The economy is pretty exciting lately.

Andres · 09-22-2008, 11:38 PM

Jesus christ almighty.

Bobby Swisha · 09-22-2008, 11:59 PM

*touches your balls with a ruler*

Aaron Haynes · 09-22-2008, 11:59 PM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0..._n_128294.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Bush Bailout Package, Section 8

Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

If the Democrats let this through, I'm giving up.

Phil Williamson · 09-23-2008, 12:08 AM

I dunno, this is kinda a no-win situation. I don't know enough economics to really take a position but things are certainly going to change :\

Andres · 09-23-2008, 12:16 AM

I don't know much about finance either, I've been reading Paul Krugman's take mostly:

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/

Slime · 09-23-2008, 12:29 AM

Damnit, I had $5000 in a mutual fund, went to $13000 and I repeatedly said I wanted to sell it all then, my dad wouldn't let me because he said it has to be a long-term investment, now its worth $7000. FUCK

I cant decide whether to take it out now or not, it went down a lot today again

Shaun · 09-23-2008, 12:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aaron Haynes

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0..._n_128294.html

If the Democrats let this through, I'm giving up.

Can you dumb this down for me? I don't fully understand....

Apfigur · 09-23-2008, 11:11 PM

The new crisis which is coming, is far much worse than the one we experienced in the 1990's. The crisis of today is not only a financial one, but a climate, food and oil one etc.

How will those in power tackle the problem? Oil can be replaced by agrofuel, which demands large areas of land to cultivate however, and that makes the food crisis worse. What should one do then? One reasonable thing to do is to annexe an oil producing country, but that was obviously much more troublesome than they first thought. How does one tackle the climate crisis? Cut down the use of fossil fuel? You can surely do that without economic growth crashing down. More renewable energy and ignore the food riots (which have shaken cities in 37 countries and brought down governments, only that it is far much bigger than 1968)? What will happen when sea level rises bring infection diseases which kill millions?

This is only the beginning. It can very well be so that capitalism is going into a crisis worse than the depression in the 1930's. And it's surprisingly quiet about it. You have to read Financial Times and The Economist to understand anything at all. It's an extremely big thing that's going on, and thanks to 9/11 is the left wing 10 years back in the development, and incapable to take the chance.

The field is open, everything can happen. In any case, I'm going to read, read and read. Economic magazines, study circles, Marx, etc. I have to comprehend what's going on.

tronderboo · 09-23-2008, 11:45 PM

I don't know if you should read Marx to figure out what's going on now. That's like going to Crayola to ask for help with Monet. Or something.

I've been thinking, though, that we, at our collective ages, are probably set to be some of the least affected by whatever happens next.

Skittlebrau · 09-24-2008, 04:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun

Can you dumb this down for me? I don't fully understand....

Basically, in the middle of the bill that says the Treasury Department is going to take $700,000,000,000 out of the budget and use it to help banks out of the shitstorm they're in, theres a clause that says that the judicial and legislative branches won't have any say whatsoever in the matter, and its none of their fucking business what happens to the money once its in the Treasury Department's hands.

Shaun · 09-24-2008, 04:40 AM

yeah, but what are the implications of that?

Jesterfoot · 09-24-2008, 05:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aaron Haynes

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0..._n_128294.html

If the Democrats let this through, I'm giving up.

jesus, that section alone is enough to warrant an investigation.

Phil Williamson · 09-24-2008, 05:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun

yeah, but what are the implications of that?

lack of oversight would be a big thing.

Aaron Haynes · 09-24-2008, 05:31 AM

Bush and Paulson are both urging Congress to pass it immediately without adding any oversight provisions. They're using the urgency of the economic crisis to allow banks and CEOs to profit off of the bail-out. They got rich off of the shitty investments, and they'll be punished with piles of cash.

