The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

Federal Reserve Bank and the economy

Just_Bri_ThanksJust_Bri_Thanks Seething with ragefrom a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPA regular
edited May 2009 in Debate and/or Discourse
My roomie and I were talking about the economy this afternoon, and I realized I don't really know what is going on here.

I showed him recovery.gov and the Fed's wikipedia article, but I don't have any real background in finance; so can anyone explain what recent actions the Fed has taken to help with the economy?

I find the whole thing a bit confusing, especially when discussing it with an ESL with a background in reinsurance.

...and when you are done with that; take a folding
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
Just_Bri_Thanks on
«13

Posts

  • slurpeepoopslurpeepoop Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    If you're not suicidal, are still young enough to love your fellow man unconditionally, and believe that at our core, humans are good people, just walk away.

    Don't look back.

    slurpeepoop on
  • Just_Bri_ThanksJust_Bri_Thanks Seething with rage from a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2009
    I am not suicidal, I hate everyone equally, and I believe that lots of people suck.

    By all means, please continue.

    Just_Bri_Thanks on
    ...and when you are done with that; take a folding
    chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
  • Pi-r8Pi-r8 Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    The Federal Reserve Bank is sort of helpless right now. Typically what they do to stimulate the economy in recessions like this is to lower interest rates, which makes it easier for banks to borrow money and just generally gets money circulation faster. But right now, their interest rates are already at zero, so what else can they do? Although there was a (half-serious) proposal for them to start using a negative interest rate.

    Pi-r8 on
  • Just_Bri_ThanksJust_Bri_Thanks Seething with rage from a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2009
    How would that even work?

    Just_Bri_Thanks on
    ...and when you are done with that; take a folding
    chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
  • Pi-r8Pi-r8 Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    I guess banks that borrowed money from the reserve would pay back less than what they originally borrowed. Doesn't really make much sense.
    edit: From what I understand, they weren't honestly considering that. It was just proposed as a way for them to think "outside the box" and find SOMETHING they could do to help restart the economy.

    Pi-r8 on
  • saggiosaggio Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    My roomie and I were talking about the economy this afternoon, and I realized I don't really know what is going on here.

    I showed him recovery.gov and the Fed's wikipedia article, but I don't have any real background in finance; so can anyone explain what recent actions the Fed has taken to help with the economy?

    I find the whole thing a bit confusing, especially when discussing it with an ESL with a background in reinsurance.

    The Federal Reserve is the U.S.'s central bank, tasked with a) keeping inflation low, and, b) ensuring employment is at a reasonable target. These two things are actually diametrically opposed, in economical terms, which is one of the reasons why the Fed is kinda wonky.

    Regardless of that, however, the main weapon the Fed uses is its control over monetary policy - it can raise and lower the main interest rate that banks may borrow under. Raising or lowering this rate may raise or lower inflation, via the availability (or liquidity) of credit. At the moment, most central banks (such as the Bank of Canada), are either at 0% or just above it (0.25%), which means that the effect that monetary policy can have on the economy is now effectively nil.

    This is why all governments are talking about fiscal stimulus.

    saggio on
    3DS: 0232-9436-6893
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    edited May 2009
    How would that even work?

    My poli sci professor last semester told me that negative interest rates can work, but they're kind of screwy.

    Captain Carrot on
  • slurpeepoopslurpeepoop Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Well, to sum up:

    Over the past 50 years, "ownership" no longer has the traditional, proper definition. America feels that constantly paying for then constantly upgrading material non-owned possessions a preferable means of existence than paying off then owning said material possessions. American penis size grows to nearly 4 feet in length.

    Banks come off a decade of unprecedented prosperity.

    They reward the general populace with additional fees, eliminate or begin charging "niceties", and slowly begin to try to squeeze any more possible profit they possibly can out of customers due to Board of Directors demanding that heads will roll if the unprecedented wealth does not continue.

    Greedy company execs minimize payroll, inventory, production, benefits, and do everything they can to avoid paying taxes while simultaneously breaking records over and over again on maximizing their own paychecks, perks, and benefits. Board of Directors also demand that profit stays at all time high or heads will roll.

    Banks begin policy of lending out money (that belongs to the bank's customers) at a record pace, so the accounting books show unparalleled profit potential. Feasibility of loans not really in question. Exec and CEO positions change hands so rapidly nobody working in the corporate sector looks at the potential 10 years down the road.

    The American dollar soars, despite only 8%-10% of money actually existing. Other 90% of "money" in the economy consists of dollars in computers which don't actually exist. Credit card debt soars.

    People begin defaulting on their loans. A national average of $100,000 debt per living person in the USA seems to outpace earning potential.

    Debtors start pulling their savings, investments, 401k, renegotiating their mortgages, etc. before finally declaring bankruptcy, defaulting on loans from the bank.

    Banks, now owning bankruptcy debtor's debt, has less of their own customers' money to loan to others.

    Repeat about 25 million times.

    Greedy company execs and labor unions, having spent the last few years crippling their companies for their own selfish, short-term goals, are met with opposition by Board of Directors on why stock is starting to slide. They cripple company further by beginning an ongoing series of layoffs, new production schedules, and other changes which benefit the company's bottom line for a very short term. leaders then leave the company to start their own startup or another company looking for leadership with a resume showing the goals they met in such a short period of time.

    Companies, now needing fresh cash to reinvigorate their company, go to the bank asking for a loan. Bank approves, despite there not being enough money to pay their own customers if the customers have the audacity to ask for their own money.

    Companies go all out, investing in anything that could add another number to the bottom line profit margin, while simultaneously cutting every form of doing business possible while execs' pay soars. Morale, customer service, and products/services suffer. Layoffs continue, raising the total debt per living human while lowering the ability to pay it back.

