Are You an Optimist Or Pessimist About The U.S. Economy?

[One Eyed Cat]

Back in 2010 or later or FUBAR?

[Bikerpunk]

They'll be back, but MUCH later than 2010.

[One Eyed Cat]

They'll be back, but MUCH later than 2010.

How about from a psychological standpoint though? In many ways, that is the key. The standard of living will go down obviously. There will be no universal health care or any of the other social programs being mentioned. At best, they can control costs and improve the disability and retirement systems. Taxes will be raised not lowered. I don't care who becomes President

Let's face it though. As you aptly pointed out, we are socializing risk while privatizing profit. How long will it take to regain faith after the reregulation of a system that just failed?

OEC

The "New" New Deal
Friday, September 19, 2008 | 10:02 AM
in Bailouts | Psychology/Sentiment | Taxes and Policy
I am having a hard time keeping up with all of the bailouts and special facilities created for dealing with this crisis. Am I missing any?

- Bear Stearns
- Economic Stimulus progam
- Housing Bailout Program
- Fannie & Freddie
- AIG
- No Short selling rules
- Fed liquidity programs (Term Lending facility, Term Auction facility)
- Money Market fund insurance program
- Special Loans for GM & Ford
- New RTC type program

If you are a fan of irony, consider this: The conservative movement has utterly hated FDR, and his New Deal programs like Medicaid, Social Security, FDIC, Fannie Mae (1938), and the SEC for nearly 80 years. And for the past 8 years, a conservative was in the White House, with a very conservative agenda. For something like 16 of the past 18 years, the conservative dominated GOP has controlled Congress. Those are the facts.

We now see that the grand experiment of deregulation has ended, and ended badly. The deregulation movement is now an historical footnote, just another interest group, and once in power they turned into socialists. Indeed, judging by the actions of the conservatives in power, and not the empty rhetoric that comes out of think tanks, the conservative movement has effectively turned the United States into a massive Socialist state, an appendage of Communist Russia, China and Venezuela.

To paraphrase Floyd Norris, we have become Marxists, but of the Groucho, not Karl, variety . . . D'OH!

[Cafe_Post_Mortem]

I think we can recover, but I am not 100% sure we will.

I am no economist, but i have suspicions. I suspect that part of our economic recovery after 2001 was caused less by by the Bush tax cuts, and more by allowing certian companies (see if you can guess wich ones) to lend money they did not have to people who could not pay it back.

Now I don't entirely blame bush. Some of the deregulations started under clinton, but i think we need to the old guard just to break up the old crews a bit.

[KilLAtomiK]

i think wel be back but it may take a bit longer than a couple of years. i dont think the economy can bounce back that fast but then again im no economist.

[One Eyed Cat]

I think we can recover, but I am not 100% sure we will.

I am no economist, but i have suspicions. I suspect that part of our economic recovery after 2001 was caused less by by the Bush tax cuts, and more by allowing certian companies (see if you can guess wich ones) to lend money they did not have to people who could not pay it back.

Now I don't entirely blame bush. Some of the deregulations started under clinton, but i think we need to the old guard just to break up the old crews a bit.

Yeah. I would blame basically both parties.

[jonny.illuminati]

Now I don't entirely blame bush. Some of the deregulations started under clinton, but i think we need to the old guard just to break up the old crews a bit.

hell... the deregulation started under FDR to some extent and continued for years...

http://www.truthout.org/article/wall...s-deregulation

i believe the current crisis is mostly due to easy money deals convincing people to buy houses and borrow money they couldn't afford... straw that broke the camels back...

[OliX]

Do I smell war?

[jonny.illuminati]

Do I smell war?

thank god i'm retired... did to many wars... of course now i'm trained for the apocalypse... cannibal party at my pad (compound) on tuesday!

[One Eyed Cat]

Do I smell war?

Nah. We'll toy with Russia with a bit. No money for war though.

OEC

[OliX]

thank god i'm retired... did to many wars... of course now i'm trained for the apocalypse... cannibal party at my pad (compound) on tuesday!

Haha Count me in. But no feet please, they taste horribly hint

[OliX]

Nah. We'll toy with Russia with a bit. No money for war though.

OEC

Never said US will start it.
Anyway, someone just might use their chance while US is weakened. It might sound silly and stupid but look up how most of the other wars started. I'm in Norway atm so if WW III starts I can expect Russian invasion over here.

[One Eyed Cat]

Never said US will start it.
Anyway, someone just might use their chance while US is weakened. It might sound silly and stupid but look up how most of the other wars started. I'm in Norway atm so if WW III starts I can expect Russian invasion over here.

