On Feb 27, 7:51=A0pm, "aw" <aw...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "kujebak" <kuje...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>
news:f4ad7948-6d74-4c80-847b-40d723fc911f@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>
> aw wrote:
> > "kujebak" <kuje...@[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
> > > >> > >> > prdele
> > > >> > >> > :-)
>
> > > >> > > 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
"Housin=
g
> > > >> Trhu"?
>
> > > >> Under Reagan, the federal deficit expanded from 2.6% of GNP to
5.3%=
> > > >> in
> > > >> 1986
> > > >> (before falling somewhat in 1987), adding more than ?1 trillion
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
> > > >> the
> > > >> 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
> > > >> 1987
> > > >> averaged only ?15 billion a year more than what Reagan requested.
> > > >> 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
fa=
st
> > > >> transition from the world's largest creditor to the world's
largest=
> > > >> debtor,
> > > >> owing foreign investors roughly ?400 billion. What made the
borrowi=
ng
> > > >> possible was high interest rates, which themselves may have been
> > > >> caused
> > > >> by
> > > >> the big deficit.
>
> > > >> Remember Ronald Reagan and Supply Side Economics? In the early
1980=
s,
> > > >> Reagan
> > > >> promised the nation that if we lowered tax rates on the wealthy,
th=
e
> > > >> economy
> > > >> would grow so much the federal budget would be balanced "within
thr=
ee
> > > >> 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
> > > >> year
> > > >> after the tax cuts were enacted, the economy actually shrank
2.2%,
> > > >> the
> > > >> worst
> > > >> performance since the Great Depression. And the effect on the
feder=
al
> > > >> budget
> > > >> was catastrophic.
>
> > > >> Jimmy Carter's last budget deficit was ?77 billion. Reagan's
first
> > > >> deficit
> > > >> was ?128 billion. His second deficit exploded to ?208 billion. By
t=
he
> > > >> time
> > > >> the "Reagan Revolution" was over, George H.W. Bush was running an
> > > >> annual
> > > >> deficit of ?290 billion per year.
>
> > > >> Yearly deficits, of course, add up to national debt. When Reagan
to=
ok
> > > >> office, the national debt stood at ?994 billion. When Bush left
> > > >> office,
> > > >> it
> > > >> had reached ?4.3 trillion. In other words, the national debt had
> > > >> taken
> > > >> 200
> > > >> years to reach ?1 trillion. Reagan's Supply Side experiment
> > > >> quadrupled
> > > >> 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 ?250 an ounce during the Clinton administration to
?950
> > > 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 ?US.
> > > The only solution to this problem is to slash spending and/or raise
> > > taxes
> > > while cranking
> > > up interest rates to 20% or more as Carter/Volker did while cleaning
u=
p
> > > 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
f=
or
> > > each dollar
> > > in deposits ?10 can be lent. This creates powerful leverage of over
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
finish=
es
> > > the
> > > bank
> > > and bankrupts its investors. The Federal Reserve has played an
im****ta=
nt
> > > role in
> > > this credit collapse, through incompetence, idealogical bias,
favoriti=
sm
> > > 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?
>
> > =A0Last 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
borr=
ow
> > money abroad. Debt held
> > by Foreigners present burden on Future US Production and interest
paymen=
ts
> > are not necessarily reinvested in US.
> > When FED
> > try to save domestic Banks a and other Fin. institution, he lowers
> > interest
> > on currency, which brings
> > Devaluation and then Inflation, Stagflation, Depression, destroyed
middl=
e
> > Class, atd.
> > This is one Example.
> > What is happening in US now is burst bubble of housing market with
> > excessive
> > debt
> > inflated asset prices of houses, CDO etc. and a nation in debt to it's
> > ears.
> > 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?
>
> Covece, tobe vysvetlovat zaklady ekonomie je stejny, jako vysvetlovat
> Pepkovi Vyskocovi Paralaxu. Ja ani nevim(a nebudu vyhledavat), jakej byl
z=
a
> Cartra deficit, ale vim na !00%, ze statni dluh nebyl ani polovicni, ze
=
=A4
> byl rezervni
> menou celyho sveta, ze saving byl tehda kladnyho koeficientu, ze Cina
> nedrzela =A41. 3 trilionu
> Japonci, ze nedrzeli =A4980bil. ze Iraq a Afganistan nepousteli zilou
Amer=
ice
> mesicne =A0v radu =A410bil.
> ze US neutraceli za zbrane vic, jak zhruba cely svet, ze Americani
> nekupovali vsechno udelany v Asii
> Atd, atd.atd.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Je-li k dispozici jen kladivo, pripada kdeco jako hrebik ;-)
|
