deejaydana Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 Link: http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2009/1116/opinions-great-depression-economy-on-my-mind.html Ron Paul comes off a bit extreme at times with his various solutions to what ills our country (though I still agree with many of his opinions). Still, I can't imagine you'd hear many elected officials in Washington with the stones to offer up with such candor these opinions on where we're at like he regularly does. This is a good companion piece/counterpoint to the thread yesterday about how we're back on track economically and how the economy is growing. Government intervention cannot lead to economic growth. Where does the money come from for Tarp (Treasury's program to buy bad bank paper), the stimulus handouts and the cash for clunkers? It can come only from taxpayers, from sales of Treasury debt or through the printing of new money. Paying for these programs out of tax revenues is pure redistribution; it takes money out of one person's pocket and gives it to someone else without creating any new wealth. Besides, tax revenues have fallen drastically as unemployment has risen, yet government spending continues to increase. As for Treasury debt, the Chinese and other foreign investors are more and more reluctant to buy it, denominated as it is in depreciating dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoot Point Really Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 IMO, that's sound advice.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckus Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 I am tired out people trying to ****ing stand on a soap box and tell everyone that they know what is going to happen with the economy. The real truth is people don't know. In his article he says "Green shoots of recovery are supposedly popping up all around the country, and the economy is expected to resume growing soon at an annual rate of 3% to 4%. Many of these are the same people who insisted that the economy would continue growing last year, even while it was clear that we were already in the beginning stages of a recession." Well many of your followers were the ones telling everyone 6 months ago we were headed for the second Great Depression and that the stock market would be at 2,000. Sooooo....lets hold off on pretending anybody knows what is going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madison Redskin Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 Well many of your followers were the ones telling everyone 6 months ago we were headed for the second Great Depression and that the stock market would be at 2,000. Sooooo....lets hold off on pretending anybody knows what is going on. I swear that some of them actually want to see the economy go into the ***** just so they can say, "I told you so, we should all be libertarians." When the Dow was picking up, they said, "dead cat bounce." When the GDP showed signs of growth, they said, "the economy is still fundamentally unsound." When the unemployment rolls fall, they will surely say that we are still headed towards some calamity. As you pointed out Duckus, it's almost impossible to predict what is going to happen with the economy. Yet some ideologues will do their best to persuade everyone that The End is near and we should all stock up on canned goods, shotgun shells, and gold bars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgundy Burner Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 Duckus, when I see youngsters (such as you) trying to say that seasoned investors don't know, it's really funny to see. At my age, I'm pretty sure that I will stick with my investment advisors - who just happen to think this is a false recovery and some very difficult times are coming. But don't take my word for it. Don't take the advice of those who handle my portfolios. Don't take the advice of Dr. Paul. Oh, and don't take the advice of George Soros. I disagree with his politics, but tend to listen to him when talking about investments. http://pragcap.com/the-guru-outlook-george-soros-says If you want to really learn about what is going on, this would be a good place to start. http://www.caseyresearch.com/library/articles/3037/when-will-inflation-really-hit-us?/ A couple of nuggets to chew on... Check the performance of the Wilshire 5000. Earnings are at about 40 times value and dividends are a little over 1%. That's not a good sign of things to come. Watch Citi/CitiGroup. How ugly will it get? Just watch this baby for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsFactor Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 I love the don't worry be happy crowd. RP is right 1000% more often than any other politician. Just saying. Track record actually means something with this guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madison Redskin Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 I love the don't worry be happy crowd. I'm not in that crowd. I have serious concerns about the economy. I'm just not going to listen to the "check out my new backyard bunker" crowd. As for RP being right, the guy is an ideologue. People who view everything through the prism of an ideology are usually pretty stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 Duckus, when I see youngsters (such as you) trying to say that seasoned investors don't know, it's really funny to see. The truth is, they don't, and the research shows it. From Larry Swedroe's Lessons the Market Taught Us in 2008: Lesson 9: There is a great likelihood that each time there is a crisis, some guru will have forecasted it with amazing accuracy. But that ignores two important facts. The first problem is that even blind squirrels occasionally will find acorns. In other words, there are tens of thousands of gurus making forecasts all the time.Given the number trying, randomly, we should expect some to make accurate forecasts. The crash of October 