I doubt they're that stupid. Putin's weakness has been discovered and isolated. As brilliant and cunning as he is, he has a temper. He overplays his hand. They're weak beyond the nukes. Russia would get their asses handed to them if they tried anything. They aren't foolish enough to use nukes. Their stock market dropped 55% during a *US* financial crisis. Hopefully, Putin will down some vodka and 'ludes and do the math.

OEC

[OliX]

What about China, or even Europe.... ok, now I'm pushing it where it doesn't belong

But what are the chances of a civil war?

[One Eyed Cat]

What about China, or even Europe.... ok, now I'm pushing it where it doesn't belong

But what are the chances of a civil war?

China doesn't need an actual war with anyone. They'll wait patiently until they pass up the US in GDP. No chance of a civil war. There may well be rioting after the election. The society will continue to deterioriate to some extent. Nothing close to a civil war though. Europe will absorb the remaining countries into the EU. They'll have a (somewhat stable) peace.

OEC

[OliX]

Hopefully you're right. I really hope all this mess that's happening across the globe is coincidental and not connected.

[Pull~My~Hair]

depends on who wins this election, and even then it'll be later then 2010

[One Eyed Cat]

Hopefully you're right. I really hope all this mess that's happening across the globe is coincidental and not connected.

It is connected. That is a good thing, however. China and Russia will see their economies are intertwined with ours. Thus, it isn't in their interest for the US and/or Europe to fail. The rules of the game have to change though. I can understand leveraging money up to 10:1 (ratio used by commercial banks). Beyond that, you destroy the actual market system. I have no problem with people producing quality goods and making bank. We just can't let a few high rollers start turning our coin into meaningless paper to gamble with (and then bail them out on our tax dollar!) We need to get it right this time.

OEC

[One Eyed Cat]

depends on who wins this election, and even then it'll be later then 2010

The plans are basically the same. Obama sounds like he may try to bail out more of the people holding the subprime mortgages. That may or may not work. Beyond that, it's pretty clear specific standards will be set in terms of qualifying for mortgages, banks being solvent and transparent, guarantees of savings etc.

OEC

[Amelia G]

I doubt they're that stupid. Putin's weakness has been discovered and isolated. As brilliant and cunning as he is, he has a temper. He overplays his hand. They're weak beyond the nukes. Russia would get their asses handed to them if they tried anything. They aren't foolish enough to use nukes. Their stock market dropped 55% during a *US* financial crisis. Hopefully, Putin will down some vodka and 'ludes and do the math.

OEC

Do they still have 'ludes in Russia?

[jonny.illuminati]

The plans are basically the same. Obama sounds like he may try to bail out more of the people holding the subprime mortgages. That may or may not work. Beyond that, it's pretty clear specific standards will be set in terms of qualifying for mortgages, banks being solvent and transparent, guarantees of savings etc.

OEC

Obama isn't going to bail the sub-prime folks out... we the tax payers are going to bail them out... any way you slice it whether its Obama's or McCain's plan we have to pay for it... so in essence we are going to pay for people that should have known better than to get a crappy mortgage... oh and we are now paying for the companies that GAVE them the crappy mortgage... wow... wish i bought a house i couldn't afford and then i would be getting bailed out... better yet i wish i owned one of those companies... estimates now put taxpayer cost at a TRILLION dollars for the bailout by the time the dust settles... that money could have paid for a few weeks in iraq... or one hell of an island vacation for all of us on the BB forums...

[One Eyed Cat]

Obama isn't going to bail the sub-prime folks out... we the tax payers are going to bail them out... any way you slice it whether its Obama's or McCain's plan we have to pay for it... so in essence we are going to pay for people that should have known better than to get a crappy mortgage... oh and we are now paying for the companies that GAVE them the crappy mortgage... wow... wish i bought a house i couldn't afford and then i would be getting bailed out... better yet i wish i owned one of those companies... estimates now put taxpayer cost at a TRILLION dollars for the bailout by the time the dust settles... that money could have paid for a few weeks in iraq... or one hell of an island vacation for all of us on the BB forums...

Obama's plan (all govt "plans" being paid for by the taxpayer). My sense is we may have already done so though.

[One Eyed Cat]

Do they still have 'ludes in Russia?

Just for Putin.

OEC

[jonny.illuminati]

Obama's plan (all govt "plans" being paid for by the taxpayer). My sense is we may have already done so though.

to true!

[Bikerpunk]

The problem is NOT the subprime loan people defaulting. This would be a few hundred mil for a few banks, worst case.

