chess online

chess online

Play online chess!

world debt
« Back to club forum
Pages: 12
Go to the last post
FromMessage
chrisforbes21
20-Jun-12, 20:01

world debt
Having studied econometrics in detail world debt is a fable. Discuss
riaannieman
21-Jun-12, 02:05

World debt
Chris, can you explain your statement with more detail? I would love to comment on this, because I believe your statement could be wrong, but I need to know what you mean. The world cannot be in debt- this planet is only capable of producing a certain amount of wealth, and no more; it doesn't matter what we invent, or how much progress we make. There is only so much land, water, gold, silver and other things of value to go around. To create more wealth, we need to plunder other planets.....
chrisforbes21
21-Jun-12, 04:39

as a published expert on markets
My first love in financial instruments is equities my second commodities I am not sure if I should
reverse this because commodities makes the world go round. The most valuable commodity in
the world is people for without people there would be no value in anything. Value is only a thing
that we attribute to things based on demand. You can make a lot of money trading this stuff
while its cool to understand it its not really for me. My least favourite instrument is credit
derivatives as I do not agree with the attirbutation of long term debt. In this modern world there
is no reason why we could not scrub all debt, I repeat there is no reason we could not scrub all
debt, give people credit for what they are owed and continue as we are. Debt is a burden that
people and nations are subjected to it stops the world moving forward, money is but a tool to
help live life, not the reason for living.
bencox1
21-Jun-12, 07:26

World Debt
For starters I will give my interpretation of world debt. (my interpretation is limited based on my narrow view of the world outside my country.)
In 1913 the Federal Reserve was created in the United States by some elite bankers whose names were kept anonymous for political reasons. Before the creation of the Federal Reserve there was no inflation (except during the extreme times of the civil war). Gold and silver was the only legal currency allowed by the Constitution (although Congress was allowed to print money backed by gold and silver.) Debt was formed by people who created wealth out of thin air (the Federal Reserve). The same year the Federal Reserve was created the 16 amendment was created allowing the government to create an income tax on citizens directly without going through the states. Later in 1933 during the Great Depression FDR confiscated all gold owned by citizens and replacing it with federal reserve notes making it illegal to own gold lengthening the depression. Also on June 5,1933 the United States declared bankrupt and also created the Social Security system in 1935 pledging the citizens of the United States of America as collateral against the debt that the government owed to the Federal Reserve system. Since then the debt has increased and in 1965 the Federal Reserve stopped making silver coinage and replaced it with copper and nickel coins. In 1971 Nixon passed a bill which effectively ended the gold standard and replaced it with the Federal Reserve notes. Three years later President Ford legalized the private ownership of gold. Also later on in 1982 the Federal Reserve stopped making pennies out of copper but instead used a less valuable metal zinc.
In short the presence of private banks in countries and the use of fiat currency has created the world debt which is now sky rocketing to new levels by the unchecked printing of money by privately owned banks.
lupusdwb
22-Jun-12, 19:47

World Debt
Ben, I‘m not following your interpretation of world debt so here’s a few facts to clarify your statements so others in our group that are not as American can follow along.

The Federal Reserve was created by Congress, Congress was advised by a "brain trust" of bankers, yes, but their names are recorded in the Congressional Record as required by the Constitution.

Inflation has existed for centuries although it's definition has changed throughout the years. There’s a nice chart on Wikipedia under “inflation” that shows inflation, and deflation, recorded in the US since 1666.

The Constitution doesn't mention gold and silver but in Article 1, section 8 it does say: "Congress shall have the power… To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;". The Constitution is dated 9/17/1787. A silver standard, actually a dual standard of silver & gold, was tried in 1785 but was abandoned in 1861. The Gold standard wasn’t adopted in the US until 1873.

Debt was created centuries ago by merchants and traders to finance their businesses. Wealth is created from hard work, experience and knowledge, sometimes by inheritance and too frequently by illegal gain. Thin air only creates difficulty breathing but at the top of a mountain, it's worth it!

