Mother of all debt problems.

[Kilmer]

So, to what do you attribute the 90s economy?

I am not sure what you are asking. Are you talking about the "new" economy that did not exist? Are you talking about deregulation and mergers that limited consumer choice and raised, not lowered prices? Are you talking about the environment of corruption that led to the largest bankruptcies in history?

I guess I don't understand your question and what it has to do with our present governments fiscal irresponsibilities.

[wskin44]

Last night I was watching Congressional hearings regarding the economy. One panel member explained that the deficit reductions of the nineties were caused by the peace dividend of reductions in defense expenditures when the Soviet Union collapsed. Everyone in office tried to claim credit, but it had nothing to do with Clinton or the rising Republican tide.

His point was that reducing expenses is the only way out of this mess. Unfortunetly it was pointed out that 20 years ago discretionery spending was 2/3 of the budget. Now it is only 1/3 and will shrink to about 10% of the budget in the near future. So how do you cut expenses?

Getting into the non-discretionery spending will be the only way. That means Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

I have been saying for some time that we have screwed our kids by borrowing money and committing them to paying it off and paying for our comfy retirements. I have also been saying that in time our kids will have no choice but to return the favor and reduce our benefits.

Al Gore and John Kerry ran on economic platforms that played the old class warfare tunes from sixties. They didn't have the vision to see that the coming divide is between the generations, not economic/social classes.

[Kilmer17]

I am not sure what you are asking. Are you talking about the "new" economy that did not exist? Are you talking about deregulation and mergers that limited consumer choice and raised, not lowered prices? Are you talking about the environment of corruption that led to the largest bankruptcies in history?

I guess I don't understand your question and what it has to do with our present governments fiscal irresponsibilities.

You said the statement was a boldface lie. I say- PROVE IT.

Show me how it's wrong (I wont get into the meaning of lie) , and offer an alternative.

[Kilmer]

You said the statement was a boldface lie. I say- PROVE IT.

Show me how it's wrong (I wont get into the meaning of lie) , and offer an alternative.

I don't have the burden proof. The person who makes the outrageous claims that some document written by Delay and Gingrich had anything to do with the economic growth in the 90's. There is no documented evidence that the contract was anything more than a political ploy designed to help Republicans in congressional elections. Some idea's transferred into law in drastically changed form, but what the hell do they have to do with economic prosparity. Fact is, the only really helpful idea in the contract (balanced budget) was so crippled that it has allowed this congress and President to completely ignore it.

[Kilmer17]

I don't have the burden proof. The person who makes the outrageous claims that some document written by Delay and Gingrich had anything to do with the economic growth in the 90's. There is no documented evidence that the contract was anything more than a political ploy designed to help Republicans in congressional elections. Some idea's transferred into law in drastically changed form, but what the hell do they have to do with economic prosparity. Fact is, the only really helpful idea in the contract (balanced budget) was so crippled that it has allowed this congress and President to completely ignore it.

That's a convenient way of justifying a "You're a liar" type drive by post.

Thanks for proving my original point which was-

IS NOT IS NOT IS NOT.

[DjTj]

Enough of this Kilmer vs. Kilmer sideshow ... the surplus of the 90's is easy to explain:

Reagan defeated the Communists, Bush Sr. and Clinton raised taxes, Al Gore invented the internet, and corporate America inflated their profits - everyone happy now?

[Mister Happy]

Last night I was watching Congressional hearings regarding the economy. One panel member explained that the deficit reductions of the nineties were caused by the peace dividend of reductions in defense expenditures when the Soviet Union collapsed. Everyone in office tried to claim credit, but it had nothing to do with Clinton or the rising Republican tide.

Surprisingly, Congress has an entire hearing for the economy and they can't even figure out a simple fact that they can get from their very own budget website. Actually it's not that surprising. They don't care. They just want to make it seem like they are doing something without actually doing something. Typical politicians.

There were no spending cuts. Spending increased as much as it ever has during that time of surpluses.

There was only a surplus because the economy boomed so fast that the government didn't have time to spend it all. It didn't take them long to catch up. Unfortunately, by then, the boom was gone, and now we have record deficits.

[Kilmer]

That's a convenient way of justifying a "You're a liar" type drive by post.

Thanks for proving my original point which was-

IS NOT IS NOT IS NOT.

