|
Sir Tonk posted:http://wonkette.com/557788/st-louis-police-not-all-that-interested-in-how-people-end-up-shot-apparently Yeah and right after that there was a vine of a cop talking about shooting people in the face and another cop stopping him when he noticed it was being recorded.
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 09:34 |
|
|
Some notes on US debt and deficits: 1. When the Federal Government has a deficit, it is required by law to issue debt instruments in an amount equal to the deficit. The proceeds of these sales go to the treasury to cover the deficit, and the Treasuries outstanding are used to calculate whether the debt limit has been exceeded. 2. US Treasuries are the safest investment in the world, and are hugely important in world financial markets. They are used as collateral for all sorts of financial transactions, and are the basis for much of the world's daily business. 3. The rapid repayment and closing of US Treasuries issued by the US Federal Government would result in the rapid collapse of the world economic system (due to lack of "safe" collateral). This would be highly undesirable. 4. The maintenance of outstanding debt by a sovereign currency issuer (a country that has its own central bank) can never result in default. Default for such a government is always a choice. Any debt level can be maintained. Countries (like those that make up the EU) that do not possess their own central bank, can be forced to default because they are not able to issue enough currency to cover their obligations. 5. As a matter of economics (though not of law), it is not necessary for the US Treasury to issue debt instruments at all to "cover" deficits incurred by Congress. As a sovereign currency issuer, all spending duly authorized by congress may be enacted by the Treasury without need to be "funded" by the sale of US debt. If this sounds like "printing money", that's because it is. If congress so wished, they could empower the FED to make available to the Treasury directly all funds to finance spending enacted by congress without need to issue new debt. In this case, Federal Deficits would immediately cease to add to the National Debt. Issuing Treasuries is a policy choice, not a budgetary imperative. 6. Taxation does not in any real sense "fund" federal expenditures. Although for the purposes of national accounting they are counted as offsetting federal expenditures, in reality the money collected does not (and need not) equal national expenditures. The purpose of taxation for a currency issuer is fourfold: A) Taxes are needed to reduce private sector demand, so that government can spend on public purposes while maintaining price stability. B) Taxes are needed to effect redistribution of existing wealth and prevent the socially unbalanced accumulation of new wealth. C) Taxes are needed to penalize socially undesirable activities and reward socially desirable activities. D) Taxes are needed to allocate the real costs of public projects to those whom society decides should bear those costs. Taxes are not needed to fund government spending. It is the creation of an obligation ("paying taxes") that can only be satisfied with the issued currency that "maintains" demand for use of that currency. Note that this also shows that the common understanding of taxation (that taxation "funds" expenditure) is exactly backwards. Governments issue currency first by spending it into existence. Only later are taxes collected to ensure that economic actors continue to use it and that prices do not fluctuate outside of policy. The above discussion begs a few questions: 1. What are the practical limits on congressional spending? -Government spending will tend to cause inflation when it creates demand in excess of available real goods, labor, and services. This is the true limit. -Government spending may cause distortions on a market by market basis. 2. What are the practical limits on US debt? -There are no practical limits on US debt unless and until it loses the power to issue its own currency or to denominate its debt in its own currency. 3. Is US debt good or bad? -US debt is very valuable to those who buy and sell securities on the world market. It is a safe hedge against inflation. It provides a reliable, safe investment to those who can afford to hold it. -US debt provides a stabilizing lever to the FED in times of crisis. -US debt is actually an asset the yield of which is financed by the Federal Government. It is issued primarily to back Social Security and to buyers on the world market. Its issuance to private interests represents an allocation of financial resources to those who can invest in them. As such people are generally wealthier it supports upward pressure on wealth distribution. 4. Are US deficits good or bad? -US deficits in no way constrain initial US federal spending except as a matter of law and politics. As a matter of economics spending in excess of real US resources may cause inflation. In a low inflation environment such spending may be desirable. Federal spending since the crisis of 2007 has not come close to purchasing resources in excess of US production. -The actual limits on spending are the real supply of goods, labor, and services available to be purchased/commanded by federal spending, not the available funds. When the available demand for goods, labor, and services is lower than national supply/output, federal deficit spending can make up the difference by employing labor and utilizing goods and services to maintain production until such time as Private Sector consumption returns to a level sufficient to utilize them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:23
|
|
|
Last time we were talking debt like this someone recommended a book explaining Modern Monetary Theory and how it wasn't about as credible as the Austrian School. Anyone remember that book and the links? I don't have them any more
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
Y'all realize that DEBT is a trigger word for readers of the potitoons thread, right? Better stop all this talk before someone draws labels all over everything in your house.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:Y'all realize that DEBT is a trigger word for readers of the potitoons thread, right? Better stop all this talk before someone draws labels all over everything in your house. IT'S INCISIVE COMMENTARY!!!
