|
|
25 Aug 2003, 18:37
|
#1
|
fascinated by bridges!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Norwegiensis
Posts: 919
|
National debt
Guess who doesn't have much of that.
Hah.
Matrim
__________________
Holy smoke.
|
|
|
25 Aug 2003, 18:40
|
#2
|
Dirte
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 5,573
|
Are you refering to the fact that we have 700 milliard on account?
Or the fact that the "pension-debt-allready" (so it's going to incerease) for the generation older then "us", is allready at 3000 milliard or so?
(Numbers out of my head, might be terribly wrong)
__________________
"Freedom, morality, and the human dignity of the individual consists precisely in this; that he makes waffles not because he is forced to do so, but because he freely conceives it, wants it, and loves it."
|
|
|
25 Aug 2003, 18:41
|
#3
|
Ball
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 4,410
|
Atlantis?
__________________
#linux
|
|
|
25 Aug 2003, 18:41
|
#4
|
Not Dark or Handsome
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Cwmbru
Posts: 2,588
|
Monaco?
__________________
"You can't drink a pint of Bovril."
|
|
|
25 Aug 2003, 18:49
|
#5
|
fascinated by bridges!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Norwegiensis
Posts: 919
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Snurx
Are you refering to the fact that we have 700 milliard on account?
Or the fact that the "pension-debt-allready" (so it's going to incerease) for the generation older then "us", is allready at 3000 milliard or so?
(Numbers out of my head, might be terribly wrong)
|
Yeah well we'll have to do something about those pensioners, ourselves counted. We'll have to work till we're 80 but so must most of Europe in the future anyway.
Matrim
__________________
Holy smoke.
|
|
|
25 Aug 2003, 19:01
|
#6
|
The Twilight of the Gods
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 23,481
|
Quote:
Originally posted by queball
Atlantis?
|
Tanks of Atlantis!
|
|
|
25 Aug 2003, 20:10
|
#7
|
Condemned to RP
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,654
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Matrim
Yeah well we'll have to do something about those pensioners, ourselves counted. We'll have to work till we're 80 but so must most of Europe in the future anyway.
Matrim
|
Not us
|
|
|
25 Aug 2003, 20:14
|
#8
|
Gubbish
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: #FoW
Posts: 2,323
|
The US?
__________________
Gubble gubble gubble gubble
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 15:50
|
#9
|
Gone
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 14,656
|
Quote:
Originally posted by W
The US?
|
Isn't The US national debt rather immense? (Possibly one of the largest in the west if not the world, I'm thinking.)
Last edited by Marilyn Manson; 26 Aug 2003 at 16:14.
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 16:21
|
#10
|
cynic
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Bishop Auckland Co. Durham
Posts: 8,809
|
the US national debt is horrifically big :/
__________________
lazy
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 16:26
|
#12
|
cynic
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Bishop Auckland Co. Durham
Posts: 8,809
|
that only mentiones their external debt and is therefore misleading
__________________
lazy
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 16:31
|
#13
|
Ball
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 4,410
|
Yeah, it depends how you measure it. The biggest figure I can find is $34 trillion. Bigger means more reliable.
__________________
#linux
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 16:41
|
#14
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,290
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
Isn't The US national debt rather immense? (Possibly one of the largest in the west if not the world, I'm thinking.)
|
given the fact that the us also has the biggest GNP in the western world, that is to be expected and doesnt matter that much.
more worring is bushs deficit per year, which currently is somewhere between 4-5% of the GNP i think.
edit: after a short look at queballs link: the national dept of the us is $6.2 trillion. looking at the world fact book tells me the GNP of the us is $10.4 trillion, this means the national dept are about 60% of GNP. pretty normal data, some european countries would be very happy if their national dept would be that low.
BUT if bush goes on like this, things will most likely become a lot worse.
__________________
im not tolerant, i just dont care.
Last edited by wu_trax; 26 Aug 2003 at 16:49.
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 16:44
|
#15
|
Klaatu barada nikto
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota
Posts: 3,237
|
Quote:
Originally posted by queball
Bigger means more reliable.
|
In that case, let's fabricate more reliable numbers!
__________________
The Ottawa Citizen and Southam News wish to apologize for our apology to Mark Steyn, published Oct. 22. In correcting the incorrect statements about Mr. Steyn published Oct. 15, we incorrectly published the incorrect correction. We accept and regret that our original regrets were unacceptable and we apologize to Mr. Steyn for any distress caused by our previous apology.
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 16:48
|
#16
|
Gone
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 14,656
|
Quote:
Originally posted by wu_trax
given the fact that the us also has the biggest GNP in the western world, that is to be expected and doesnt matter that much.
|
Some level of debt is expected, but the US' is absolutely gargantuan.