Congress, not the Federal Reserve, has that power to create debt under the Constitution Article 1 Section. 8: “The Congress shall have Power… To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;”

Original federal taxation was levied only on States, real property, slaves and as import tariffs. States then levied taxes on citizens to pay it’s debts. In 1913, the first federal income tax was levied on citizens.

In 1933, the Great Depression was at rock bottom and people were hoarding gold as it had more value than currency. President Roosevelt issued an executive order in May to confiscate all gold owned by citizens in excess of $100 (2012 buying $2321.36). Since gold backed currency, the money supply could be expanded if the government held more gold. Jewelers, mining companies, coin collections, personal jewelry and such were exempt. It was not illegal to own gold. Federal Reserve Notes, printed by the US Treasury at the Bureau of Engraving & Printing, were issued for the gold turned in. As an aside, the printing of US currency by anyone other than the BEP is counterfeiting and is vigorously punished, so I don’t see private banks trying to print money.

Roosevelt’s executive order was unpopular and was revoked by Congress in August 1933. From May to August was not nearly enough time to effect the Depression in any manner.

June 5, 1933 was when Roosevelt signed the Resolution that took the United States off the gold standard when Congress enacted a joint resolution nullifying the right of creditors to demand payment in gold. There’s no record of the United States declaring Bankruptcy on that date.

Social Security was created in 1935 as an insurance plan designed to collect a payroll tax to be held in a trust and then paid back to the payor as an annuity at retirement. It was designed, as it's name implies, as a social retirement program to give security to those of little or no wealth. Left to that definition, it would still be a good plan having collected $9 trillion and paid out $7.5 trillion and according to the 2012 Trustees report, the 2011 balance in the Trust is $2.5 trillion, the difference being interest paid. There’s much to be said about additional social programs added to the original plan but it would take much too long to go through that. Then Congress saw all that money accumulating in the Trust and decided to “borrow” it by having the Trust buy US Treasuries ie US debt. So the Trust finances US debt and that is what you are referring to as “citizen” collateral. As an investor, I consider the purchase of US Treasuries a safe bet since they have the full faith and credit of the US Government behind them, a government that has never declared bankruptcy and has never been late on payments.

The US does not owe anything to the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve by law is not funded and earns it’s income from interest it charges the private banks to borrow from it. It is actually required to pay all of it’s net income after expenses to the Treasury, 2011 payments of $76.9 billion according to the January 2012 accounting report.

I could go on but this is lengthy enough. US debt was originally acquired in the amount of $5 million to finance the American Revolution and that original amount has been repaid many times over.

I rather agree in principal with Chris’ statement that all debt should be forgiven, wiped out, and every person, every country, every company start anew. It would be interesting to see what private banks would do... if they don’t go belly up. I think in this day and age, every person would be careful not to be in debt again, every country would again borrow to finance the social programs it most needs to finance, and every company would borrow like crazy because that’s how merchants and traders finance their business. So, I shake my head and think it would do no good to wipe it all out and along with it the responsibility, and excellent experience, to have to pay it back. So it’s going to be a long road until new jobs are created which is the real crux of the problem and, without a growing base of taxpayers, the real reason debt is increasing.

Here’s the link to the US Constitution website which also includes the Charter, Declaration and Bill of Rights: www.archives.gov I highly recommend reading the original handwritten old English copy as it puts you in the same state of mind as the founding fathers who framed this document that has lasted for over 200 years and is the cornerstone of this great nation.

I would be interested in your theories of how you would get this wobbly world turned back upright.
riaannieman
22-Jun-12, 23:30

And there you go
Donna, thanks a lot for those facts. Now I understand a little more of the USA economy as well, being a South African who doesn't have first hand knowledge and no education about the history of the USA, besides what I see in movies and TV programs, such as North and South. Now let me digest this all, and I will voice my opinion later.
shamash
23-Jun-12, 17:27

"US Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke bails out Europe"
<<"The Fed debated domestic policy this week, but its actions in Europe are just as revealing

Warning that America’s sputtering economic recovery was grinding down, this week the
Federal Reserve noted in classic Fed-speak that “strains in global financial markets continue to
pose significant downside risks to the economic outlook.” But the Fed and its soft-spoken
chairman Ben Bernanke announced nothing new to fix those strains. And they said even less
about the steps they were already taking to prop up the staggering banks in Europe.