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
Xylo gave jrodefeld his own pigpen to roll around in, I think it's only fair to give Amerigasdadsa his own too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
Swan Oat posted:I like the debt and think we should have more of it, personally. Yeah. I mean I'm pretty sure that debt issued since 2010 has had negative interest rates. I wouldn't pass that up. I can understand complaining about how the money is spent (EX: A pointless war that made the world a worse place vs foodstamps that actually have a huge return on investment) but that's it. Anyway the alternative to low interest debt is higher taxes and some other country (CHINA!!!!) getting all negative to interest free money instead. So either the US takes on as much debt as possible or some other nation will get it. Sephiroth_IRA fucked around with this message at 21:37 on Aug 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:34
|
|
|
Sephiroth_IRA posted:Yeah. I mean I'm pretty sure that debt issued since 2010 has had negative interest rates. I wouldn't pass that up. I can understand complaining about how it's spent (EX: A pointless war that made the world a worse place vs foodstamps that actually have a huge return on investment) but that's it. This is false. For a couple months it was negative interest rates IIRC, but that's it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:37
|
|
|
I'm checking the sources but Wikipedia only says "Since 2010". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_of_the_United_States#Negative_real_interest_rates edit: Even if we aren't in the negative anymore, it's still low. Sephiroth_IRA fucked around with this message at 21:49 on Aug 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
El Scotch posted:Xylo gave jrodefeld his own pigpen to roll around in, I think it's only fair to give Amerigasdadsa his own too. Except jrodefeld is legitimately crazy instead of a troll.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:Last time we were talking debt like this someone recommended a book explaining Modern Monetary Theory and how it wasn't about as credible as the Austrian School. Anyone remember that book and the links? I don't have them any more Warren Mosler's 7 Deadly Innocent Frauds of Economic Policy is a good place to start.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
Sephiroth_IRA posted:I'm checking the sources but Wikipedia only says "Since 2010". Yeah, your overall point is fine, people on this forum just too often parrot "We're making free money on debt" even though it's not really the case anymore. EDIT: I'll be happy to be corrected, but what I read seems to indicate it's no longer the case.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
Does treasury.gov list the real interest rates on the total debt issued by month/year? The only thing I can usually find is the interest rate on a specific type of bond. I know it doesn't matter because Obama has everyone on the payroll so all the numbers are fake. edit: Don't worry I believe you. As much as we (Americans) talk about debt the one thing I never hear people say is that someone is going to get that money no matter what and I'd rather it be us than "insert evil country here". Sephiroth_IRA fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Aug 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
Well, the source for that wiki page is http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/DFII5, which shows that there were actually only a few points since 2011 when the interest went positive in relation to inflation, although how accurate that is I'm not entirely sure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:death is certain Watching that almost makes me forget that the Obama administration found and killed Bin Laden.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 22:36
|
|
|
Now in the White House, Obama appears tie-less, sleepy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
Why didn't Obama respond forcefully to Foley's murder like he did to Benghazi???? :foxsay:
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
Obama could flay terrorists live on TV like Ramsay Bolton and the right would still hate him.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Why didn't Obama respond forcefully to Foley's murder like he did to Benghazi???? I wasn't even going to touch that because it didn't make any loving sense. I think if I thought about it hard enough to actually articulate how stupid it is, I'd have a stroke.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 23:13
|
|
|
[quote="Sephiroth_IRA" post="433799697"] Does treasury.gov list the real interest rates on the total debt issued by month/year? The only thing I can usually find is the interest rate on a specific type of bond.[/quote The US does not issue "debt" it issues bonds of many different types several times a month at auction to the public. There is no one interest rate number to find (even for a given day!) - we're paying everything from 30 year bonds from the late 80s that's potentially above 10% to stuff that's just a couple bp's above 0 from 2009. You can look up the results of auctions on treasury direct going back a long ways. Incidentally the debt is bad and we're going into crisis people get befuddled or start going into crazy conspiracy theories when I ask how we can possibly have a debt crisis when our debt is being auctioned below 1%
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 23:13
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:If my choices are standard "throw everyone else under the bus FYGM" white populism and Clintonian liberalism, sign me up for the latter thanks. We already created a mess with the New Deal by uplifting poor rural whites but no one else. I also prefer to keep breathing and working, neither of which will happen if we put it a bigoted ruraltopian hellscape. I really don't understand your logic at all. So, everyone being poor and oppressed somehow is better than the populist economics of the New Deal? The Social Security Act of 1935, Glass-Steagall, and Food Stamps never helped any minorities? You'd rather we just get rid of all those things if it means we have politicians that pretend to represent the best interests of everyone?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
Sephiroth_IRA posted:Obama could flay terrorists live on TV like Ramsay Bolton and the right would still hate him. He could send an elite SEAL team to Pakistan to gun down Osama Bin Laden and dump his body in the ocean and they'd still ha...oh wait he did and they still do.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
"That was seal team 6 not Obama!" is the usual response. A few people I have talked to admit that if it happened under Bush they wouldn't have an issue with people giving him partial/full credit for the kill.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
420DD Butts posted:I really don't understand your logic at all. So, everyone being poor and oppressed somehow is better than the populist economics of the New Deal? The Social Security Act of 1935, Glass-Steagall, and Food Stamps never helped any minorities? You'd rather we just get rid of all those things if it means we have politicians that pretend to represent the best interests of everyone? That's not the dichotomy I was given. Populism (at least as formulated in the US) is a backwards, socially conservative movement that actively screws with women, LGBT people, as well as racial and religious minorities. I'm not going to throw all those people under the bus so poor whites can get ahead, again. I'm all for New Deal style programs, but ones that actively help out minorities and directly destroy the racist underpinnings in society. Sorry, I'm not going to support some serpent handler trash so that they can turn around and stone me because I don't pray and gently caress the way their boring half-educated asses prefer. And American Populism has always been full of that kind of idiocy. Williams Jennings Bryan was a proto-drug warrior and pre-modern creationist idiot. At least the Vulture Capitalist scumbag has a real education and doesn't believe in pre-modern, counter-factual garbage. I don't care how much social safety net I get for it, I'm not going to help some knuckledragger oppress everyone again. Luckily enough, that's not the choice we have. I can vote for a real leftist who's actually willing to keep minorities safe while also practicing some economic justice. But I'm someone who voted Nader and is still drat proud of it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 23:51
|
|
|
Sephiroth_IRA posted:Obama could flay terrorists live on TV like Ramsay Bolton and the right would still hate him.  Cut with the grain not against it! Your knife isn't rusty enough!!!