Huge spending on defence + big spending domestically = not all that good for balancing the books, even if you are the biggest economy on the planet.
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 16:50
|
#17
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,290
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
Some level of debt is expected, but the US' is absolutely gargantuan.
Huge spending on defence + big spending domestically = not all that good for balancing the books, even if you are the biggest economy on the planet.
|
i edited my post. up till now, the us data isnt all that bad, but it seems to become worse.
__________________
im not tolerant, i just dont care.
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 17:00
|
#18
|
share the <3
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 2,709
|
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 17:04
|
#19
|
mmm.. pills
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,152
|
__________________
CSS : the result of letting artists design something only an engineer should touch.
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 17:05
|
#20
|
share the <3
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 2,709
|
yah but they make so much money that the deficit is more important than the debt.
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 17:07
|
#21
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,290
|
especially if you dont have other to pay for them. (like in the last gulf war)
__________________
im not tolerant, i just dont care.
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 21:56
|
#22
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,290
|
__________________
im not tolerant, i just dont care.
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 22:00
|
#23
|
Ball
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 4,410
|
now an Anti-Bush thread.
__________________
#linux
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 22:02
|
#24
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 8,476
|
this thread is now about how we wouldnt have any problems under the gold standard
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 22:09
|
#25
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,290
|
Quote:
Originally posted by queball
now an Anti-Bush thread.
|
i can turn EVERYTHING into a) us-bashing or b) a pro-eu-thread
__________________
im not tolerant, i just dont care.
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 22:10
|
#26
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,290
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Nodrog
this thread is now about how we wouldnt have any problems under the gold standard
|
we wouldnt have the same problems, but hundrets of far worse ones instead.
__________________
im not tolerant, i just dont care.
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 22:13
|
#27
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 8,476
|
Quote:
Originally posted by wu_trax
we wouldnt have the same problems, but hundrets of far worse ones instead.
|
list plz
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 22:14
|
#28
|
share the <3
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 2,709
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Nodrog
list plz
|
people shaving money
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 22:16
|
#29
|
Ball
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 4,410
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Nusselt
people shaving money
|
You're thinking of the bald standard.
__________________
#linux
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 22:17
|
#30
|
share the <3
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 2,709
|
Quote:
Originally posted by queball
You're thinking of the bald standard.
|
im going bald.
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 22:17
|
#31
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,290
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Nodrog
list plz
|
im off to bed now, but for one thing:
assmume economical growth, but no new gold -> more goods, but no more money -> lower prices (=deflation) -> people start safing money -> end of economical growth
adjusting the amount of money in circulation to how much of a certain metal an country owns is a VERY bad idea.
__________________
im not tolerant, i just dont care.
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 22:33
|
#32
|
Gubbish
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: #FoW
Posts: 2,323
|
Quote:
Originally posted by wu_trax
im off to bed now, but for one thing:
assmume economical growth, but no new gold -> more goods, but no more money -> lower prices (=deflation) -> people start safing money -> end of economical growth
adjusting the amount of money in circulation to how much of a certain metal an country owns is a VERY bad idea.
|
You know the best measurement of economical growth?
How much on average you make by investing money.
An average investment will ALWAYS pay off more than simply sitting on your posessions, even if those posessions is gold or paper money.
Until Nodrog asked, you hade NO specifics, did you, and when he asked you jsut pulled something out of your ass that sounded half-plausible?
__________________
Gubble gubble gubble gubble
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 22:37
|
#33
|
share the <3
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 2,709
|
i dont get it
|
|
|
26 Aug 2003, 23:44
|
#34
|
Miles Teg
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Dom City
Posts: 5,192
|
niue
__________________
Audentes Fortuna Iuvat
|
|
|
27 Aug 2003, 00:07
|
#35
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Confœderatio Helvetica
Posts: 323
|
Quote:
Originally posted by wu_trax
assmume economical growth, but no new gold -> more goods, but no more money -> lower prices (=deflation)
|
Wrong.
Quote:
Originally posted by wu_trax
-> people start safing money -> end of economical growth
|
Wrong.
|
|
|
27 Aug 2003, 00:48
|
#36
|
Das Scoot
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 788
|
Quote:
Originally posted by queball
Yeah, it depends how you measure it. The biggest figure I can find is $34 trillion. Bigger means more reliable.
|
This year is apparently the biggest budget deficit EVER, to the tune of $480 Billion iirc. And they haven't even added in the costs of the Iraq war yet. There was a graph of the past ten years, it was going down steadily, even into the black for a few years, then after 2000....HUGE ****ing drop back into the red.