Bernanke’s silence speaks loudly of the strange and controversial role that America’s central
bank now plays in global finance. The Federal Reserve’s charter gives it two basic legal
mandates. One is to promote price stability, which means to combat both inflation and
deflation, as central banks all over the world try to do. The other, to the surprise of many, is
to promote full employment, which the Fed has literally never accomplished. Nothing in its
charter explicitly empowers the Fed to act as central banker to the world, or anything close.
But, in contrast to his predecessors as Fed chairman, Bernanke has increasingly talked up the
full-employment mandate to justify increasing global intervention.

“The crisis in Europe has affected the U.S. economy by acting as a drag on our exports,
weighing on business and consumer confidence, and pressuring U.S. financial markets and
institutions,” he testified to Congress earlier this month. “As always, the Federal Reserve
remains prepared to take action as needed to protect the U.S. financial system and economy
in the event that financial stresses escalate.”

The needed action has already started, as Gerald P. O’Driscoll Jr., a former vice-president of
the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, explained last December in the Wall Street Journal. He
called his whistle-blowing exposé “The Federal Reserve’s Covert Bailout of Europe.”

O’Driscoll revealed – and Bernanke later confirmed – that the Fed has entered into agreements
with the European Central Bank to provide billions of dollars, which the ECB then lends to ailing
banks in Europe to increase their liquidity. The Fed also agreed to similar deals with the central
banks of England, Switzerland, Japan and Canada.

Technically, the dollars are not loans. They are instead “currency swaps.” In return for the
dollars, the ECB and other central banks give the Fed equivalent amounts of their own
currency, along with an agreement to return the dollars at the same exchange rate.

The Fed has offered swaps on and off since 1962, and it first launched the current set of
programs in late 2007 in response to global repercussions of America’s subprime mortgage
crisis. The new agreements signed just after last Thanksgiving lowered the charge from 1
percent to one-half of 1 percent.

The swaps differ from the $1.2 trillion in direct loans that the Fed made to American and
foreign banks following the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers in 2008. As documented by the
non-partisan Government Accountability Office, these direct loans dwarfed the $700 billion
Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and greatly embarrassed the Fed, which fought to keep
the information from becoming public. The swaps keep the dollars from showing up on the
Federal Reserve’s balance sheet and let the foreign central banks pick the recipients and make
the loans.

The sums at risk are not chopped liver. Lending through the swap lines peaked at $586 billion
in December 2008. Current totals are much lower, amounting last week to $24.215 billion. But,
given the stakes, the Fed has to be prepared to go at least as far as it did before.

O’Driscoll calls the currency swaps “Byzantine, anti-democratic, non-transparent and fully
intended to confuse observers.” Though I’m far from sharing his well-known faith in the mythic
free market and see a real American interest in helping Europe avoid disaster, I have to admit
that he makes a point. The swaps recall Enron’s off-balance-sheet accounting and Goldman
Sachs’s use of credit default swaps to help Greece mask its debt to meet the fiscal
requirements to enter the Eurozone.

Nor is Bernanke playing straight with either Congress or the public. Last December, he assured
Republican Senator Lindsey Graham and others that the Fed did not have “the intention or the
authority” to bail out European countries or banks.

Three months later, he told Congress that the dollar swap lines “seem to have been
successful” in helping Europe avoid a “major financial accident.”

The Europeans are no straighter. The European Central Bank also wanted a fig leaf to hide
what it is doing. The swaps allow the ECB to lend dollars to ailing banks without being seen as
bailing them out, which its charter forbids it to do.

