Some one has to start it, Americas default.

Its already been agreed but not voted on. I did say that it would be, I suggested that it was all choreographed to rattle the the dollar some more.

I also said that Us held more gold than 'not much' as some suggested.

at 8,133.5 tons and at 1600 dollars a ounce they are making money from it. If it reaches 2000 from the Us shenanigans then the debt is paid, not without catastrophic loss of gold value.

To what am I apologising for, pointing out Americas problems and discussing it is not dumping on America. If you had defaulted ( and there is still a possibility) I would have been involved, do you mind if I am concerned.


As I had predicted Us has saved itself at the 11th hour however its reduction in financial creditability is probable from AAA to AA. Some houses can not by law invest in less than AAA bonds so they MUST be sold off----by law.

This will be the damaging factor to the market, and to Us in the long run.

When oil is no longer traded in dollar,--and that is also a possibility then time to seriously reconsider all finances.

Americas influence on the rest of the world is still of consequence, not as much but still is and as long as Us play silly games and barely manages itself then I will remain interested and to some degree involved.

Oh by the way I can not work out Americas debt to gold stock as I don't have a calculator big enough, do they do 12 digit calculators.

 

We are a sensitive lot Frosty...

I have to show my ignorance again- Isn't the whole mess caused by lack of revenue from taxes?
That is won't the problem resolve itself to a large degree with a strengthened economy as the world (and US) climbs out of this downturn?

Clinton had a 'balanced budget' a few short years ago.
Whats keeping the same conditions from occurring in the near future?


edit- I do note that the above abundance mirrors the explosion in tech/internet and the fall off in 2001. Unique/short term wealth generation?

Or... is the tax base declining as wealth in the US becomes more stratified and aggregates in the upper echelons? Presumably a tax bracket which is more resistant to taxation and therefore generates a lower return to the coffers of the government?

 

America frowns on taxes, the Rebublicans say that taxes is not good when US needs a stimulous, Well yeah but they are talking taxing Soros , Trump, etc etc who would'nt even notice it not the 50,000 a year man,-- this is the big argument.

They want to raise taxes from 35% to 39%( surtax in Uk is 60%)

The Beatles paid 95% taxes which was in those days 19 shillings and sixpence in the pound.

The richest people in the world live in Us and enjoy ridiculous tax breaks, Ok I reckon I have revealed my side of the equation.

The debt ceiling was put in place after the first world war, only America and Denmark has this system ( in the world) but Denmarks ceiling is so high it never needs adjustment. Since 1960 US has raised the ceiling 78 times,--sounds daft --you bettcha.

No other country has a law limiting debt.

US does not have credability problems -it can still borrow money infact more countries are lending to US than before,--but this can change.

The threat of default is over but the problem is not,-- you have reduced spending by 1 trillion but increased the ceiling by 2 trillion to continue your spending which is more than you earn. It doesnt take much brains to work out it cant continue.

It cost 4.5billion a day to run USA

The politicians bickering is difficult to understand under such circumstances, resulting in less and less investment heading for US. I believe 14 trillion is more dollars than there is in existence, but im not sure about that.

Americas seemingly self destruct programme has influenced the fabrication of the euro.

 

Some good points mentioned, but here's a bit more to ponder on...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-r-talbott/launch-third-party_b_905435.html

Called on carpet (gently I should add) for failing to link to source (It's ok my bad) Source: http://www.theonion.com/articles/drunken-ben-bernanke-tells-everyone-at-neighborhoo,21059/

 

I believe there is a long stride present in the economies of individual countries and the world community.
I don't understand it but I have heard it stated, defined by how wealth is held by communities and the shift into and out of property holdings. Part of this cycle includes boom periods where capital investments in property yield higher than usual returns and lending institutions respond by advancing valuations while decreasing the thresholds imposed on borrowers.
Collapse inevitably occurs.

I believe I am reluctant to find that the institutions involved define the cycle- they respond.
I believe I am reluctant to find the US institutions created what was in this case a fully global stride of this cycle. Faults can be found as the collapse occurs but they are more to my mind weaknesses which can exist in prosperity only, and are not the mechanisms which fully create either the 'boom' or the 'bust'.

A signpost along the way in 2007:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-446908/UKs-personal-wealth-tied-property.html

 

I like the bit about the corruption being so rife that it can not be cured within. But starting a new party and having then accepted would be a huge concept and wouold they not, being human fall along the wayside from corruption too.

