle East, step up oil exploration of South America and perhaps most of all take away all duties, excise taxes, quotas, etc on imported automobiles like VW. I'll bet that gets the Big Three in gear.
mheslep said:Gross debt as a percentage of GDP has increased substantially since 1988:
1988: 51.9%
2007: 65.5%
2009: 69.3% (estimated)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/pdf/hist.pdf , table 7.1
also see
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/3b/USDebt.png/350px-USDebt.png
WhoWee said:Create a little chaos and shake things up?
DrClapeyron said:1. Stablize the situation in the Middle East to insure that no country is defensless against any possible aggresors (Israel, Egypt, Iran).
2. Increase oil flow from neighbouring countries to mitigate issues which may arise half way around the world.
3. Give an incentive to automakers and autounions to clean up their act.
Worked last time - but I thought the new president was supposed to have NEW ideas?WhoWee said:You want to sell arms to Iran?
This is brand new! This time, we sell them Stingers, and don't let Israel, arms-dealers, etc, take a cut, AND we keep the money instead of funding right-wing insurgents in central America. See? Totally different!mgb_phys said:Worked last time - but I thought the new president was supposed to have NEW ideas?
Do you have a particularly good source for that? Just curious.DrClapeyron said:The Chinese have begun selling weapons to Zimbabwe, supporting Mugabe's regime, and it is only a matter of time before Sudan, Tanzania and others begin similar purchases. ...
When looking at long term US debt, I don't think it is reasonable to stack the expected stimulus package on top of the TARP financial money as if it were all the same. It is likely that most of the TARP money (bank bailout) will directly come back to the treasury, as it can mostly be viewed simply as deposits the government made into various banks. Treasury has an account number for those funds, as it were. The non-loan stimulus money, on the other hand, by definition can never come back to the treasury directly from the party to which it was given. The same goes for most all of the rest of government spending - social security, medicare, defense - once Treasury writes the check its gone.WhoWee said:...With a population of 300 million people...the amount per person (based on $850B) proposed is $2,833...for every man, woman and child in the US ($19,833 for my household). This is on top of the $750Billion bank bailout which is already allocated at $2,500 per person ($17,500 for my household). My projected share is $37,333 (so far)...and I didn't even get a disclosure document (nervous humor)...
mheslep said:Do you have a particularly good source for that? Just curious.
BBC said:A Chinese ship carrying arms destined for Zimbabwe has been forced to leave the South African port of Durban four days after failing to unload.
Earlier, a South African judge ruled that the cargo of rocket-propelled grenades, mortar rounds and ammunition could not be transported overland.
BBC said:China has defended its sale of weapons to Sudan, amid growing criticism of its alleged failure to help resolve the humanitarian crisis in Darfur.
BBC said:The BBC has found the first evidence that China is currently helping Sudan's government militarily in Darfur.
The Panorama TV programme tracked down Chinese army lorries in the Sudanese province that came from a batch exported from China to Sudan in 2005.
Muslimsinkenya said:The Somali pirates who recently hijacked a ship carrying Russian-made arms and tanks claimed that the weapons were bound for South Sudan. But the Kenyan government was adamant that they had been sent to Kenya, not South Sudan. The BBC World Service announced on October 7 that it had found evidence that the equipment had been intended for South Sudan, as claimed by the pirates. Analysts recalled that Russian-made military equipment had been passed to the Sudanese region through Kenya once before, pointing out that it strongly backs the West’s strategy to break up Africa’s largest country. The West’s current effort to turn Darfur (in West Sudan) into yet another supposedly independent country underlines how determined that strategy is.
Thanks.DrClapeyron said:Here you go.
Weapons bound to Zimbabwe via South Africa:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7354428.stm
Weapons bound to Sudan:
http://www.stoparmstosudan.org/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7258059.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7503428.stm
Kenya and Somalia pirates: http://muslimsinkenya.wordpress.com/2008/12/01/kenya-involved-in-arming-south-sudan-to-fight-for-secession/
I think something may be brewing on the eastern coast of Africa involving the "[URL Zimbabwe, Sudan and guns.[/URL] Of course these are small arms, sorry if I mislead anyone into thinking that the Chinese were selling jets, tanks, etc.
. . . .
And as in much of Africa, Ncube said, China's reach into Zimbabwe's economy is equally pervasive: The roads are filled with Chinese buses, the markets with Chinese goods, and Chinese-made planes are in the skies. Chinese companies are major investors in mining and telecommunications. The government in Beijing, meanwhile, is a crucial backer of Zimbabwe's authoritarian president, Robert Mugabe.
. . . .
. . . .
And as in much of Africa, Ncube said, China's reach into Zimbabwe's economy is equally pervasive: The roads are filled with Chinese buses, the markets with Chinese goods, and Chinese-made planes are in the skies. Chinese companies are major investors in mining and telecommunications. The government in Beijing, meanwhile, is a crucial backer of Zimbabwe's authoritarian president, Robert Mugabe.
. . . .
NEW YORK – Most Republican governors have broken with their GOP colleagues in Congress and are pushing for passage of President Barack Obama's economic aid plan that would send billions to states for education, public works and health care.
Their state treasuries drained by the financial crisis, governors would welcome the money from Capitol Hill, where GOP lawmakers are more skeptical of Obama's spending priorities.
The 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, planned to meet in Washington this weekend with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and other senators to press for her state's share of the package.
Florida Gov. Charlie Crist worked the phones last week with members of his state's congressional delegation, including House Republicans. Vermont Gov. Jim Douglas, the Republican vice chairman of the National Governors Association, planned to be in Washington on Monday to urge the Senate to approve the plan.
"As the executive of a state experiencing budget challenges, Gov. Douglas has a different perspective on the situation than congressional Republicans," said Douglas' deputy chief of staff, Dennise Casey.
Not a single Republican voted with the majority last week when the House approved Obama's $819 billion combination of tax cuts and new spending. The president's goal is to create or preserve 3 million to 4 million jobs.
Republicans led by House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio complained that the plan is laden with pet projects and will not yield the jobs or stimulate the economy in the way Obama has promised.
The measure faces GOP opposition in the Senate, where it will be up for a vote in the week ahead.
. . . .
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama appeared Saturday to be leaning toward appointing a third Republican to his Cabinet, a move that would place the fiscally conservative Sen. Judd Gregg at the head of the Commerce Department even though a liberal Democrat was initially tapped for the post.
. . . .