Re: 16,84 korun ceskych

aw wrote:
> "kujebak" <kujebak@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:aff9f18c-026a-4258-87fa-fe0810a849d3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Feb 27, 3:21 pm, "aw" <aw...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > "kujebak" <kuje...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >
> >
news:f42f3fc6-88bd-431b-9037-02cb1825b789@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >
> > > aw wrote:
> > >> "kujebak" <kuje...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >
>>news:878acbd9-7008-42f5-b017-cd2161c7e115@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> On Feb 27, 9:09 am, "aw" <aw...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > >> > "Paul J Kriha" <paul.nospam.kr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
> > >> > messagenews:47c512b1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > >> > > "Zdislav V. Kovarik" <kova...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> > >> > >news:Pine.WNT.4.58.0802261437450.-356059@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > >> > >> On Fri, 22 Feb 2008, Jack Stone wrote:
> >
> > >> > >> > .........aneb dollar spolehlive pokracuje na sve ceste do
prde=
le
> > >> > >> > :-)
> >
> > >> > > Jack tam uz nejakou dobu netrpelive ceka, aby ho privital.
> >
> > >> > >> Ze von uz tam byl, za Cartera?
> > >> > >> A nelibilo se mu tam, tak se zase vyhrabal.
> > >> > >> Duh.
> >
> > >> > >> Cheers, Slavek(ZVK)
> >
> > >> > Jakej byl deficit za Cartera? A statni dluh byl min nez
polovicni.
> > >> > Takze to vyhrabavani dnes je uz skoro nemozny.
> >
> > >> Pomerene malej, v ****ovnani s deficity predeslych
> > >> (republikanskych) administrativ. Presto sel dolar do pr-
> > >> dele koncem 70tych let, a ke sve historicke hodnote
> > >> se vratil az za Reagana. Samozrejme ze hodnota
> > >> americkeho dolaru nema nic spolecneho s tim kdo
> > >> tu je u vesla. Nelze tedy zapotrebi jaksi vyvracet
> > >> tvuj argument. Zcela jsi v tom uspel sam ;-)
> >
> > >> Jestlipak vis co jineho meli ctyri roky Carterovi
> > >> adminintrativy spolecneho s dneskem?
> >
> > >> Ze by, jako jediny (US president) dokazal primet Israel k podepsani
> > >> mir. dohody s Egyptem? Ze za neho nedoslo k uplnemu kolapsu
"Housing
> > >> Trhu"?
> >
> > >> Under Reagan, the federal deficit expanded from 2.6% of GNP to 5.3%
i=
n
> > >> 1986
> > >> (before falling somewhat in 1987), adding more than =EF=BF=BD1
trilli=
on in red
> > >> ink
> > >> to our national accounts. Worse, this growth took place not during
> > >> wartime
> > >> or depression but in a period of peace and prosperity. That's when
th=
e
> > >> national debt is supposed to shrink.
> >
> > >> Reagan came to Wa****ngton promising to cut taxes and federal
spending=
..
> > >> He
> > >> cut taxes. But spending rose both in absolute terms and as a share
of=

> > >> GNP.
> > >> Was it Congress's fault? Total government outlays between 1982 and
19=
87
> > >> averaged only =EF=BF=BD15 billion a year more than what Reagan
reques=
ted. That
> > >> accounts for only 8% of the ac***ulated deficits.
> >
> > >> In the past, the government financed its deficits mostly by selling
> > >> bonds
> > >> to
> > >> American investors. This time it has borrowed from the rest of the
> > >> world.
> > >> The result: by the end of 1987 the United States had completed a
fast=

> > >> transition from the world's largest creditor to the world's largest
> > >> debtor,
> > >> owing foreign investors roughly =EF=BF=BD400 billion. What made the
b=
orrowing
> > >> possible was high interest rates, which themselves may have been
caus=
ed
> > >> by
> > >> the big deficit.
> >
> > >> Remember Ronald Reagan and Supply Side Economics? In the early
1980s,=

> > >> Reagan
> > >> promised the nation that if we lowered tax rates on the wealthy,
the
> > >> economy
> > >> would grow so much the federal budget would be balanced "within
three=

> > >> years,
> > >> maybe even two."
> >
> > >> Sober people were skeptical-and rightly so. Reagan's Republican
> > >> opponent
> > >> for
> > >> the 1980 presidential election, George H.W. Bush called it "voodoo
> > >> economics." His own Budget Director, David Stockman, called it a
> > >> "Trojan
> > >> horse," a scam intended really to funnel more money to the already
> > >> rich.
> > >> Stockman was quickly dismissed.
> >
> > >> The results, we now know, were a disaster. In 1982, the first full
ye=
ar
> > >> after the tax cuts were enacted, the economy actually shrank 2.2%,
th=
e
> > >> worst
> > >> performance since the Great Depression. And the effect on the
federal=

