US Stocks Down 15% in 2 Weeks

[opebo]

And thank you President Obama for providing this leadership to new depths.

The Republicans did it.

[opebo]

And thank you President Obama for providing this leadership to new depths.

The Republicans did it.

Wow, I had no idea Obama was a Republican.  Was that in the papers?

Obama had nothing to do with it.

[opebo]

Obama had nothing to do with it.

So, if Obama has no role in legislation, we should elect someone who will. 

The President never has any role in legislation, J.J. - he's from the executive branch you see.  The Legislative Branch is the Congress.

I think they will, but not it the "change" consists of policy that have not worked for 40 years.

The policy of the last 40 years has been neo-liberalism, and it is neo-liberalism which has failed.  Keynesianism has been abandoned for that same period, and this is precisely why we are now in a depression.

Laissez faire capitalism = depression
Keynesianism = prosperity

[opebo]

You have enough structural problems to bring down "the system".

Oil has finally given up the ghost -- $76.

Oil is basically what drove us to this point.  Expensive oil, consumer spending is lackluster... so companies don't stock up on stuff and are reluctant to hire...

Oil will crash... the economy will start to mend slowly.  And then as soon as the economy shows signs of growing again (albeit from a lower position than we are now), oil will spike again.  And the process repeats itself.

Wow, you are very off-base.  We are at this point because of poor government policy (neo-liberalism).

[opebo]

The President never has any role in legislation, J.J. - he's from the executive branch you see.  The Legislative Branch is the Congress.

Ever hear of a veto?

The veto would have led to precisely the same collapse.  The only way to avoid the depression was for the Republican congress to raise taxes upon the rich.

[opebo]

The veto would have led to precisely the same collapse.  The only way to avoid the depression was for the Republican congress to raise taxes upon the rich.

So Obama had the power, but lacked the leadership to use it.

No, he had no power at all.  He could accept the House's madness, and have a depression, or veto and have a depression.  It is the same either way.  He had no power at all to change anything.

Yes, there are two things, in tandem, to solve the fiscal problem, cut spending and raise revenue.

Actually a more responsible economic program - and one which would have lead to a more secure AAA rating - would be to increase both spending and taxation.

[opebo]

The spending was what lowered the rating.

No, it was the failure to increase taxes.

[opebo]

Multiply that  $1.44 trillion by four.  Bush had eight fiscal years, Obama's had two.

During recessions spending automatically increases, J.J.

[opebo]

Ever hear of the Keynesian Endpoint?

Why would I hear of some nonsense coined a year ago by an idiot?

[opebo]

Strongly considering converting my portfolio to cash at the end of the day.

Why not gold?

[opebo]

Learn to always have at least 20% of your portfolio in bonds, and 20% in equities,

Where's the other 60%? 

[opebo]

Ever hear of the Keynesian Endpoint?

Why would I hear of some nonsense coined a year ago by an idiot?

Actually first approached in the mid to late 1930.  Make sure you send a thank you note to Hitler for not getting there.

Hmm... ok.  So you're saying WWII wasn't Keynesian?

[opebo]

Hmm... ok.  So you're saying WWII wasn't Keynesian?

I doubt if Hitler was a Keynesian.  Even in the 1930's the the government didn't have enough resources to get the US out of the Depression.  It takes the private sector to solve the problem.

Um, I hate to break it to you, J.J., but the 'resources' of the 'private sector' are available to the government - through the obvious expedients of taxation, nationalization, etc. 

The point about World War Two was that it represented a government takeover of the 'private' economy, which is what solves depressions.

[opebo]

...World War Two was that it represented a government takeover of the 'private' economy, which is what solves depressions.

Reality check, the Germans did the same thing, and they ended in ruins.

Unrelated.  The government takeover of the economy was just as salubrious in Germany as in the US.  You're talking about the fighting, which was a separate issue.

[opebo]

FDR realized he couldn't win World War II without the private sector (and pissed off a number of New Dealers in the process).

But you do realize that economic activity was only created by government fiat, government order, government contract, don't you J.J.?  Had their not been a WWII there would never have been an escape from the Depression, and there would never have been the post-war halcyon days.  Just as we will never leave behind the current deflation/depression if we do not abandon laissez-faire capitalism and return to a high level of State guidance and redistribution.

[opebo]

The government did not create the market for the products.

The products were bombs, tanks, airplanes, and ships.. who were they selling them to?  Teenagers?

[opebo]

...our economy boomed after WWII. The German, and Japanese economies, also, boomed after the war. You can't plausibly claim that it was government fiat in WWII that lead to their booms, because their policies left their countries in a pile of rubble. Yet, you make the exact same claim about the US!

Of course I can make that claim - the Keynesian economics caused a boom in all countries, as it always does.  The pile-of-rubble effect was caused by the war, which is unrelated.  The war was merely the excuse for the spending, not a result of the spending.  We could re-create the same boom now by spending the money on that scale, but instead of blowing up the products we could just as well throw them in the ocean.

[opebo]

Germany simply didn't follow a Keynesian path after WWII.

Obviously I was talking about before and during the war, BS.  After the war there was no need for small countries to follow Keynesianism - they could simply export into the Great Keynesian Market (the USA).

The boom is the US was in part the result of our bombing their factories. We were the last producer left standing.

Simple nonsense, BS - production is never the key to any boom!  The boom in both Germany and the US was caused by Demand - Keynesian-created demand.  The very idea that 'production' creates a boom - haven't you noticed there was no production in China a couple of decades ago, and loads in Detroit?  Where are they now?

Good lord you right-wingers have everything so comically backwards.

[opebo]

Except, as pointed out, there is a diminishing marginal utility for government created demand.

Obviously there isn't, but even if there were it would be at the end of a high-growth inflationary period, and we are currently in a deflationary depression.

[opebo]

Ah, the inflation rate has been positive since 2009.

If you believe that, we're probably speaking different languages, J.J.  Actually it is rather funny how conservatives tend to doubt a lot of government economic statistics, but are always eager and willing to believe in 'inflation'.  We're having deflation, J.J., as bond yields show.  Just like Japan all over again.

[opebo]

You are talking about lower interest rates, not deflation. 

Yeah, lower interest rates are the best evidence of deflation there is.

Besides, the price of real estate is still going down, which is by far the most important aspect of deflation.