Record $14 trillion-plus debt weighs on Congress

[Edbear]

http://www.expatica.com/ch/news/swis...os_124967.html

""The world has fundamentally changed," said Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum which organises the annual meeting at the Alpine resort.

"One of the most important factors of the new reality is the shift of geopolitical and geoeconomic power from north to south, from west to east.

"This has not only political and economic consequences. I think the world will go through some shock waves of adaptation," he added.

The south and east are taking up a bigger seat in this new world, as illustrated by the participation of emerging giants like India and China at the meeting.""

[Oscar]

What will they do...

"Remarkably, nearly half of today's national debt was run up in just the past six years. It soared from $7.6 trillion in January 2005 as President George W. Bush began his second term to $10.6 trillion the day Obama was inaugurated and to $14.02 trillion now. The period has seen two major wars and the deepest economic downturn since the 1930s."

"Here's what then-Sen. Barack Obama said on the Senate floor in 2006: "The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. government can't pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance the government's reckless fiscal policies."" Get outta that one Mr Obama. And who are these super rich countries that that you can borrow Trillions off?

Anyhoo, they're gonna be searching for ways to cut the deficit etc... sounds like it's open season on new tax creation... Hmmmm, is it just me or does that sound remarkably familiar to our situation?

Govt outsourcing to the private sector is the best way to get things done eh? I think not!

Good luck America, looks like you're gonna need it. Hope you don't go the way of the Tunisians

(the Tunisian link I chose highlights the UTTER ignorance of the media

"We should stop trying to fit the events in Tunisia into a Western context. It simplifies things, but it also overlooks the real forces of change at work in the North African country. This isn't about Facebook, or Wikileaks, or Twitter — it's about the people of Tunisia being fed up with decades of marginalization at the hands of a Western-backed kleptocracy, and taking charge of their own future. Among the issues that brought about the events of the last month: Low wages, few job prospects for a growing educated class, high food prices, and a heavy-handed government lead by former President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. Did social media have an effect on events in Tunisia? Undoubtedly, yes. Is this a social media revolution? Absolutely not.")

A comparison between the US and Tunisia...what have you been smoking?
Care to elucidate how the two economies (not to mention the two societies) are even vaguely similar?

[Winston001]

It's not complex at all. The tax payer of the country that's going down the gurgler will pay... not those who made the shitty deal, not the govt, not the country, not those who have called in the loans, not the businesses (they just go under and fuck off with what cash they can)... so who pays?

The tax payer!



Yet they are still over 1 trillion pounds in debt. How can that be if what you say above is correct? Who's gonna pay for that debt?

The tax payer!

No. This is confusing public debt with private debt. Government borrowing with private borrowing. The money lost by many private borrowers is gone and will not be repaid to overseas lenders. However some of that money has been guaranteed by governments to keep banks afloat and to that extent, the losses are taken over by the taxpayer.

Governments themselves issue treasury bonds which is the way they borrow money. NZ for example is borrowing $300 million per week to fund public expenditure but also receives taxes to partly offset the loans. That still leaves Bill English with an $11 billion annual deficit and a huge headache.

In 1933 Franklin Roosevelt introduced the New Deal which was a revolutionary idea for the times and stemmed from the work of economist Maynard Keynes. The American government borrowed and spent money in the economy which stimulated jobs and pulled America and much of the world out of the Great Depression. One legacy is their magnificent freeway system.

That is what is happening now. Keynesian economics.

[Winston001]

http://www.expatica.com/ch/news/swis...os_124967.html

""The world has fundamentally changed," said Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum which organises the annual meeting at the Alpine resort.

"One of the most important factors of the new reality is the shift of geopolitical and geoeconomic power from north to south, from west to east.

"This has not only political and economic consequences. I think the world will go through some shock waves of adaptation," he added.

The south and east are taking up a bigger seat in this new world, as illustrated by the participation of emerging giants like India and China at the meeting.""

Yep, nice find which expresses the new reality. You'll note he does not say the OECD nations will collapse or that the world economy will end. Just that former third world nations now have more power and economic muscle in the world. Two millennia ago some Italians controlled the known world. 1200 years later a vigorous chap from Mongolia held an empire from the Pacific ocean to Hungary.

These balances of power are always changing and we needn't fear them. The OECD nations will repay their debts and be poorer as a result but they will still have Ducatis and skiing in the French Alps. It takes total war to wipe out the wealth of a nation. Or not - consider Japan and Germany today.

[Brian d marge]

- and it lost far more in two World Wars than the US has currently put at risk.

and some of us are still pissed off about this

Stephen

America , used the war , to position itself

a war which threatened the whole western way of life

underhanded evil baskets

[racefactory]

Yep, nice find which expresses the new reality. You'll note he does not say the OECD nations will collapse or that the world economy will end. Just that former third world nations now have more power and economic muscle in the world. Two millennia ago some Italians controlled the known world. 1200 years later a vigorous chap from Mongolia held an empire from the Pacific ocean to Hungary.

These balances of power are always changing and we needn't fear them. The OECD nations will repay their debts and be poorer as a result but they will still have Ducatis and skiing in the French Alps. It takes total war to wipe out the wealth of a nation. Or not - consider Japan and Germany today.

Nice post.

[mashman]

A comparison between the US and Tunisia...what have you been smoking?
Care to elucidate how the two economies (not to mention the two societies) are even vaguely similar?

Yup. People and Money.

[mashman]

No. This is confusing public debt with private debt. Government borrowing with private borrowing. The money lost by many private borrowers is gone and will not be repaid to overseas lenders. However some of that money has been guaranteed by governments to keep banks afloat and to that extent, the losses are taken over by the taxpayer.

