littledavesab Posted October 16, 2008 Report Share Posted October 16, 2008 Could a partial answer to the US's current problems be a more enlightened immegration policy. Having seen your bits taken from FSN on the population thread and considering the number of houses in the US lying empty, current unfavourable demographics and looming social security bills to be paid. Immigrants whowant to be productive could be an answer. But not to the car method of transportation and cost of oil imports !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dispassion Posted October 16, 2008 Report Share Posted October 16, 2008 Could a partial answer to the US's current problems be a more enlightened immegration policy. Having seen your bits taken from FSN on the population thread and considering the number of houses in the US lying empty, current unfavourable demographics and looming social security bills to be paid. Immigrants whowant to be productive could be an answer. But not to the car method of transportation and cost of oil imports !! I don't think it's a shortage of workers that the US is suffering from, it's a shortage of viable businesses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted October 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 17, 2008 I don't think it's a shortage of workers that the US is suffering from, it's a shortage of viable businesses. SURE. Too much money has been poured into malinvestments: Wars, transfer payments, McMansions, SUV's... these are all a drag on the economy, and divert scarce capital away from productive enterprise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littledavesab Posted October 17, 2008 Report Share Posted October 17, 2008 I don't think it's a shortage of workers that the US is suffering from, it's a shortage of viable businesses. Agreed. My suggestion would be a long term fix. But if you attracted the right kind of immigrants who want to start a business rather than those who want to collect social security. If you keep the bright IT students rather than rejecting them once they have completed their IT course. Longer term this would feed back into the economy. However at present US Politics seems to be going in the other direction it seems? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted December 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 17, 2008 WRONG PRICE SIGNAL? No wonder Americans went crazy building McMansions in the outer-rings People were slow to catch on that the game was changing. Because they kept building "large", they are now suffering big losses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No6 Posted December 17, 2008 Report Share Posted December 17, 2008 SURE. Too much money has been poured into malinvestments: Wars, transfer payments, McMansions, SUV's... these are all a drag on the economy, and divert scarce capital away from productive enterprise The US has been and still is very innovative, the trouble is the lure and greed of malinvestment always seems to get the better of them. That, and a political system that is happy to keep quite when it feels the going is good, but then feels the need to engage in mass moral hazard when it turns bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted January 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2009 Immigrants who want to be productive could be an answer. How do you restrict those "non-productive" immigrants? The US has been and still is very innovative, the trouble is the lure and greed of malinvestment always seems to get the better of them. That, and a political system that is happy to keep quite when it feels the going is good, but then feels the need to engage in mass moral hazard when it turns bad. The right price signals (like a higher oil price, thanks to a gasoline tax, can help to limit malinvestment. But it takes courage, foresight, and a political battle to introduce it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowrentyieldmakessense(honest!) Posted January 2, 2009 Report Share Posted January 2, 2009 The right price signals (like a higher oil price, thanks to a gasoline tax, can help to limit malinvestment. But it takes courage, foresight, and a political battle to introduce it seems a bit keynesian (rather than Austrian) to me from todays daily reckoning So, it turns to another great economist – Keynes. Instead of colluding to fix the price of money, Keynes said governments should make up for the lack of private spending with public spending. That is, instead of allowing consumers to use their resources as they wished, politicians should divert resources to their own pet projects. In its idealized form, if the private sector found no use for a working man, for example, the feds should put him to work on some socially-useful project – such as building a bridge or picking up trash. Of course, if there are idle hands in an economy it’s because the feds have already distorted it. Typically, various government rules and safety nets make it difficult to adjust the price of labor downwards. So, when prices fall, labor rates become disproportionately high. Who’s going to pay a man $25 to make a gadget that sells for $15? No one. That is what causes unemployment. But rather than allow labor prices to fall, Keynes came up with a trick. Government should spend money, thus causing inflation. The rising prices will make labor seem relatively affordable again. But like all the tricks and quick-fixes in economics, Keynesianism causes more problems than it solves. Governments rarely have any genuine savings. So, in order to spend, they either have to take money away from other spenders ...or print it up. If they take it from other uses, the net gain, in theory, is zero. In practice, it is much less than zero, since most government spending is wasted. If it prints up the money, on the other hand, the inflationary effect is much greater...and ultimately ruinous. As we shall see...as the reckoning continues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littledavesab Posted January 2, 2009 Report Share Posted January 2, 2009 How do you restrict those "non-productive" immigrants? Difficult from a political angle possibly, as such moves tend to generate claims of politically incorrect (to say the least) from the opposition. I understand this point. Also the NAFTA /Mexican angle also I guess has an impact. However US could start by looking at its policies towards foreign students who have ended their studies. + by listening to Bill Gates. Of course BG may have a certain business angle which will slant his opinion but still. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/conte...68051089279.htm + Does not the US already operate a rather complicated immigration / Green Card system which limits immigration to those with a certain sum of $$$ in readies (I think?). A certain targeted loosening might be beneficial but again could be politically difficult in the midst of a recession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted March 26, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2009 US WILL AVOID OLD MISTAKES - and make new ones instead Wealth is sliding fast (This is nothing more than "fictitious wealth" getting written down) The Great Recession Economists generally agree this is the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, but they say despite pain, another depression isn't likely. EXCERPT: "One of the main reasons why economists think another depression could be avoided is that it will take more than just a sharp decline in consumer spending and household wealth to spark a depression. Even though household net worth has fallen a record $11 trillion, or 18%, during the course of this recession, the broader economy can weather such a shock. Historically, stock market crashes and bursting housing bubbles haven't necessarily led to depressions. It takes a variety of economic factors and policy decisions to turn a recession into something even more serious. "I don't know if you can make a causal link between a loss of wealth and a depression," said Lakshman Achuthan, managing director of Economic Cycle Research Institute. Learning lessons of the 1930s Significant policy changes since the 1930s will also cushion the blow. Unemployment insurance, Social Security payments and larger government at the federal, state and local levels keep money flowing into the economy even as consumers and businesses pull back on their own spending. "There's a lot more safeguards in place," said Keith Hembre, chief economist at First American Funds. Hembre said the $787 billion stimulus bill passed by Congress in February will also spur more economic activity down the road. In addition, the Federal Reserve, led by Great Depression expert Ben Bernanke, has pumped trillions of dollars into the economy with new lending programs the central bank has never tried before. That has swelled the supply of money. By way of contrast, the money supply tightened during the Great Depression. There were many other policy mistakes made in the 1930s that economists say are not being repeated today, including stiff tariffs that killed international trade and government imposed limits on prices and production levels. Even if Congress imposed "Buy American" provisions in the public works paid for by the stimulus bill, there is no call to move back to the strict protectionism of the 1930s or production and price controls." /more: http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/25/news/econo...isons/index.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted April 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 9, 2009 FIGURES FOR THE DOWNTURN - a Second leg Down? Debt Growth has been unhealthy: + Business-related debt is hovering at 50-70% of GDP (most of last 4 decades) + Household debt grew from below 50% (before mod-1980's) to 70% (2000) and 100% (2007) : HH debt now stands at $13.8 Trillion, 75% of which is home mortgages : From 2001-2007, HH Debt increased by $6.26 Trillion, a near double Household debt at 100% of GDP is not sutainable, and it must be reduced by repayments, or writedowns. To fall to 75% of GDP, then $3.4 Trillion will need to be reduced, and that might be 1/3 byr writedowns, and 2/3 by repayments Such massive repayments will mean that Us households will have to spend $2 trillion less, which is 11-14% of US GDP, Spread that over 5 years, and you will see 2- 3% knocked of GDP. Adn that's BEFORE the multiplier effect! MEANTIME, government debt is growing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbubb Posted May 19, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 THEY HAVENT STOPPED DIGGING YET... 'Tax Bomb' dead ahead: Former GAO chief says your taxes will double Yes, taxes will go up. Must. Why? Debt: federal, state, corporate, bank, pensions, personal. The hole just keeps getting deeper, bigger. Well over $100 trillion of debt is being piled on future generations, while our GDP is only $15 trillion annually. Reagan was right, "government is the problem," both the GOP and the Dems. Imagine doubling your taxes: That's what David Walker, the former U.S. comptroller general and GAO chief, recently said on CNN: "The federal government has spent more money than it takes in at an increasing rate. Total federal debt almost doubled during President George W. Bush's administration and, as much as we needed some stimulus spending to boost the economy, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office now estimates total debt levels could almost double again over the next eight years based on the budget recently outlined by President Obama," with our "tax bill doubling over time." Debt is killing the American Dream. We've mortgaged our future, and now Obama's adding a new $1.84 trillion federal deficit. That's four times Bush's record deficit last year, with deficits over $500 billion annually for the next decade. The president's gambling, doubling down, betting the farm, going "all in," with a huge bet that could break the bank. Is this America's last hand in a high-stakes poker game? /more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littledavesab Posted April 1, 2011 Report Share Posted April 1, 2011 You (Dont) want burocracy then see this real life FS apology - NOT an Apiril fool! 8 pages !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHH http://www.fscc.gov.uk/documents/final/GE-L01215.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerpy Posted April 1, 2011 Report Share Posted April 1, 2011 NOT an Apiril fool! You sure ZZZZzzzzzzzzz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littledavesab Posted April 7, 2011 Report Share Posted April 7, 2011 You sure ZZZZzzzzzzzzz Unfortunately yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.