But the problems go far deeper. European leaders currently face a head-spinning array of
overlapping crises. They want to save the Euro, make Europe more competitive, reduce
sovereign debts, recapitalize failing banks and rebuild inter-bank lending, which has fallen lower
than anyone expected. Less well understood, the European leaders also need to find a way to
recycle surpluses from wealthy exporters like Germany so that the poorer countries can
continue to buy its products. That’s a macroeconomic lesson from John Maynard Keynes that
Angela Merkel has yet to acknowledge.

If the economics seem complicated, the politics are worse. So far, the leaders here in Europe
have failed to build sufficient popular support for their European project, and the solutions
they are currently discussing all would give their people far less democratic control over the
decisions that affect their lives. In fact, power would increasingly go to the financial giants on
Wall Street and their allies in London, Frankfurt and Zurich. These are roughly the same folks
who dominate the supposedly independent Federal Reserve, and Ben Bernanke’s inscrutable
currency swaps will only feather their nest.">>


-- by BBC investigative journalist Steve Weissman
bencox1
23-Jun-12, 17:35

lupusdwb
Hi mostly because I don't have loads of time and because I find that other people can get the point across easier I am just going to provided a link that explains the Federal Reserve system better and other private banking cartels in general.
When I have more time I will address some more of your points.

theeconomiccollapseblog.com
chrisforbes21
23-Jun-12, 21:16

Debt legacy
that's a decent link if you were to study debt graphs of world governments than the same
patter of US debt is repeated all over the Western world. The trouble is when you get to such
a level of debt then making dent in it is very hard as the interest payments are so high, so the
governments need to keep issuing new bonds. There were some very weird regulatory
changes in the late 90's and early 2000's around trading securities.

Wealth distribution is quite skewed as well so if you type into google and type in American
Wealth map there is an interesting image. I do believe in the financial system but I also think
that the sovereign debt situation is getting a bit ridiculous. The legacy we will leave for our
children and grandchildren will for the majority leave them a slave to the system for most of
their natural lives. To get a decent unfunded education these days puts people up to $100k
in debt. It also forces the hand some of our greater minds in science and medicine to pursue
money over human advancement.

Modern society has so many great things but the control that money has is out of balance
with its importance its supposed to be a tool not a controller. There is no reason why you
could not wipe out world debt and start over with exactly the same system as we have it
would give us 10 years of breathing space while we figure out how to refine the system. I am
looking forward to my next meeting of the Adam Smith think tank to share my thoughts around
this with some of the economists to see if the scrapping of debt is feasible without a collapse
in our system.
lupusdwb
24-Jun-12, 14:39

Debt legacy reply
Making a dent in it is what the Federal Reserve is doing now. Calling in treasury bonds that are higher interest 2 to 4% and issuing at current rate .15 to .75% is smart. In my department at work, we're scrambling to find safe investments that are more than .75% and typically settling for the 75bp. The work entailed in proving to our Board others are "safe" is difficult.

The same legacy was left to us and to our parents, grandparents and great-grandparents. We will do what those before us tried to do, sometimes successfully, sometimes not. It is never a quick fix. It is never completely done. It will always happen again.

The key is to balance necessary social programs against future receipts, note the words "necessary" and "balance", just like a corporation does. Governments are the biggest corporations in the world and we, their citizens, are the shareholders. We have the same rights as a corporate shareholder as we are the recipients of the EPS the government makes. And the way we control them is by contacting the "Board of Directors" we elected - US: Representatives and Senators, UK: House of Commons, House of Lords (you do have some elected Lords now, don't you?). If they don't do what the majority wants, we elect someone else.

There is always greed, and also the need to pay school bills, it's called human nature. It is quite expensive to acquire the background knowledge that will land you a job that requires you to make life and death decisions every day. That's why hospitals in the US take on the best graduates, pay those school bills with a sign-on bonus and assign experienced doctors to teach them the right decisions. The greed happens when they are the experienced doctor and the ego kicks in. Should be the same process - experienced scientists working with graduates, don't know they have sign-on bonuses. It also applies in the accounting field at CPA firms, having been there.

