Wed, Sep 17, 2014, 12:37 PM EDT - U.S. Markets close in 3 hrs 23 mins


% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Intel Corporation Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • stark2424246 stark2424246 Sep 11, 2011 7:23 AM Flag

    Here's the disaster in a nutshell

    the obama job act is never going to pass.

    He delibreatly set enough poisin into it to force Congress to vote it down. That is his #1 spring board into re-election. It is for fools like you who do not understand history, psychology and the economy.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • OK, nimrod, let's talk about the economy.

      The national debt is about 15 Trillion $.
      That's about $6 Trillion of "internal debt",
      what the govt owes itself, mostly borrowing from
      the SS trust fund, plus about $9 Trillion of
      public debt, what we owe Japan, China, UK, Eurozone,
      widows, orphans, universities, etc. (china is one of many..china has about $ 0.8 T of our PD, so
      they are not the lion's share; the lion's share is mostly all US public debt)

      The $9 trillion would be zero today if we had kept the Clinton taxes. But your guy, W, decided to cut those taxes for his rich friends, invade Afghanistan, invade Iraq, and then cut some more, and then launched TARP and then there are the Obama
      damage control costs of this depression we are now in. So our PD is $9 T instead of 0..thanks mostly to W.

      The Gross domestic product is also about $15 T.
      That means we have a gross debt ratio of
      $15/$15 = 1. We have an "external" or "public debt" ratio of about $9/$15 = 0.6.

      To make an analogy..if you earned $100K per year and carried a $100k mortgage your external debt ratio would be $100k/$100K = 1. If you alos owed your wife $40K, your total debt ratio would be 140/100 = 1.4.

      I don't think any household with such a debt ratio would be considered "extreme" or financially at risk. IF your salary was risky, then yes, you would be at risk becasue your debt ratio could suddenly go from 1 to $100K/0 = infinity.


      GOT IS SO FAR?

      Our national problem now is to stimulate the growth of our "salary" because chipping away at all of this mostly W debt is a harder problem. The analogy is that the guy with a $100K salary must invest in himself and his job. He needs to have the necessary equipment, training, suits and ties, automobile, computers, job related travel and entertainment costs, etc. required to effectively do his job. So, YOU MUST INVEST TO MAINTAIN AND INCREASE YOUR SALARY. Even if you had zero debt you would have to do this.

      Now consider the inanity of the republicans. First, they got us deeply into this mess of having a lot of debt (even though a public debt ratio of 0.6 really isn't that critical) and now THEY ARE BLOCKING ANY ATTEMPT TO INVEST TO INCREASE OUR GDP, EG OUR SALARY.

      Obama's jobs act is an essential investment to drive the economy and increase our GDP. There will be multipliers here...if we spend $1 we usually get $3 back in increased GDP.

      That will drive our GDP down..making the problem much worse.

      Get it?

      probably not.

      • 3 Replies to flumoxed11
      • why not just show me the amount of INCOME TAX REVENUE collected before and after the Bush tax rate cut.

        As for the $15/$15 ratio, what would be wrong with $10/$15 and using the excess to pay down the debt?

        And one thing you didn't think about. The internal debt is held by "the rich" so you never have to pay it back because they are evil! Isn't that what we learned in public schools?

      • no one ever anwsered my inquiry about an example of a socialist nation haveing a growing economy for any length of time without stealing through acts of war.

        Your idea of borrowing 100% of the GDP is foolish.

      • What the US is doing is similar to what the individuals tried to during the Clinton years. Increasing the average household debt from $500 to $6,000 was easy due to changes in the credit card industry. Paying 3% down instead of 10% down on a house was easy becasue of the mortgage changes. This living on debt was fun until the ecoomy took multipal hits from 4N sources and the housing bubble cracked. But why are we trying to build on borrowed mney when there is so much welath in the country? The anwser is that the professional polititians want to take as large a slice as they can for themselves.

    • You will hear BO talking about how the GOP voted against this bill for the next year and a hlaf. It will be his prime campaign nugget.

    • you are the one who doesn't understand history, psychology and the economy. I'll not call you a fool. You are hopelessly xenophobic.

34.80-0.13(-0.37%)12:37 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.