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 00:18
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:
I...I can't tell if you are deliberately thinking that Gordon Ramsay and Ramsay Bolton are the same or doing so as a joke.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 00:20
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:I...I can't tell if you are deliberately thinking that Gordon Ramsay and Ramsay Bolton are the same or doing so as a joke. Either way I'm lollin hard, way better than pages of Amergin Spergin. Have those rumors of ISIS having 18 Americans in custody after some sort of accident been substantiated? Maybe I should ask the Middle East thread
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 00:23
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:I...I can't tell if you are deliberately thinking that Gordon Ramsay and Ramsay Bolton are the same or doing so as a joke. Now I want Ramsay Bolton: Kitchen Nightmares.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
whitey delenda est posted:Either way I'm lollin hard, way better than pages of Amergin Spergin. They have/had two journalists. One has been killed, and they are threatening to do the same with the other one. These people have been captured for awhile. ISIS is just trying to use them to get us to stop attacking them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Now I want Ramsay Bolton: Kitchen Nightmares. "Let me show you how to make skinless breasts, you fool..."
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 00:41
|
|
|
The Tea Party of Louisiana is mad at Senator David Vitter for supporting Common Core. Specifically, they are mad because one of them read on a website that Common Core turns 60% of students gay, which is so obviously a True Fact that how could David Vitter ignore it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 00:47
|
|
|
whitey delenda est posted:Either way I'm lollin hard, way better than pages of Amergin Spergin. Welp, something about it just popped up on Al Jazeera
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 01:06
|
|
|
Rhesus Pieces posted:He could send an elite SEAL team to Pakistan to gun down Osama Bin Laden and dump his body in the ocean and they'd still ha...oh wait he did and they still do. The best part was he was getting made fun of by Seth Meyers for not getting Osama when he had troops in route.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
Joementum posted:The Tea Party of Louisiana is mad at Senator David Vitter for supporting Common Core. Surely that's a parody news site.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 01:44
|
|
|
zoux posted:Surely that's a parody news site. Hard to say. They are also running an article about an infant leaving its father to die in a hot car and its About page has the text, "Disclaimer: If you believe any of the poo poo you read here you are a freaking moron," but what is the Tea Party of Louisiana supposed to believe, that or the obvious truth that the Common Core curriculum turns 60% of kids gay overnight?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 01:47
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Hard to say. They are also running an article about an infant leaving its father to die in a hot car and its About page has the text, "Disclaimer: If you believe any of the poo poo you read here you are a freaking moron," but what is the Tea Party of Louisiana supposed to believe, that or the obvious truth that the Common Core curriculum turns 60% of kids gay overnight? In fact, they say that they know it's parody, but put it up anyways. I hate the goddamn Tea Party.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
zoux posted:In fact, they say that they know it's parody, but put it up anyways. I hate the goddamn Tea Party. This was how they linked to it on their site before reporters started asking them about it:  Yes, hmmm, they're definitely aware it's satire and totally in on the joke. Also  at the David Barton link.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
Joementum posted:The Tea Party of Louisiana is mad at Senator David Vitter for supporting Common Core.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
edit: eh nm. lol the first wave is already gay. Is it the curriculum or is it because Moochelle is forcing our kids to eat gay vegetables? Sephiroth_IRA fucked around with this message at 02:27 on Aug 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 09:34 |
|
|
whitey delenda est posted:Either way I'm lollin hard, way better than pages of Amergin Spergin. I asked BM about it and he said it was discredited but now it appears they have more hostages and we did send in a spec ops team that failed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 02:26
|
|