Besides controlling our legislators, I think breaking up the private mega banks, removing security trading from all bank balance sheets, regulating consumer lending (including credit cards) and actually enforcing the regulations would help tremendously in the US. Scrapping debt wouldn't be feasible because the bank lobby group is huge here. Lending their depositors' money is their business and profit from that is what their shareholders expect. But I'd love to hear what your Adam Smith group comes up with.
lupusdwb
24-Jun-12, 16:23

Reply to Shamash
Thank you for posting the BBC article about Bernanke. I respect the BBC as it still has some journalists.

I'm afraid we are all intertwined in the global "debt crisis". There are many European companies that operate in the States, many US companies that operate in Europe. What happens to Europe affects the US and vice versa. It is in our best interest to work together toward a solution that allows us both to survive.

Currency swaps have been happening for years and is a lively trade in personal accounts in the US. I'm not familiar with currency swaps but couldn't be too different from stock options, same concept just a different benchmark. I think the European term for stock options is credit derivatives, which in it's very simplest terms is a form of betting on the future price of a stock. So, if the US is benefiting from it now, it could just as easily go the other way.

You've got to admit none of the countries are telling the whole truth. To do so would obviously create a panic, wouldn't it? It's our job to cull through the enormous amount of information and find tidbits of fact.

Thank goodness for the media who also never tell the whole truth because many of them cut and paste others' news on their websites due to cutbacks in their industry. They don't get paid to research their claims, so in my estimation they are bloggers, not journalists. So we see a retraction or apology pretty frequently.

And then there's the definition of "truth" which seems to be subjective nowadays. I won't go there.

And lastly, this statement puzzles me:
.... "power would increasingly go to the financial giants on Wall Street and their allies in London, Frankfurt and Zurich. These are roughly the same folks who dominate the supposedly independent Federal Reserve, and Ben Bernanke’s inscrutable currency swaps will only feather their nest."

The Federal Reserve is an agency of the Federal Government, reports to Congress and has the responsibility to regulate private banks as well as numerous other tasks. I went back and looked at the FOMC Board's seven members and the twelve presidents of the Fed district banks and couldn't find but two who weren't former professors, lawyers, government workers and for the most part started at the Fed in their research department. Two of the Presidents had ties to banks, Dudley at the NY branch worked for Goldman Sachs and Lockhart at the Atlanta branch worked for Citibank. So, I haven't found anything about private banks dominating the government regulator that oversees them nor have I found anything about "feathering nests". Does the European Central Bank feather nests? ;>)
chrisforbes21
24-Jun-12, 16:52

Credit Derivatives
Most financial instruments are relatively easy to understand but the we use lots of fancy
terminology to confuse people. Credit derivatives are bundles of packaged debt, these can be
everything from retail debt, to housing market debt to government debt. Each derivative can
be packaged up to a few billion dollars then people can buy sell long or short them. Long and
short is when you do not own the instrument but you bet on the performance. These are
options. Sometimes they bundle several credit derivatives together and they are known as
CDO squared or hurricane CDOs. Its very hard to value these most of the models are using
assumptions that are not marked to market, hence the latest large JPMorgan loss which
currently stands at $2bn. In 2007 a lot of these CDO's were valued at 100% of priced value
but when the market collapsed they value dropped to 5%, these were supposedly AAA rated
and that is why the market collapsed overnight and trillions were wiped off global markets.
You had large banks that well leveraged to over 40 times their capital. That's like me
borrowing $4m with only $100,000 capital. When lots of the big banks like Lehman, Bear
Sterns, Merrill Lynch, RBS etc were caught in the short squeeze (ie pay back this amount or
we withdraw your credit line) they went bust or got bailed by the government.

Its not just the banks that carry this legacy debt a lot of it was taken on by central banks and
the governments and then this gets passed back to us in taxes. The EU went to bail out the
EU banks and governments with one Trillion Euros but most economist think this is not enough
if Italy which is leveraged to 120% of its GDP goes the same way as Ireland, Portugal, Greece
and Spain. Italy is the 3rd largest EU economy. Anyhow my main point is most of the money
is just paper bonds so they can be torn up and start over. There is far too much fear around
these instruments and world debt but when you study it, you may come round to my way of
thinking that it is possible to tear this stuff up and take the fear out of a world global
economic collapse.

shamash
25-Jun-12, 06:37

The Fed is not a Federal Agency, lupus
<<"The Reserve Banks are not federal agencies.">>
www.save-a-patriot.org


<<"Because "Federal Reserve" sounds like a federal name, and the Fed's chairman frequently
testifies before Congress and appears on news shows, most Americans reasonably assume
that the Federal Reserve and its member banks are all federal.