This 700 TRILLION is to soak up all the leveraged bets and derivatives. People having side bets on the mortgage market and then blaming people with mortgages.

Nice of the neocons to point the finger like that. We don't ask too many questions about SIVs and credit swaps otherwise.

[One Eyed Cat]

The problem is NOT the subprime loan people defaulting. This would be a few hundred mil for a few banks, worst case.

This 700 TRILLION is to soak up all the leveraged bets and derivatives. People having side bets on the mortgage market and then blaming people with mortgages.

Nice of the neocons to point the finger like that. We don't ask too many questions about SIVs and credit swaps otherwise.

Well yeah, they leveraged everything to insane margins. Subprime mortgage bailout is a sidebar. It was one of the few possible differences I could find in the two plans (neither of which is entirely comprehensible to anyone as yet) Looks like Paulsen will just do it all (with our cash) before the election though.

OEC

[keiko]

I'm gonna be broker then fuck no matter what, but in a way i think this will be good for the economy in the long run, hopefully with all the lessons we will learn from this used to update and debugg the system in the future. no one will go back and fix things properly till they are so broken it can't be repaired and they have to build a new one. if the great collective "They" uses duct tape to fix this we're fucked both ways from sunday. if They actually replace policies and implement new ideas, we should be good, but first they must remove the old system. From the Ashes of Disaster, yeah?

~K

[Ajax Knucklebones]

The plans are basically the same. Obama sounds like he may try to bail out more of the people holding the subprime mortgages. That may or may not work. Beyond that, it's pretty clear specific standards will be set in terms of qualifying for mortgages, banks being solvent and transparent, guarantees of savings etc.

OEC

The only way you can fix the people with subprime mortgages is to give them a lower fixed rate on their homes and also defer payments until they get back on their feet....But then what about the rest of the people that bought their homes in 2005 and before? Does the government just say screw them...They're on they're own? What really needs to be done is set the subprimes at a decent fixed rate and then come up with a governmental program that if you lose your job right(this is for all Americans) now because of layoffs, the government will maybe foot the bill until you can find another job. Of course, though, this program will not fix the current problem in the least. The big problem is alot bigger than subprime (like BP said). Obama is probably tooting this horn just to get votes.

Being from a small bank myself, I don't think this bailout the government is constructing will help us at all. When all is said and done, I'm sure it's just going to be for the "big boys". The smaller banks will probably be on their own, since if they go under, they'll just be sold to the highest bidder bank.

Essentially what the government is doing is keeping us from going into a depression. In the end, will this bailout keep that from happening? Who knows? The commercial and residential construction business in my county is dead. Piles of people are out of work. Hardly anybody is building anything. Lenders are getting super conservative now when lending any cash. So, even now that the housing market is dirt cheap, nobody can get a loan unless they have like 20% down which, come on...How many people have that at their disposal? So, foreclosures just pile up and no one is building new homes.

So, how does this bailout "fix" the economy? Beats the shit out of me. It just becomes a big band-aid, but in the end, unless people can get jobs and work, I don't know how this will pan out.

The government should create road construction or forest projects to put people to work, like during the "Great Depression". People earn money and that money goes back into the economy. As more money went back into the economy, it slowly, partly, helped end the depression.

Oh, by the way....We really aren't in a depression yet. If we really were and it was that bad out there, none of us would be on these computers. We would have our connections shut off and pawn our computers. We have so much more luxuries now than how people lived during the depression. Am I saying it's not bad out there? Oh no....It does suck, but during the height of the depression 1/4 of the US population were homeless. People were living in shanties all over the place. We are in a recession...A bad one. Yes, people like BP are moving all over the country to find work, but during the depression you could move all you wanted....There was no work where ever you moved to.

Am I optimistic...Yes...And for one reason only. The more pessimistic people are, the more EVERYBODY becomes pessimistic and then nobody, even the one's with money, spend. An example is my dad....He's says to me all the time..."I hate to wonder how this is gonna affect me?". People...My dad's retired and is living on a NY cop's retirement. He is super-fine as far as finances go, BUT, because of all this negativity on the media, even people like my dad are cutting back spending and for no reason what so ever. Just because he knows the economy is bad so he thinks his financial situation is in trouble. THAT'S what a nation wide pessimistic view does. Scares even the people WITH money to spend....And that just makes the economy even worse and our problems greater.