Saw it on fark, find it yerselfs if you care.
__________________
n00b since Jan 11th, 2001
I don't really know what I'm doing here
|
|
|
27 Aug 2003, 08:54
|
#37
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,290
|
Quote:
Originally posted by W
You know the best measurement of economical growth?
How much on average you make by investing money.
An average investment will ALWAYS pay off more than simply sitting on your posessions, even if those posessions is gold or paper money.
Until Nodrog asked, you hade NO specifics, did you, and when he asked you jsut pulled something out of your ass that sounded half-plausible?
|
if prices drop and people assume this goes on in the future, people spend as little as possible.
if you would need a new car and you realize that that car you want will be cheaper in a few month, would you buy it today or wait? if everyone does this, there is no way for economical growth.
its true that the gold-standard is somewhat irrelevant for the current topic, bush would have the same problem, he still will have to pay the interest rates in the future, no matter if there is gold or not, but that doesnt change the fact that the whole idea of a gold standard is ridicoulus
( and here is some more info if anyone doesnt belife me
__________________
im not tolerant, i just dont care.
|
|
|
27 Aug 2003, 14:18
|
#38
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Confœderatio Helvetica
Posts: 323
|
Quote:
Originally posted by wu_trax
if prices drop and people assume this goes on in the future, people spend as little as possible.
if you would need a new car and you realize that that car you want will be cheaper in a few month, would you buy it today or wait? if everyone does this, there is no way for economical growth.
|
Sorry, but you are wrong.
Saving is the best way for (future) economic growth. People trade off today's wealth with economic growth of tomorrow. When People save their money, interest rates decrease and firms will invest more, resulting in economic growth.
Read some Introduction to Macroeconomics.
|
|
|
27 Aug 2003, 14:51
|
#39
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,290
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Entium
Sorry, but you are wrong.
Saving is the best way for (future) economic growth. People trade off today's wealth with economic growth of tomorrow. When People save their money, interest rates decrease and firms will invest more, resulting in economic growth.
Read some Introduction to Macroeconomics.
|
that fully depends on how much of their income people save. im not talking about saving a part of your income, but about saving a large part of your income, or in other words as much as possible, because a) people think times will become worse or b) people think they will get the same goods for a lower price in the future. thats causes deflation and is a very bad thing (see japan in the last 10 years).
why should companies invest if people dont buy stuff? in that case there are no customers -> prices drop -> companies fire people -> people have less money -> less customers -> companies fire even more people -> etc.
__________________
im not tolerant, i just dont care.
|
|
|
27 Aug 2003, 15:03
|
#40
|
Raaaaaaaah!
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,296
|
Quote:
Originally posted by wu_trax
thats causes deflation and is a very bad thing (see japan in the last 10 years
|
Why is deflation such a bad thing ? Moderate deflation like moderate inflation isn't a huge problem it's just you scare mongers with your half assed understanding of economics crying "OH NO PRICES ARE RISING/FALLING THE WORLD IS GOING TO END !!11!" which causes the problems.
__________________
Hicks
Mercury & Solace
Always [Fury]
|
|
|
27 Aug 2003, 15:07
|
#41
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,290
|
again, if you can buy a good today for a price and if you could wait a few month and get the same product for a lower price, what would you do?
this has nothing to do with beeing scared, deflation stops economical growth.
__________________
im not tolerant, i just dont care.
|
|
|
27 Aug 2003, 15:09
|
#42
|
Gone
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 14,656
|
I don't understand economics.
|
|
|
27 Aug 2003, 15:27
|
#43
|
Gubbish
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: #FoW
Posts: 2,323
|
Quote:
Originally posted by wu_trax
if prices drop and people assume this goes on in the future, people spend as little as possible.
if you would need a new car and you realize that that car you want will be cheaper in a few month, would you buy it today or wait? if everyone does this, there is no way for economical growth.
its true that the gold-standard is somewhat irrelevant for the current topic, bush would have the same problem, he still will have to pay the interest rates in the future, no matter if there is gold or not, but that doesnt change the fact that the whole idea of a gold standard is ridicoulus
(and here is some more info if anyone doesnt belife me
|
I originally wrote a "YOUR STUPID HAHA" post, but changed my mind and wrote what I did, as a way out for you, admitting that you have no clue and is pulling **** out of your ass. Now you're pushing onwards instead?