On the other hand, some people claim that the federal reserve system is not federal at all, and
is entirely owned by the member banks which it regulates. For example, Congressman Dennis
Kucinich said recently "the Federal Reserve is no more federal than Federal Express".

The Fed itself maintains that:

While the Fed’s Washington-based Board of Governors is a federal agency subject to the
Freedom of Information Act and other government rules, the New York Fed and other regional
banks maintain they are separate institutions, owned by their member banks, and not subject
to federal restrictions.">>

www.examiner.com
lupusdwb
25-Jun-12, 17:59

Deleted by lupusdwb on 25-Jun-12, 18:00.
lupusdwb
25-Jun-12, 18:02

Federal Reserve really is an agency of the US government
Here is the link to facts about the Fed. Note the web link contains "gov": www.federalreserve.gov
bencox1
26-Jun-12, 05:01

lupusdwb
I just want to quickly write to you about the link you gave to the website. It clearly has some mistakes. In the first sentence it says "The Federal Reserve, like many other central banks, is an independent government agency but also one that is ultimately accountable to the public and the Congress."
Two points I would like to make are that it uses the phrase "independent government agency" which I though it had already been established that the Federal Reserve was no more Federal than the Federal Express. Secondly it says that it "is ultimately accountable to the public and the Congress". I live in America and it is sad how many people still believe that the Federal Reserve is a government agencies and even more sad how many people could care less. The point I am trying to make is that the Federal Reserve is not accountable to the American people in any way; first off they are not elected officials but "appointed" second they keep nearly everything they did secret. That is why many the American people have woke up to this fact and have pushed for auditing the Federal Reserve to find out what they have been doing and how much money they have been printing unchecked.
abcnews.go.com
lupusdwb
26-Jun-12, 19:07

bencox1
I am saddened by your answer, Ben, as I was hoping for a discussion on World Debt and your thoughts on how to upright the global crisis. There are many more websites and many are provided by our government. The web is an amazing place to find information but you have to go to the source and research the facts, not depend on opinion.

I too live in America and for many more years than you have. And I agree with you, you're right... there are many people in America who appear to "care less" and that is heart wrenching, that so many could be so callous. It is an ugly election year, worse than any I have seen and rampant with special interest groups pouring money into ads that incite instead of inform. We need to be thinking about what is best for the entire nation, not what is best for only you or me. What is the basis of democracy but to thoughtfully prepare for voting for the best candidate you have researched and think will do the best job. Our candidates can't get past the inciteful to inform us of their capabilities.

As is typical in an election year, many find it opportunistic to shout their own agendas and try with all their might to force their agenda on the entire nation. This year the shouting is not coming from the people, it's coming from special interests. The problem is, there’s too much shouting and not enough discussion about solutions. Because of that, we are at a total standstill. And a lot of people are without jobs, Ben, they are seriously hurting and look to our legislators for solutions. We are a nation of many peoples and there is no one right answer for all. It will have to be a compromise. But I feel for the innocent people who have now been out of a job up to four years and are still waiting for reasonable, caring people to fill the jobs of legislators.