Paul Krugman points this out in more detail, but when testifying in front of the Senate, Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson said "we didn't include oversight because we thought it would be presumptuous, that's what we figured congress would do." Despite the fact that the submitted plan doesn't just not include oversight, it does not allow oversight by any administrative agency or court of law in the United States. And they were trying to rush it through the system before anyone stopped to say, "hey, this smells like bullshit."

It's a blatant power grab, and more proof, as if we needed it, that you can't trust the Bush administration to play straight even in the middle of a national crisis.

Slime · 09-24-2008, 05:33 AM

Aaron Haynes · 09-24-2008, 05:44 AM

I wish Bowman was still here. I'd love to hear him try to explain why we should've deregulated more.

Lord Blazer · 09-24-2008, 06:46 AM

I don't understand how giving a $bajillion dollars to companies will stabilize the economy. I took economics in high school and a micro- course in college and I just don't understand how giving them a whole bunch of money does anything.

Crazy Ivan · 09-24-2008, 07:15 AM

...c'mon, really? Like, at least try looking some stuff up on your own before coming in here with that. Do you know anything about any of the proposed plans? Because none of them really involve just "giving a bajillion dollars to companies." Well, Paulson's sooooorta does. But not really. It's probably a little more complex than what you might be able to remember from a high school economics class.

Jason Ruiz · 09-24-2008, 07:39 AM

Exactly. It's like, "LOWER THE TAXES ALREADY!" Am I right?

Bravoie · 09-24-2008, 07:42 AM

Give me more food stamps too, bitches.

Crazy Ivan · 09-24-2008, 07:50 AM

THE BLAME OBVIOUSLY LIES WITH ALL THE MINORITIES THAT WERE GIVEN CREDIT AND MORTGAGES WHEN THEY DIDN'T DESERVE THEM!

No, seriously, that's what republicans are saying.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/pos...M1ZDEwYjMxNjg=

Kevitus · 09-24-2008, 10:21 AM

America could ask Germany for help anytime.

Andres · 09-25-2008, 02:51 AM

Quote:

In fact, some of the most basic details, including the $700 billion figure Treasury would use to buy up bad debt, are fuzzy.

"It's not based on any particular data point," a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. "We just wanted to choose a really large number."

Slime · 09-25-2008, 02:54 AM

hahahah

Lord Blazer · 09-25-2008, 05:56 AM

You remember that episode of the Simpsons where the government printed a $1 Trillion dollar bill to stabilize the economy?

....1,000,000,000,000 vs 700,000,000,000

I'm just saying.

09-22-2008, 11:38 PM	#1
Andres Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 17,797	The economy is pretty exciting lately. Jesus christ almighty.
Andres Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 17,797

09-23-2008, 12:16 AM	#5
Andres Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 17,797	I don't know much about finance either, I've been reading Paul Krugman's take mostly: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/
Andres Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 17,797

09-23-2008, 12:29 AM	#6
Slime Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 24,891	Damnit, I had $5000 in a mutual fund, went to $13000 and I repeatedly said I wanted to sell it all then, my dad wouldn't let me because he said it has to be a long-term investment, now its worth $7000. FUCK I cant decide whether to take it out now or not, it went down a lot today again
Slime Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 24,891

09-23-2008, 11:11 PM	#8
Apfigur Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 5,355	The new crisis which is coming, is far much worse than the one we experienced in the 1990's. The crisis of today is not only a financial one, but a climate, food and oil one etc. How will those in power tackle the problem? Oil can be replaced by agrofuel, which demands large areas of land to cultivate however, and that makes the food crisis worse. What should one do then? One reasonable thing to do is to annexe an oil producing country, but that was obviously much more troublesome than they first thought. How does one tackle the climate crisis? Cut down the use of fossil fuel? You can surely do that without economic growth crashing down. More renewable energy and ignore the food riots (which have shaken cities in 37 countries and brought down governments, only that it is far much bigger than 1968)? What will happen when sea level rises bring infection diseases which kill millions? This is only the beginning. It can very well be so that capitalism is going into a crisis worse than the depression in the 1930's. And it's surprisingly quiet about it. You have to read Financial Times and The Economist to understand anything at all. It's an extremely big thing that's going on, and thanks to 9/11 is the left wing 10 years back in the development, and incapable to take the chance. The field is open, everything can happen. In any case, I'm going to read, read and read. Economic magazines, study circles, Marx, etc. I have to comprehend what's going on.
Apfigur Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 5,355