Pehaps it is as you say but yet I dont think it is organised --it has evoluted into this from whispering in dark corners yes but no one know what the other guy is doing.

I think it can be said that the career of politics is just that,-- a life of corruption and rewards for favours that the position affords.

Poor ole Obama has just come out of this on his knees, yet a sigh of relief amongst the American people is futile--nothing has changed in fact its worse, you can now continue into bankrupcty until december-ish when it all starts again.

Notice only a minuscule temporary jump up on the market from the result of the agreement by immature investors. The decline in the economy continues.

 

Well, that's a matter for debate. The government is taking up a larger and larger share of the economy every year. To avoid deficit spending, that means they would have to take a larger and larger share of the wealth every year to pay for it. Every dollar that the government takes away from a tax payers is a tiny loss of freedom for the taxpayer. Before, the taxpayer had the freedom to decide how that dollar would be spent; now the government has the power to decide how that dollar will be spent. Raising taxes and government spending is taking freedom away from the people and giving power to the government. If you don't think that is a problem, then you are going to prefer raising taxes to lowering spending.

Still, what urgent things was the government not doing in 2008 that are so important now that we can't eliminate that trillion-dollar spending increase that Obama got passed as his first act in office, even with the country's debt spiraling out of control and the economy too weak to withstand a tax increase?

 

The Gov takes in less than it spends. That' simple enough to understand.

The American Taxpayer is largly out of work, so the Gov is not getting the Tax revenue it's used to.

Now, we wont get more jobs, because the American Taxpayer bought the Cheap Chinese Junk and the Revenue, jobs and Fatories have moved to China.

The Gov is left with one of two choices. Spend less, or Tax more.

Right now.. write your Delegation and tell them your choice. Dont let up on them till they cut spending and take a cut in pay and benefits themselves.....like we've had to do!

 

Hi Bamby, USA near Wheeling. I've often wondered where it was.

Don't mention the financial institutions controlling your government, I did that and now I've got the CIA looking for me.

 

You have been fooled by propaganda, Frosty. When Obama and other Democrats talk about raising taxes on "the rich", they aren't talking about billionaires; they are talking about individuals making more than 200K and married couples making more than 250K. By and large, these aren't people born with a silver spoon in their mouth; they are people who have worked very hard for many years to build a career or a business and are now in their late middle age and trying to save for retirement. Many of them live in places where an income like that only lets you afford a small house or condo.

Many small business owners fit into this category and taxes on them will directly effect their ability to hire people or to keep people employed.

You know who *really* likes this Democrat version of taxing the rich? Rich people, that's who. Mega-billionaires and rich Hollywood celebrities are always coming out to say how they think they should pay higher income taxes. And why not? Their wealth is in their assets, not their incomes. The people who will be hurt by these taxes are the upper middle class --the people who are trying to *become* rich.

I've got news for you, when rich people see a whole bunch of new people with high incomes threatening to join their exclusive club, they don't say "welcome to the good times", they go drop a big campaign contribution on their friendly neighborhood politician and say, "You know what this country needs? We need higher income taxes on rich folk."

So, if you really want to tax the rich you don't tax income, you tax net worth. Here is my proposal:

For every dollar over $10M of net worth, you pay 1% tax per year.
For every dollar over $100M you pay an additional 1%.
For every dollar over $1B you pay an additional 1%
For every dollar over $10B you pay an additional 1%
For every dollar over $100B you pay an additional 1%

Let Congress propose that tax and see if George Soros announces that it's a great idea because the rich don't pay enough taxes.

 

Thats right you are spending more than you earn, if you cant cut back you earn more. If you cant earn more you cut back. you can always cut back.

The president flies in Airforce one , before that takes of a host of aircraft fly first taking cars and hundreds of staff. The Prime minister of England flies 1st Class in a normal aircraft.

Cut that! oh but thats not much in 14 trillion and there lies the problem the debt is so huge that not just one cut back is sufficient.

You need a woman president and your country is too big to be managed by one government and the president does not have enough power as we have just recently seen the downfalls of that. There is democracy and stifled democracy where it doe'snt work due to the need to sway hundred of politicians with bulging bank accounts accepting pay off.

It sounds ridiculous but the whole system is failing.

If a president did not have the right to a second term he would do what he could in the first instead of setting things up to get the second.