1987 was forecast with amazing accuracy by a little known analyst named Elaine Garzarelli. Having made such a prescient forecast she was immediately elevated to guru status and everyone was seeking her opinions. Unfortunately, her subsequent forecasts were well off the mark and the returns she produced as a fund manager were so poor that she was fired in May of 1996. Each crisis produces its own “Garzarelli.” This crisis produced Nouriel Roubini, professor of economics and international business at NYU’s Stern’s School of Business. A problem with Roubini (and almost all forecasters) is that we don’t know how many other forecasts he has made and what is the track record of those forecasts. Another problem is that the evidence on the accuracy of such forecasts is best summed up by the findings of William Sherden, author of The Fortune Sellers. Sherden studied the performance of seven forecasting professions: investment experts, meteorology, technology assessment, demography, futurology, organizational planning, and economics. He concluded that while none of the experts were very expert, the folks we most often make jokes about—weathermen—actually had the best predictive powers. Sherden also provided these insights: He said that the First Law of Economics was that for every economist, there is an equal and opposite economist—for every bullish economist, there is a bearish one. His Second Law of Economics was that they are both likely to be wrong. Sherden’s research found that there are no economic forecasters who consistently lead the pack in forecasting accuracy.(3) Perhaps the most interesting thing about Roubini is that despite his forecast he revealed that his retirement account had a 100 percent allocation to equities. It seems that Roubini knows enough to ignore his own forecasts as they are not likely to lead to abnormal profits. There's a reason that there's an old saying... "Economists have correctly predicted 9 out of the last 5 recessions" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsFactor Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 As for RP being right, the guy is an ideologue. People who view everything through the prism of an ideology are usually pretty stupid. And I would usually agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 I'm not in that crowd. I have serious concerns about the economy. I'm just not going to listen to the "check out my new backyard bunker" crowd.As for RP being right, the guy is an ideologue. People who view everything through the prism of an ideology are usually pretty stupid. one persons ideology may be another's core principles. The main thing he is adamant on is his oath to follow the constitution. doesnt make him an ideolog, it simply makes him principled (even when he is bashed and attacked for it) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madison Redskin Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 one persons ideology may be another's core principles.The main thing he is adamant on is his oath to follow the constitution. doesnt make him an ideolog, it simply makes him principled (even when he is bashed and attacked for it) I actually believe that, as a general matter, government works best when it does the least. However, RP appears to believe that the government ALWAYS works best when it does the least. He views nearly every social, political, military, and economic issue the same - the answer is almost always less government. My problem with ideologues like RP is they usually fail to view each issue on the merits. Instead, they seem to twist things around and say to themselves, "Now how can I use this problem to advance my ideology?" or "How can I square this with my ideology?" RP is no different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 I love the don't worry be happy crowd. So if you take a pessimistic view of the long term future of the country, what specific financial actions are you taking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Sick Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 I was supposed to have a meeting with Ron Paul last week. I hear he is setting up a housing development in Montana, consisting entirely of wooden shacks! Manifestos and hooded sweatshirts NOT required... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 I was supposed to have a meeting with Ron Paul last week. I hear he is setting up a housing development in Montana, consisting entirely of wooden shacks! Manifestos and hooded sweatshirts NOT required... One of the more stupid posts I've seen here. makes literally no sense.:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 I actually believe that, as a general matter, government works best when it does the least. However, RP appears to believe that the government ALWAYS works best when it does the least. He views nearly every social, political, military, and economic issue the same - the answer is almost always less government. My problem with ideologues like RP is they usually fail to view each issue on the merits. Instead, they seem to twist things around and say to themselves, "Now how can I use this problem to advance my ideology?" or "How can I square this with my ideology?" RP is no different. Yes, he definitely has a small federal government is best point of view. It isnt ideology, again, it's that he respects and follows the constitution and the principles that helped establish it as our form of government. It was written to limit federal power to very certain things on purpose. You can disagree with his point of view, as I'm sure even he would encourage you to do as a free citizen. He views each and every vote through the only prism that is required of him by his oath. That prism is the constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailYeah Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 One of the more stupid posts I've seen here. makes literally no sense.:doh: Yeah, I dont get it. Something