We've taken enough of our club mates' time. We are "off the topic" too. So I decline to answer your message. I hope with time you will consider that there are always two sides and choosing one against the other isn’t nearly as interesting as exploring both and coming up with fresh new ideas.
bencox1
27-Jun-12, 05:35

Off Topic
lupusdwb I don't think were "off topic" otherwise chrisforbes21 or another moderator would have told me so.
What I think is you don't like my view of world debt. I believe world debt was created by private banking cartels and the unlimited printing power they to created "money" out of thin air. I was just debating with you about the Federal Reserve because I am not as familar with other national banks.
Here is a link of nations past and a few present and their history of using fiat currency.
dailyreckoning.com
shamash
27-Jun-12, 15:00

the wisdom of benjamin franklin. . .er..... cox
Ben, I for one find your remarks illuminating, relevant, refreshing, articulate, helpful and most
welcome.
chrisforbes21
27-Jun-12, 15:15

back to my point
there is no reason we cannot scrub world debt
shamash
27-Jun-12, 15:31

O I agree, Chris, and. . .
here's a provocative remark from Bertold Brecht written during a previous World Depression:

<<"What's breaking into a bank compared with founding a bank?">>
chrisforbes21
27-Jun-12, 15:39

momentum
I am prepared to give my life for truth I have no fear a snow ball at the top of the hill. If we
cannot say truth then we lie to our soul
bencox1
27-Jun-12, 15:54

Scrub World Debt
I think that to start over with zero debt isn't possible. The repercussions would be massive. Think about China, the massive amount of money that they loan all over the world is too much for them to just forget about the whole thing. It isn't just money, though the amount America owes them, but also the mass exporting of goods which America buys on money that China lends them. So it isn't just money but then they would have to forget about the goods which will never be returned. It would be WWIII in the making...
But even so lets say that there were no tensions and no regrets. People would not be willing to move on to find a different monetary system not based on debt because people have been using this system for so long. It isn't easy for people to give up their large pocket book and actually balance the budget.
Individually I think scrubbing the world debt is great in the end it would end in chaos.
bencox1
27-Jun-12, 15:55

Money US owes China
Forget to include this in previous post...
www.npr.org
chrisforbes21
27-Jun-12, 16:00

I love this
www.youtube.com
chrisforbes21
27-Jun-12, 20:31

I am going to try and make this right
I am going to take on world debt hey I am not sure I will win but I will try to solve the issue now
that my friends is a great game of chess
lupusdwb
01-Jul-12, 11:30

Another try at World Debt
I am still interested in discussing World Debt. Without a workable solution, we are mired in global "tar pits" and cannot move forward.

I would prefer to discuss intelligently and thoughtfully instead of merely placing blame. What's done is done, no changing it.

However, looking back at history and seeing what happened can be instructive, as long as the events are taken in the context of the history in which they occurred. They are definitely useful as a starting point for fruitful, open discussion in current times.

Back in 2009, I taught a class on the reasons for the debt crisis and how it affected the investment markets. It included a discussion of this article from the New York Times which I think states the American reasons, at the time, quite well.

www.nytimes.com

This article was written in 2009, two years after the crisis started which is about how long it takes to admit there's a problem, and just before global investment markets bottomed out in March. The crisis was not just a local event, instead it was global. Not only that, but it is now 3.5 years later and more "errors in judgment" have occurred that have compounded the American problem. But it is not just an American problem, it is global. I would like to learn what, if anything different, happened in countries other than the US. Anyone have any similar articles specifically on what occurred in your countries related to the causes of the crisis?

And further, any ideas for right now to put up safeguards and yet continue to allow global financial exchange? For example, I don't think it's feasible to go back to isolationism. I don't think from looking at what's happening in the 17 nation European Union, that a global bank would be possible or advisable, though I'm certainly watching this with a great deal of interest. I don't think going back to a gold standard in every country would work because of the limited supply of gold, it's a finite commodity that would create wars similar to the oil wars now. I'm pondering Chris' stance on eliminating all debt and starting over. Are there other ideas?
bencox1
01-Jul-12, 16:32

Housing Bubble
www.lewrockwell.com It is simply a fact that the Federal Reserve created the housing bubble by flooding the market with billions (if not trillions) of dollars to make borrowing money artificially cheap. (please read the article for a detailed answer)
It is simple to anybody that you cannot last long without a balanced budget. Or if you were to print "money" in your basement then you would go to jail. The kind of economics that is employed in America (and all around the globe) is unethical and the response to world debt is simple.
We should balance the budget and stop policing the world. ( I personally think that a non intervention policy is the most logical). Also I would say that we should have all the printed currency backed by gold and silver and interchangeable at any bank. This is just for starters but overall a limited government that is for the people, and by the people is what is best for all nations across the world.
lupusdwb
01-Jul-12, 19:10