Great point. You are as eloquent as usual.

[Lifelong Skins Fan]

Paying off the national debt tomorrow is impossible so why even bring it up, may as well argue that if we vanished from the earth are were replaced with crab people Mexico would be screwed. No matter how you want to look at it, at the very least paying out interest to our many eager foriegn bankers is a poor way to spend tax payer money. Deficits are the products of irresponsible fiscal policy. Borrowing because you can't stop spending more then you earn is always bad, even at the personal finance level.

QUOTE]

Are you serious? There is a reason universities teach macroeconomics as well as microeconomics. Theories germain to personal finances are not applicable when discussing global economics.

You are correct that we need to spend less than we make to reverse the trend. What this means is curtailing entitlements, ending pork-barrel spending by congress and b reaking the cycle we have created of enabling segments of the population through entitlements.

[tex]

[source: MSN Money, Oct. 4]

HEDGE FUND MANAGER BLASTS GREENSPAN AS THE "MOST INCOMPETENT, IRRESPONSIBLE FED CHAIRMAN OF ALL TIME," the "world´s biggest serial bubble blower" who is culpable for the looming blow-out of the financial system. The stock market bubble of late 1990s was created by Fed´s easy money policy, not high-tech, through the "practice of bail-outs and market cheerleading," says Bill Fleckenstein. Greenspan also precipitated an even bigger, more dangerous housing bubble. "[T]he fall-out from the housing boom, the unfinished business from the stock boom, and all the derivatives he´s championed for his beloved deregulated financial system, will combine to hit with full force somewhere down the road."

[tex]

http://www.fortune.com/fortune/investing/articles/0,15114,1117911-1,00.html

The king of real estate's cashing out

Tom Barrack is selling most of his U.S. portfolio. Maybe you should be nervous too.

October 22, 2005: 6:05 PM EDT

By Shawn Tully, Fortune Senior Writer

KING OF REAL ESTATE

I'm Tom Barrack and I'm Getting Out

The world's best real estate investor has made billions in the U.S. market. Now he's cashing out and buying overseas. Should you cash out too?

By Shawn Tully

Tom Barrack is driving a dusty Chevy Suburban around his 1,200-acre mountain ranch near Santa Barbara, Calif. Nestled between the Ronald Reagan estate and Michael Jackson's Neverland, Barrack's spread is a medley of vineyards, pastures, and paddocks. Barrack cruises past the lovingly restored manor house, a rambling adobe aerie framed by allées of cabernet franc, then weaves through a cluster of stables sheltering 60 horses that munch homegrown wild oats. Even in this magical setting, real estate is never far from his thoughts. He stops the Suburban at his favorite spot, a vast polo field planted with delicate, lime-hued Bermuda grass that's easy on the horses' hooves. Then Barrack launches into a parable. "I feel totally safe playing polo on a field full of pros," says the bronzed 58-year-old. "But when amateurs are all over the field, someone can get killed. They have more guts than brains. They charge after every ball and don't know when to hold back." It's the same with the U.S. real estate market right now: "There's too much money chasing too few good deals, with too much debt and too few brains." The amateurs are going to get trampled, he explains, taking seasoned horsemen, who should get off the turf, down with them. Says Barrack: "That's why I'm getting out."

Investors, take heed. Barrack may be an amateur in polo, but when it comes to judging markets, he's the ultimate pro. Arguably the best real estate investor on the planet today, he runs a $25 billion portfolio of trophy assets, from the Raffles hotel chain in Asia to the Aga Khan's former resort in Sardinia to Resorts International, the largest private gaming company in the U.S. Barrack's Colony Capital of Los Angeles, one of the largest private-equity firms devoted solely to real estate, has racked up returns of 21% annually since 1990, handing investors, chiefly pension funds and college endowments, 17% after all fees. Barrack has done deals with Saudi princes, Texas oilmen, a Caribbean dictator—even with Donald Trump. He bought the Fukuoka Dome, Japan's Yankee Stadium, in part because he calculated that the titanium in the retractable roof was worth as much as the purchase price. He bought and sold New York City's Plaza hotel, turning a fast $160 million profit, as well as London's tony Savoy chain, netting another $270 million. Even Trump defers: "Tom has an amazing vision of the future, an ability to see what's going to happen that no one else can match."