09-24-2008, 04:40 AM	#11
Shaun Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 17,881	yeah, but what are the implications of that?
Shaun Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 17,881

09-22-2008, 11:59 PM	#2
Bobby Swisha Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 46,012	touches your balls with a ruler

09-23-2008, 12:08 AM	#4
Phil Williamson Super Moderator Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 16,900	I dunno, this is kinda a no-win situation. I don't know enough economics to really take a position but things are certainly going to change :\

09-23-2008, 11:45 PM	#9
tronderboo Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 2,743	I don't know if you should read Marx to figure out what's going on now. That's like going to Crayola to ask for help with Monet. Or something. I've been thinking, though, that we, at our collective ages, are probably set to be some of the least affected by whatever happens next.

09-24-2008, 05:31 AM	#14
Aaron Haynes Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 15,125	Bush and Paulson are both urging Congress to pass it immediately without adding any oversight provisions. They're using the urgency of the economic crisis to allow banks and CEOs to profit off of the bail-out. They got rich off of the shitty investments, and they'll be punished with piles of cash. Paul Krugman points this out in more detail, but when testifying in front of the Senate, Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson said "we didn't include oversight because we thought it would be presumptuous, that's what we figured congress would do." Despite the fact that the submitted plan doesn't just not include oversight, it does not allow oversight by any administrative agency or court of law in the United States. And they were trying to rush it through the system before anyone stopped to say, "hey, this smells like bullshit." It's a blatant power grab, and more proof, as if we needed it, that you can't trust the Bush administration to play straight even in the middle of a national crisis.

09-24-2008, 05:33 AM	#15
Slime Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 24,891	wow
Slime Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 24,891

09-24-2008, 05:44 AM	#16
Aaron Haynes Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 15,125	I wish Bowman was still here. I'd love to hear him try to explain why we should've deregulated more.

09-24-2008, 06:46 AM	#17
Lord Blazer Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 16,879	I don't understand how giving a $bajillion dollars to companies will stabilize the economy. I took economics in high school and a micro- course in college and I just don't understand how giving them a whole bunch of money does anything.

09-24-2008, 07:15 AM	#18
Crazy Ivan Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 9,462	...c'mon, really? Like, at least try looking some stuff up on your own before coming in here with that. Do you know anything about any of the proposed plans? Because none of them really involve just "giving a bajillion dollars to companies." Well, Paulson's sooooorta does. But not really. It's probably a little more complex than what you might be able to remember from a high school economics class.

09-24-2008, 07:39 AM	#19
Jason Ruiz Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 12,975	Exactly. It's like, "LOWER THE TAXES ALREADY!" Am I right?

09-24-2008, 07:42 AM	#20
Bravoie Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 4,713	Give me more food stamps too, bitches.
Bravoie Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 4,713

09-24-2008, 07:50 AM	#21
Crazy Ivan Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 9,462	THE BLAME OBVIOUSLY LIES WITH ALL THE MINORITIES THAT WERE GIVEN CREDIT AND MORTGAGES WHEN THEY DIDN'T DESERVE THEM! No, seriously, that's what republicans are saying. http://corner.nationalreview.com/pos...M1ZDEwYjMxNjg=

09-24-2008, 10:21 AM	#22
Kevitus Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 4,542	America could ask Germany for help anytime.
Kevitus Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 4,542

09-25-2008, 02:54 AM	#24
Slime Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 24,891	hahahah
Slime Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 24,891

09-25-2008, 05:56 AM	#25
Lord Blazer Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 16,879	You remember that episode of the Simpsons where the government printed a $1 Trillion dollar bill to stabilize the economy? ....1,000,000,000,000 vs 700,000,000,000 I'm just saying.