What do you think happen with the money that people NOT use on cars? You think they're somehow taken out of circulation? If people put their money in the bank, are the money locked away so they can't be invested?
ok, incase you actually are this stupid: THE MONEY IS INVESTED NO MATTER WHAT, WHETHER IN A CAR OR IN THE BUISNESSES THAT THE BANKS THINK WILL MAKE MONEY. IN NO WAY DOES MORE CONSUMERISM INCREASE ECONOMIC GROWTH!!!
Man.
__________________
Gubble gubble gubble gubble
|
|
|
27 Aug 2003, 15:33
|
#44
|
Gone
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 14,656
|
Quote:
Originally posted by W
IN NO WAY DOES MORE CONSUMERISM INCREASE ECONOMIC GROWTH!!!
|
What does?
|
|
|
27 Aug 2003, 15:33
|
#45
|
Clerk
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 13,940
|
Quote:
Originally posted by W
IN NO WAY DOES MORE CONSUMERISM INCREASE ECONOMIC GROWTH!!!
|
I think the point is that the "economic chain" (from producers to wholesalers to retailers to consumers) depends (to some extent) on consumers buying products. The situation in Japan (at least partially) was that it was more profitable to invest the money abroad rather than on the tiny margins that could be made domestically.
Few businesses wish to increase their capacity in slow times, even if they can borrow money incredibly cheaply (with interest rates low in Japan for some time). The money will not sit in a vault, no - but it seems that it funded (very indirectly) some of the private credit splurges experienced by the US in the 90's.
|
|
|
27 Aug 2003, 15:34
|
#46
|
The Twilight of the Gods
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 23,481
|
Quote:
Originally posted by wu_trax
again, if you can buy a good today for a price and if you could wait a few month and get the same product for a lower price, what would you do?
this has nothing to do with beeing scared, deflation stops economical growth.
|
Why would anyone buy ANY computer products then?
They all get reduced in cost by a staggering amount every few months.
|
|
|
27 Aug 2003, 15:36
|
#47
|
share the <3
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 2,709
|
Quote:
Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
Why would anyone buy ANY computer products then?
They all get reduced in cost by a staggering amount every few months.
|
yeah but thats depreciation which is different to deflation
|
|
|
27 Aug 2003, 15:39
|
#48
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,290
|
Quote:
Originally posted by W
I originally wrote a "YOUR STUPID HAHA" post, but changed my mind and wrote what I did, as a way out for you, admitting that you have no clue and is pulling **** out of your ass. Now you're pushing onwards instead?
What do you think happen with the money that people NOT use on cars? You think they're somehow taken out of circulation? If people put their money in the bank, are the money locked away so they can't be invested?
ok, incase you actually are this stupid: THE MONEY IS INVESTED NO MATTER WHAT, WHETHER IN A CAR OR IN THE BUISNESSES THAT THE BANKS THINK WILL MAKE MONEY. IN NO WAY DOES MORE CONSUMERISM INCREASE ECONOMIC GROWTH!!!
Man.
|
certainly this money will be invested in a market with no growth.
in what should the banks or whoever invest their money, if their are very few customers?
__________________
im not tolerant, i just dont care.
|
|
|
27 Aug 2003, 15:42
|
#49
|
Clerk
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 13,940
|
Quote:
Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
Why would anyone buy ANY computer products then?
|
The medium term productivity (utility) gains are seen to outweigh any changes in prices.
A business could have saved a mint by waiting until today (say) to buy all their desktop computers or automated payroll system, rather than investing in the 70's or 80's. However, they would have almost certainly gone out of business in the meantime so it seems like a wise investement.
This utility argument is true of a lot of products - a delivery firm will not do without their only van simply because they think they can get a better deal next year. They may however, delay investment if they have a choice (e.g. to buy an entirely new van to expand, etc).
This isn't necessarily to do with changes in price on the investment itself, but of fear of lower income (via depressed prices). Why would I take on a $50,000 loan to expand if I expect my businesses takings to drop over the next 12 months?
|
|
|
27 Aug 2003, 15:53
|
#50
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,290
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Dante Hicks
I think the point is that the "economic chain" (from producers to wholesalers to retailers to consumers) depends (to some extent) on consumers buying products. The situation in Japan (at least partially) was that it was more profitable to invest the money abroad rather than on the tiny margins that could be made domestically.
Few businesses wish to increase their capacity in slow times, even if they can borrow money incredibly cheaply (with interest rates low in Japan for some time). The money will not sit in a vault, no - but it seems that it funded (very indirectly) some of the private credit splurges experienced by the US in the 90's.
|
thanks, exactly my point. im not saying that noone should save any money, in fact some percentage has to be saved to replace /increase current investments, BUT if the level increase too much (which is exactly what would happen in case of deflation) you get a shrinking economy.
__________________
im not tolerant, i just dont care.
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 23:27.
| |