Housing Bubble
The discount rate at which banks borrowed money from the Fed in the 1980's was a range of 14% to 7%, in the 1990s the range was 7% to 5%. In both decades there were many new homes built and lots of homes bought and sold. However, it was hardly cheap for banks to borrow compared to .75% right now. So why aren't mortgage loans being made now when borrowing from the Fed is so cheap?

The answer is that many mortgage companies (these are not banks) sprung up during this time and they made the loans. There were especially unscrupulous companies, many of which are now out of business and lawsuits filed against them. Most of the money came from FHLMC (Freddie Mac) and FNMA (Fannie Mae), not from the Fed. These two bought the mortgages and then bundled them and sold them as credit derivatives.

As far as mortgage companies and banks now... the Fed requires more capital be kept limiting how much of the cash on hand can be loaned. The Fed is also strictly enforcing the regulations for documentation that has to be gathered about a borrower, before a loan is made, with monetary penalties if the documentation is not there when the regulators audit the bank. And a larger down payment is now required from the borrower, typically only 80% of the buying price is financed and most lower income people don't have that kind of cash. Some get around this with a second mortgage but that ups the cost of the first mortgage, so not a wise decision. There should not be any relaxation in this supervision ever again.

I disagree about a government backing a currency with gold and/or silver. Both are limited commodities and as I pointed out, we've had enough wars over scarce resources. I don't want another.

I agree with you about balancing the budget and not policing the world ie a large military budget. The US balanced it's budget before and I'm sure Congress will figure out how to do it again. We are certainly not the only country to aid allies in defending their country but we don't have to be the first ones there.

I don't have a problem with a "limited government that is for the people and by the people" as that is what our government is supposed to be. However, it does need to treat all citizens the same, no special privileges granted to the rich. And while we're at it, special consideration given to corporations or industries should not be allowed, no more lobbying allowed. And I would establish term limits for Representatives, Senators and Judges, just like there is for the president. No more making a career out of politics. I'd also change the length of the Representative term to 4 years, elections for a third of the House every two years. That should help cut down the constant campaigning in the House. It's a wonder they get anything done.

I think there would be a few governments that would argue with you about every country adopting the same type of government as ours, most notably Russia, Iran, Cuba and Venezuela. And there are still a few royal families out there too.

Unfortunately, a global crisis has required all governments to step in and stop another Great Depression. Unemployment in the 1930's was 25% in the US and up to 33% in other countries. Because of the actions taken this time, unemployment has not jumped that high. Although in the younger age group it is that high in the US as several of my nieces and nephews can attest.

In my opinion there were a lot more banks and corporations that should have collapsed in the recession we are climbing out of. But what's done, is done. And now the mess it created has to be cleaned up and safeguards put in place to stop it from happening again.
bencox1
02-Jul-12, 17:47

Cleaning up the mess
I agree with you about "cleaning up the mess" but I disagree that safeguards have to be put in place to prevent it. The problem is more safeguards and government intervention which is what caused this depression. I think that the three main issues regarding the economy need to be addressed. We need to end the Federal Reserve and put the power of printing money back to the Treasury Department and that the paper currency be limited to the amount of gold and silver available to eliminate inflation. Second I think that we should eliminate the IRS and let Americans keep what money they make there own. Thirdly I think that we should end Social Security. We should end it because it is the most expensive item in the federal budget. I propose that we end it slowly not ending it immediately but instead not including anyone under 21. Also I have already said that we should bring our troops home and end foreign wars. We should take the government out of the peoples lives and return freedom back to the people.
Pages: 12
Go to the last post



GameKnot: play chess online, chess teams, Internet chess league, monthly chess tournaments, chess clubs, online chess puzzles, free online chess games database and more.