Governments themselves issue treasury bonds which is the way they borrow money. NZ for example is borrowing $300 million per week to fund public expenditure but also receives taxes to partly offset the loans. That still leaves Bill English with an $11 billion annual deficit and a huge headache.

In 1933 Franklin Roosevelt introduced the New Deal which was a revolutionary idea for the times and stemmed from the work of economist Maynard Keynes. The American government borrowed and spent money in the economy which stimulated jobs and pulled America and much of the world out of the Great Depression. One legacy is their magnificent freeway system.

That is what is happening now. Keynesian economics.

... not to mention the already subsidised private "industries" ... When the private company ups their prices, I pay for them (and by default am servicing the company debt). When the public costs go up, I pay for them... I also pay for the costs that the private contractors charge for public services and worse should they go tits... Tis the tax payer that foots the bill for the lot, granted not ALL private debt, never meant it that way... but I'll have to fund the knock ons... When a private business fails who looks after the employees? As you mention there are cross overs and likely many many more than my tiny mind can think of... but I, as a tax payer, fund a fair chunk of that debt.

Economics has a lot to answer for.

[Oscar]

Yup. People and Money.

People & money - pretty much includes the whole world.
So explain why you put US debt, the fall of the Tunisian Regime and an opinion piece on social networks in the same post.

[Oscar]

I also pay for the costs that the private contractors charge for public services

So if it was Govt./Local Body owned, you wouldn't pay?

[mashman]

People & money - pretty much includes the whole world.
So explain why you put US debt, the fall of the Tunisian Regime and an opinion piece on social networks in the same post.

It does .
Because there's a shitload more people in America, the Tunisians are also having problems brought on by lack of finance etc..., it'd be much more messyerer if America decided to go the direction of the Tunisians (hence the I hope they don't go that way), and America is the home, imho, of the Social Network (although I posted the opinion piece because I thought is was quite ironic (and no I won't explain my reasons if you didn't see the irony )). Did i pass the test .

So if it was Govt./Local Body owned, you wouldn't pay?

I thought "When the public costs go up, I pay for them" pretty much covered that bit.

[Oscar]

It does .
Because there's a shitload more people in America, the Tunisians are also having problems brought on by lack of finance etc..., it'd be much more messyerer if America decided to go the direction of the Tunisians (hence the I hope they don't go that way), and America is the home, imho, of the Social Network (although I posted the opinion piece because I thought is was quite ironic (and no I won't explain my reasons if you didn't see the irony )). Did i pass the test .



.

If the test was to post three vaguely related subjects, you get a "merit".

As for the rest - very little part of the situation in Tunisia translates to the US (apart from the obvious people and money stuff).

You are comparing the collapse of a violent totalitarian regime to the world's richest ‎democracy. The unrest in Tunisia was brought about by the unemployment rate ‎amongst educated young people in a rapidly growing economy (one built on tourism ‎and unskilled labour) since 2005. ‎

And the real stupid thing is that your post highlights the US foreign debt situation, whereas ‎Tunisia has no overseas debt problem to speak of. It owes a piffling US$18b on a est. GDP of US$100b ‎‎(down from $19b last year).‎
Even it's public debt to GDP ratio is lower than that of the US (and NZ for that matter).

Perhaps you could change your user name to "Apples & Oranges"?

[mashman]

If the test was to post three vaguely related subjects, you get a "merit".

You look at it in your terms, i'll look at it in mine ... deja vu much?

As for the rest - very little part of the situation in Tunisia translates to the US (apart from the obvious people and money stuff).

aye, nothing at all

You are comparing the collapse of a violent totalitarian regime to the world's richest ‎democracy. The unrest in Tunisia was brought about by the unemployment rate ‎amongst educated young people in a rapidly growing economy (one built on tourism ‎and unskilled labour) since 2005. ‎

Democracy ... the US seems to be closer to a totalitarian regime (i looked it up) than a democracy. The US dont have unemployment problems? They aren't educated? The US doesn't have Tourism? the US doesn't have unskilled labor?

And the real stupid thing is that your post highlights the US foreign debt situation, whereas ‎Tunisia has no overseas debt problem to speak of. It owes a piffling US$18b on a est. GDP of US$100b ‎‎(down from $19b last year).‎
Even it's public debt to GDP ratio is lower than that of the US (and NZ for that matter).

Perhaps you could change your user name to "Apples & Oranges"?

the really stupid thing is that you call apples and oranges based on the label given to the political setup of the US and Tunisia? bravo ... the people and money is irrelevant by that definition

[Oscar]

Democracy ... the US seems to be closer to a totalitarian regime (i looked it up) than a democracy. The US dont have unemployment problems? They aren't educated? The US doesn't have Tourism? the US doesn't have unskilled labor?

This is a truly stupid comment, and indicates that you do not understand the issues and since you obviously aren't capable of communicating in anything other than hyperbole, I'm not going to bother arguing.

[mashman]

This is a truly stupid comment, and indicates that you do not understand the issues and since you obviously aren't capable of communicating in anything other than hyperbole, I'm not going to bother arguing.

Arguing ? How about, just for a change Oscar, you actually try putting YOUR point across (because you never do), with the facts that you obviously have that I don't or have missed, instead of keeping all of those details to yourself. Perhaps I would then have a more balanced view of the situation and might actually learn something . I would be utterly stunned if it was in your capacity to do it, as it's something i'm yet to see. In the meantime, I will hyperbole (WTF does that word mean anyway) my fat little ass off.