> > >> budget
> > >> was catastrophic.
> >
> > >> Jimmy Carter's last budget deficit was =EF=BF=BD77 billion.
Reagan's =
first
> > >> deficit
> > >> was =EF=BF=BD128 billion. His second deficit exploded to
=EF=BF=BD208=
 billion. By the
> > >> time
> > >> the "Reagan Revolution" was over, George H.W. Bush was running an
> > >> annual
> > >> deficit of =EF=BF=BD290 billion per year.
> >
> > >> Yearly deficits, of course, add up to national debt. When Reagan
took=

> > >> office, the national debt stood at =EF=BF=BD994 billion. When Bush
le=
ft office,
> > >> it
> > >> had reached =EF=BF=BD4.3 trillion. In other words, the national
debt =
had taken
> > >> 200
> > >> years to reach =EF=BF=BD1 trillion. Reagan's Supply Side experiment
q=
uadrupled
> > >> it
> > >> in
> > >> the next 12 years
> >
> > >> Tak a ted mas chanci to vyvratit. :-)))))))))))))
> >
> > > The issue at hand - the issue you raised in your
> > > previous post - is the inverse relation****p between
> > > the size of the federal deficit and the value of the
> > > dollar. That *is* your claim, is it not? How does
> > > any of the above substantiate your point (if that
> > > is what your point is) when, in fact, it seems to
> > > indicate exactly the opposite - meaning low de-
> > > ficits under Carter leading to the decline in the
> > > value of the dollar, and Reagan's record deficits
> > > bringing it back up?
> >
> > I thought you understant irony, but..
> >
> > This is not a typical slowdown caused
> > solely by slowing consumer spending or business investment. Instead,
> > it is a slowdown caused by inflated asset prices and a nation gorging
on=

> > debt.
> > The basic problem faced by the US economy right now is excessive debt
> > caused by recklessly low interest rates from the Federal Reserve.
> > Reducing interest rates again with the dollar tanking is like throwing
> > gasoline on a roaring fire.
> > Whatever else is happening now, the dollar is tanking. Gold has soared
> > from a low of =EF=BF=BD250 an ounce during the Clinton administration
to=
 =EF=BF=BD950
> > today.
> > This reflects, not an actual rise in the price of this commodity but a
> > loss
> > in confidence
> > in the fiscal responsibility of the Bush administration. And loss in
> > confidence of =EF=BF=BDUS.
> > The only solution to this problem is to slash spending and/or raise
taxe=
s
> > while cranking
> > up interest rates to 20% or more as Carter/Volker did while cleaning
up
> > Nixon's mess.
> > Whatever is done, It ain't gonna be pretty - and whoever is president
is=

> > gonna
> > be blamed for Bush's mess just like Carter was blamed for Nixon's.
> > The system you (US) now use to create money is a debt system whereby
for=

> > each dollar
> > in deposits =EF=BF=BD10 can be lent. This creates powerful leverage of
o=
ver 90 to
> > 1
> > when the
> > monies are spread through the system. This creates speculation and
> > inflation
> > on economic
> > upswings and deflation and bankruptcy due to credit shortages on the
> > downswings.
> > With 10x leverage the loss of 10% of a banks assets effectively
finishes=

> > the
> > bank
> > and bankrupts its investors. The Federal Reserve has played an
im****tant=

> > role in
> > this credit collapse, through incompetence, idealogical bias,
favoritism=

> > and
> > politisation.
> >
> > BTW, ever heard about Glass-Steagall Act of 1933?- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Answer my question!!!
> Is there a relation****p between federal deficit spending
> and the value of the dollar? If so, why?
> In your own words preferably.
>
>
>
> Hey Buddy what is happening to you? Still didn't get that?
>
>  Last Time:
> With every deficit, state debt became bigger and bigger. Creditors loose
> trust at Nation currency.
> What follows? States like US, where is negative rate of saving must
borrow=

> money abroad. Debt held
> by Foreigners present burden on Future US Production and interest
payments=

> are not necessarily reinvested in US.
> When FED
> try to save domestic Banks a and other Fin. institution, he lowers
interes=
t
> on currency, which brings
> Devaluation and then Inflation, Stagflation, Depression, destroyed
middle
> Class, atd.
> This is one Example.
> What is happening in US now is burst bubble of housing market with
excessi=
ve
> debt
> inflated asset prices of houses, CDO etc. and a nation in debt to it's
ear=
s.
> Don't belive what Reagan and now Chenney say "Debt and Deficit doesn't
> matter.!!!!!
>
> That is all, no more necessary to say, for people of logic mind.

All I am asking is why the dollar took a plunge
during Carter administration at a time when the
deficit was at historical low. Doesn't that seem
to contradict all that you're saying?