about anti-gov cults or something. As for RP and the rest, they never really seem to address what would have happened if the government did exactly what they wanted it to do at the begining of the year, which is of course, nothing. They never really color in the link between doing nothing and prosperity during a financial crisis quite possibly deeper than the Great Depression. Yeah, we get it, free market and all. I just think there would be far more people pissed off and out of work right now if the government had done zippo. Call it a hunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 Yeah, I dont get it. Something about anti-gov cults or something.As for RP and the rest, they never really seem to address what would have happened if the government did exactly what they wanted it to do at the begining of the year, which is of course, nothing. They never really color in the link between doing nothing and prosperity during a financial crisis quite possibly deeper than the Great Depression. Yeah, we get it, free market and all. I just think there would be far more people pissed off and out of work right now if the government had done zippo. Call it a hunch. Yes, if "do nothing" means dont go even deeper into debt. Reality is that he never really took a "do nothing" stance on ideas to repair the economy. His ideas were just a different approach than those proposed by the left and the neo-cons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 RP is right 1000% more often than any other politician. Only to you and other fanatical libertarians. The rest of us recognize that if you throw enough **** at the wall, something is bound to stick. Every libertarian I know is delusional. Sadly, that includes a dear friend and another person who is a friend of the family who is starting to sound so bat **** crazy he's scaring me. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 Too bad the constitution is a living document. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 Too bad the constitution is a living document. absolutely, through the amendment process. Otherwise, it is the core rules of the road for what our governments power was designed to be limited to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 My portfolio has been doing a lot better since the last spring. Advisor says its not a false recovery...but stressed patience.....but that it is coming back. We'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 absolutely, through the amendment process.Otherwise, it is the core rules of the road for what our governments power was designed to be limited to. So you suggest we should have had 1000 + amendments already? Or should we continue to allow the judiciary branch to intrepret law and the legislative branch to pass them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 Only to you and other fanatical libertarians. The rest of us recognize that if you throw enough **** at the wall, something is bound to stick.Every libertarian I know is delusional. Sadly, that includes a dear friend and another person who is a friend of the family who is starting to sound so bat **** crazy he's scaring me. :doh: It's rather funny that every time he's been proven correct folks say the same thing about "throw enough poo at the wall". Over time, it because rather lame and weak. At one point, an intelligent person may start to see that maybe, just maybe, he was onto something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 So you suggest we should have had 1000 + amendments already?Or should we continue to allow the judiciary branch to intrepret law and the legislative branch to pass them? I'd suggest that we follow the rule prescribed to us. If that means 1000 amendments, so be it. At least we'd have the proper course of action followed a thousand times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 I actually believe that, as a general matter, government works best when it does the least. However, RP appears to believe that the government ALWAYS works best when it does the least. He views nearly every social, political, military, and economic issue the same - the answer is almost always less government. My problem with ideologues like RP is they usually fail to view each issue on the merits. Instead, they seem to twist things around and say to themselves, "Now how can I use this problem to advance my ideology?" or "How can I square this with my ideology?" RP is no different. Exactly why one of my favorite quotes is... The people I distrust most are those who want to improve our lives but have only one course of action. - Frank Herbert And another is... Above all else, the mentat must be a generalist, not a specialist. It is wise to have decisions of great moment monitored by generalists. Experts and specialists lead you quickly into chaos. They are a source of useless nit-picking, the ferocious quibble over a comma. The mentat-generalist, on the other hand, should bring to decision-making a healthy common sense. He must not cut himself off from the broad sweep of what is happening in this universe. He must remain capable of saying: "There's no real mystery about this at the moment. This is what we want now. It may prove wrong later, but we'll correct that when we come to it." The mentat-generalist must understand that anything which we can identify as our universe is merely part of larger phenomena. But the expert looks backward; he looks into the narrow standards of his own specialty. The generalist looks outward; he looks for living principles, knowing full well that such principles change, that they develop. It is to the characteristics of change itself that the mentat-generalist must look. There can be no permanent catalogue of such change, no handbook or manual. You must look at it with as few preconceptions as possible, asking yourself: "Now what is this thing doing?" The Mentat Handbook - Frank Herbert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.