If you dont like income tax there is hundreds of other taxes VAT or GST most countries have this, capital gains, advertisment tax , Tv tax, wealth tax ,death tax , gift tax corporate taxes, car tax, engine size tax, flight tax, polution tax (Aussi has just done this and so has Uk on American airlines flying to UK) -- If you want to pollute you got to pay for it.

Increase your fuel its cheap compared to Europe and government lotteries, it needs some thinking about not just stare at it.

Guys in new suits and government supplied Lincolns are not going to care are they, They will fly the world first class visiting the most expensive hotels, ---Clinton does --never stops and charges 100,000 dollars for 20 minute speech.

There is only so much care a man can give, and when he has to convince another 300 politicians who want his job --well it just too hard.

 

Arrrrgh, - - Just Nationalise the assets of the wealthy, as the proceeds were probably derived from criminal activity, or morally corrupt activity, or something simlar...

About 18 months ago I got some volume data of movements of gold and silver ETF in USA and bullion on LBMA when "da-boyz" played a US$5 drop in gold, JPMChase netted 50 billion and others made similar marks for every $5 movement... They were doing that at least every week and often 2 or three times a week - whenever there was a "newsworthy" event that might spook the COMEX players...

Frosty,
You are forgetting the US$600+ trillion in TOXIC CDO's still floating around in USA looking for a sucker... That is the invisible elephant in all the toilet cubicles...

 

It was rather sad watching all those Nero's fiddling while Rome - I mean Washington - burns. The current crop of politicians will be content to preside over the relegation of the USA from a first class outfit to something a little closer to a banana republic. So I'll take this opportunity to thank the US for all you have done: you are not going to be able to do it for much longer. As for my country, Canada, the high-flying loony (cdn$) does me no favors as my pensions from overseas are now paying about 80% of what they did. Canada has managed its economy and banking system in a reasonably responsible way and is reaping the benefit, but Canada is a trading nation and will eventually be dragged down by the rest of you. If I could I would vote for isolationism.



Eventually you in the US are going to have to do some or all of the following:

- change your political system to something that doesn't change its ideological underwear before your "leaders" have time to act
- force the Chinese to value their currency appropriately and pay fair wages (good luck with that!)
- stick the trade barriers back up
- pull back your troops and downsize your military manufacturing support system to something you can afford

I don't think your leaders have the stomach to do the first two and the last two will change the World in ways I won't like.



Economics is a lot simpler than the experts make it sound. It's really all about confidence, which determines how fast money circulates. That's it. The price of gold and oil, the national debt, the balance of trade are all consequences, not causes. People are scared of spending what they may have desperate need of later. Watching the antics in the Washington Zoo, reading about multi-million payoffs to CEO's who have run their companies into the ground, listening to experts paraded by the media (intent only on feathering their own nest) each of whom has a different opinion than the last, reading off their convincing scripts written by highly paid wordsmiths - who believe not a word of what they write - does nothing for the confidence of your people. Or anyone else's.

The message from Washington is, it's a mess, none of us knows what to do, we don't give a damn so long as we win the next election, we just go along according to our doctrine like the Soviets used to do, ideology is king because the voters in some states are too ignorant to understand anything sensible, and it's getting worse with every passing day. The "government" of the US has strained for months to produce a gnat, the bold new plan is the outcome of conceptual constipation - no ideas just beliefs or greed - and it has produced a tiny piece of hard $hit.

When in trouble, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout. That is the order of the day.

Here it is in a nutshell: when someone is scared they hang on to their money, so it does not buy anything, so the guy who made what it might have bought is out of work, he pays no taxes and goes on pogey, less taxes and more payments from the national treasure chest, and the national debt starts to zoom. Not a huge surprise but a lot of people think the debt is the real problem instead of a by-product of a stagnant economy, so they promptly vote in a bunch of newbie politicians to officially represent their ignorance. Now a small minority controls the decision-making center of the country and because they are ignorant of how things really work they bollix things up by insisting on their theoretical, untried and ludicrously inappropriate theories as the solution to the wrong problem. Red Soviet, Blue US, same destination.


Here endeth the lesson. Suggested reading: "The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire"

 

So True ancient kayaker do you happen to like parodies... I sort of enjoyed this read on the topic...

Yes, this is from the Onion. But in this surreal, centrally planned by none other than Ben Bernanke reality, the mirror in mirror effect is extremely disturbing.

Drunken Ben Bernanke Tells Everyone At Neighborhood Bar How Screwed U.S. Economy Really Is

 

There is some clever posts been written here, particularly the last 2.