Posted on 11/02/2007 5:23:12 AM PDT by Thorin
The euro, worth 83 cents in the early George W. Bush years, is at $1.45.
The British pound is back up over $2, the highest level since the Carter era. The Canadian dollar, which used to be worth 65 cents, is worth more than the U.S. dollar for the first time in half a century.
Oil is over $90 a barrel. Gold, down to $260 an ounce not so long ago, has hit $800.
Have gold, silver, oil, the euro, the pound and the Canadian dollar all suddenly soared in value in just a few years?
Nope. The dollar has plummeted in value, more so in Bush's term than during any comparable period of U.S. history. Indeed, Bush is presiding over a worldwide abandonment of the American dollar.
Is it all Bush's fault? Nope.
The dollar is plunging because America has been living beyond her means, borrowing $2 billion a day from foreign nations to maintain her standard of living and to sustain the American Imperium.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Yeah, if you peg the value of the dollar to gold, the price of gold will be remarkably stable. LOL!
Real wages for median wage earners (read, the middle class) are only marginally higher today than they were in 1973. And they are trending down.
When did I ever say that, comrade?
That's what nice about a site that saves all old post. I will find it this weekend and post it.
You go girl!
Those Arabs weren't stupid.
Looks like they jumped after NAFTA.
And they are trending down.
According to your left-wing, union backed source. You have any conservative sources you could use? Not that I don't trust you or the AFL-CIO......
Of course, we'd also have to adopt a standard of living comparable to what we had in the 1930s. You think you'll get many takers on that one?
Can the bull crap. You think it's OK to run 800 billion dollar trade deficits? The markets have been rendering a verdict on this practice
And my point isn't that we should or must be self sufficient. My point is out trade should be in balance and that's not asking too much since the EU is basically in trade balance with the world
And as shown above, they don't even read their own material. What makes you think they'll understand where it's coming from?
Lots of those NAFTA jobs have since moved to China
NAFTA drove lots of Mexicans off the land. The cheap corn we sent there did it.
Lots of those Mexican peasants came here illegally
NAFTA stinks
You ever going to show us how we've been harmed? Or are you going to keep shrieking $800 billion, $800 billion ad nauseum?
The Chinese, our friends and the ones who laughed gleefully when shown pictures of 9/11, would just love to dump their bonds. They will, no doubt, when it pleases them.
“borrowing $2 billion a day from foreign nations to maintain her standard of living and to sustain the American Imperium.”
BS. Congress has been living beyond it’s means, not Americans. The balance of American savings accounts has nothing to do with the strength of the dollar.
You do realize those temporary injections ($160 billion you list) are removed from the market in 30 days or less?
You think it’s OK to run 800 billion dollar trade deficits? The markets have been rendering a verdict on this practice
I think I’ve stumbled across dennis’ solution to our illegal immigration problem. Drive our economy into the tank so that they have no incentive to come over.
Trade deficits are not a problem as long as our trading partners have enough faith in our financial system to turn around and invest that money back in the U.S. In most cases, this means they are looking for a decent rate of return in a safe jurisdiction where their money will retain its value over time. The verdict that has been rendered here by the markets is not a verdict about our trade deficits -- it's a verdict about the gross financial irresponsibility of the U.S. government in piling up $9+ trillion in debt while at the same time passing huge new domestic programs that will require massive (currently not identified) government expenditures in the future.
"The market" is simply saying that a 4.4% to 4.7% rate of return (the current rate on U.S. 10-year to 30-year notes) isn't enough to cover the risk of investing in the U.S., in light of the fact that this $9+ trillion debt -- and the future government liabilities I mentioned -- will have to be paid through (1) massive tax increases, and/or (2) massive inflation of the U.S. dollar.
The market has good reason to behave this way. And it has nothing to do with trade deficits, either.
That's where I've seen the smoke and mirrors from many who gather and massage numbers, and that's what has me perplexed as to the data in a lot of posts and places.
IMHO, from what I've seen, we're heading into the down side of the next economic cycle and we've had that before, but never with oil, energy, and food costs jumping in 2 years like this based upon a percentage.
I do understand that purchasing a house represents debt assuming it will appreciate in value. Autos, though taxed as real property and still loses value, is a lot of times considered 'debt', but, more like unfunded liability (LOL!) Credit card balances are like debt, right?.
Aren't unfunded liabilities considered payouts to the by the government to recipients for like Social Security, Medicare, and Retirements? Employers have the same obligations too to their retirees (well at least in the past). T-bills, bonds, the government issues is pure debt, right??
It's been my understanding that the Treasury Department (central bank) keeps issuing the t-bills for China, Great Britain, Saudi, Japland, etc., to purchase so we can keep the pork spending going, pay for the unfunded liabilities, and fight the WOT? Miss anything? Didn't we officially (the US government) run out of it's budgeted money last month?
Interesting.....write a check, post date it before it can be cashed and hope like he$$ the money comes in from somewhere.
What's the percent GDP, right now, better yet, percent annual budget, the US has to pay or its notes coming due?
No Dems...No Dems...they dissassemble!!!
I haven't seen how we've been harmed by it yet. After repeated requests, you haven't shown any harm yet either.
The markets have been rendering a verdict on this practice
I think markets should be allowed to do that, without the government interference you'd prefer.
Post #265
Ummmm.....if the market was saying that, the rates of return would be higher than 4.4%.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.