[Mr Karl]

everything is proceeding exactly as planned

[One Eyed Cat]

The only way you can fix the people with subprime mortgages is to give them a lower fixed rate on their homes and also defer payments until they get back on their feet....But then what about the rest of the people that bought their homes in 2005 and before? Does the government just say screw them...They're on they're own? What really needs to be done is set the subprimes at a decent fixed rate and then come up with a governmental program that if you lose your job right(this is for all Americans) now because of layoffs, the government will maybe foot the bill until you can find another job. Of course, though, this program will not fix the current problem in the least. The big problem is alot bigger than subprime (like BP said). Obama is probably tooting this horn just to get votes.

Being from a small bank myself, I don't think this bailout the government is constructing will help us at all. When all is said and done, I'm sure it's just going to be for the "big boys". The smaller banks will probably be on their own, since if they go under, they'll just be sold to the highest bidder bank.

Essentially what the government is doing is keeping us from going into a depression. In the end, will this bailout keep that from happening? Who knows? The commercial and residential construction business in my county is dead. Piles of people are out of work. Hardly anybody is building anything. Lenders are getting super conservative now when lending any cash. So, even now that the housing market is dirt cheap, nobody can get a loan unless they have like 20% down which, come on...How many people have that at their disposal? So, foreclosures just pile up and no one is building new homes.

So, how does this bailout "fix" the economy? Beats the shit out of me. It just becomes a big band-aid, but in the end, unless people can get jobs and work, I don't know how this will pan out.

The government should create road construction or forest projects to put people to work, like during the "Great Depression". People earn money and that money goes back into the economy. As more money went back into the economy, it slowly, partly, helped end the depression.

Oh, by the way....We really aren't in a depression yet. If we really were and it was that bad out there, none of us would be on these computers. We would have our connections shut off and pawn our computers. We have so much more luxuries now than how people lived during the depression. Am I saying it's not bad out there? Oh no....It does suck, but during the height of the depression 1/4 of the US population were homeless. People were living in shanties all over the place. We are in a recession...A bad one. Yes, people like BP are moving all over the country to find work, but during the depression you could move all you wanted....There was no work where ever you moved to.

Am I optimistic...Yes...And for one reason only. The more pessimistic people are, the more EVERYBODY becomes pessimistic and then nobody, even the one's with money, spend. An example is my dad....He's says to me all the time..."I hate to wonder how this is gonna affect me?". People...My dad's retired and is living on a NY cop's retirement. He is super-fine as far as finances go, BUT, because of all this negativity on the media, even people like my dad are cutting back spending and for no reason what so ever. Just because he knows the economy is bad so he thinks his financial situation is in trouble. THAT'S what a nation wide pessimistic view does. Scares even the people WITH money to spend....And that just makes the economy even worse and our problems greater.

I'm an optimist for 2010. This isn't even close to a depression. Hopefully, they'll at least make the rules of the game more workable. I think people will see "they're doing something" and become somewhat less pessimistic. I don't think the bailout will cure anything. I'm hoping a change in regulation will to some extent though.

OEC

[Bikerpunk]

They know what fucked up the last time. And they went and did it anyway.

[One Eyed Cat]

They know what fucked up the last time. And they went and did it anyway.

They did. Although, you could argue attempts at "solutions" like Sarbanes-Oxley have backfired. Globalization made it hit harder and faster this time. They need to get it right regardless of a bunch of gamblers on Wall Street. The system requires a degree of trust that one's basic savings/assets are safe. If that is truly lost, the economy really does cease to function. We'll see. The current "plan" is bound to change. There is all sorts of opposition from the left and right now.

OEC

[OliX]

everything is proceeding exactly as planned

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/9/22/headlines#10

[Ajax Knucklebones]

They know what fucked up the last time. And they went and did it anyway.

You mean the stock market crash of 1929 or all the other ones after it? You can't have a "somewhat" free market without risk. Besides, I truly think the stock market is so full of shit anyway. They really do mostly proceed anyway they want and not according to the current economy. After Enron, the DOW dropped and was in the 7000's. Yet, the economy actually wasn't too bad all during these drops. Before the destruction of the world trade center, it was about where it is now. Yet, now wall street is so worried. Excuse me? the DOW is where it was BEFORE the terrorist attacks. None of it makes sense to me. Like I said, our economy sucks yet Wall street's numbers really aren't that bad. Does that make any sense? Seems to me, they're just taking their funds out of one bucket and sticking it into another so the "drop" really is more like a fall, then rise, then fall....A rollercoaster ride which has basically been going on since the terrorist attack. Right now all the investors are taking they're money out of troubled business' and sticking them into commodities. Gas has been shooting up in price per barrel yet demand is way down....So, yeah, I think they invest in a very ridiculous way anyway and not according to the economy.

[Bikerpunk]

The GDP of the planet is a few trillion.

There were $770 TRILLION in derivatives last year.

Uh oh....