    About this time, Cleveland gets hit with about a 80% unemployment rate.

    Companies need more money to keep bullshitting the accounting books and stay afloat by getting more loans, selling off more stock, merging, starting subsidiaries, etc. Banks, now facing bankruptcy, deny the large corporate loans.

    Companies, now facing a steep, steep dive into debt without the ability to pay it off, continue with more layoffs, cut production, and begin a grand exodus to other countries, where every aspect of business is cheaper while simultaneously charging more for inferior goods and services.

    Banks are now faced with an almost National Debt level of debt, since the unemployment rate has skyrocketed, companies are defaulting on loans, and people who are still unemployed are still having issues paying their debt down.

    About this time, the American penis size shrinks down to the size of a Vienna sausage.

    People panic, and they begin selling stock, pulling out savings, and start jumping out of windows.

    The government decides that instead of paying each U.S. citizen $15,000 to get by until things get better, they'll spend the next couple years investing nearly 2 trillion dollars into the floundering companies to save a few hundred thousand jobs, rewarding the same people who began this predicament in the first place. Free money is traded for invisible debt, invisible money that does not exist, and invisible "potential profit", all of which is to be auctioned off to the highest bidder for a fraction of a penny on the dollar.

    Companies decide that instead of buckling down and selling company Lamborghinis to pay off debt or to actually look at their company and see why they've driven themselves into a brick wall, they go to the government and beg for more money. Government hands out taxpayer money, which is then used for exec vacations, bonuses, and hookers.

    Companies, ignoring the actual reasons their company is understaffed, have no tenured/experienced managers, generate inferior products due to increased production schedules with no manpower, all while using cheaper materials/manufacturing processes, go bankrupt anyway. Invested money becomes worthless, adding to banks' and the government's debt.

    Banks use up remaining invisible money in their computers to buy/merge/sellout to other banks/companies, while creating new subsidiaries, so when companies go bankrupt, all assets/loans/others' debts will be paid to the new company, leaving the first company penniless when they go to tax court while having a new startup company with millions in credit to start anew while maintaining execs' high level of pay.

    US government's loan application to world banks saying "Hey, we're America! We're good for it!" no longer acceptable. Government begins creating new invisible money that does not exist to give to banks and companies and pay FDIC guarantees to banks, who use invisible money that does not exist to liquidate themselves while they merge with other companies/get sold to "new" companies. Loans are given out less often than the frequency of dates I have with Tatyana Ali (we've never met).

    Average Joe is officially now broke (he always has been), possibly unemployed, and realizes it, hoarding money like no tomorrow, quits spending money.

    Companies across the board make less money than ever.

    Repeat this process 300 million times.

    Companies produce less inferior product.

    All aspects of industry, from shipping to materials to processing, go downhill. The entire world feels the burn of America's inability to gorge themselves like the self-centered, sheltered slobs they are. World economy drops like a rock.

    Amish people worldwide point and impersonate Nelson Muntz.

    Government scrambles to find someone, somewhere, to get enough real money from to use as "flash cash" to prove that the US government, along with its economy, is worth investing in.




    Which is where we're at now.

    Essentially, the companies have been screwing Average Joe for decades while getting rich. While trying to get richer, they screw Average Joe even more. When they run out of ways to screw Average Joe, they go to the government, which gives them the tax money that Average Joe gave the government to run the country.

    Average Joe decides that he needs to save his money since everyone else is being irresponsible with their money, which is a little late with his two mortgages, the $80,000 SUV payment, and nearly $40,000 in credit card debt.

    There is no money to pay for the debt we've racked up. If Obama was to collect every dollar, pound, sheckle, lira, and dubloon in the entire world, we would still owe tens of trillions of dollars.

    slurpeepoop on
  • necroSYSnecroSYS Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2009
    The previous wall o' text was pretty good, but failed to mention (or I didn't see the restatement of) the (relative) hilarity of credit default swaps, short-term derivative assets, etc....basically meaning that every dollar most of the financial behemoths actually "made" in the last twenty or so years was or is carrying hundreds of dollars in side-bets....and the bundling of CDS products and stamping them with a bullshit rating means that noone is really qualified to say how shaky a company's assets are any more.

    necroSYS on
  • slurpeepoopslurpeepoop Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Well, I was attempting to summarize as much as possible, and even though I missed a few key parts, as well as your suggestions, I still ran pretty long.

    The sad thing is, that wall of text could easily swell up to 1000 times that size without adding much more detail and just explaining more "cause/effect" situations.

    That's how bad the situation is.

    slurpeepoop on
  • ronyaronya Arrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
    edited May 2009
    How would that even work?

    My poli sci professor last semester told me that negative interest rates can work, but they're kind of screwy.

    It's very easy to induce negative interest rates: commit credibly to high inflation. Bang, real interest rates drop like a stone.

    Remember, the Fed exercises explicit control over nominal interest rates (which are now close to zero). But we don't really care about nominal rates, what really matters is the real rate. Inflation reduces the real rate.

    ronya on
    aRkpc.gif
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    edited May 2009
    I thought the Fed's rate was important in terms of monetary policy.

    Captain Carrot on
  • necroSYSnecroSYS Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2009
    Essentially, the companies have been screwing Average Joe for decades while getting rich. While trying to get richer, they screw Average Joe even more. When they run out of ways to screw Average Joe, they go to the government, which gives them the tax money that Average Joe gave the government to run the country.

    Average Joe decides that he needs to save his money since everyone else is being irresponsible with their money, which is a little late with his two mortgages, the $80,000 SUV payment, and nearly $40,000 in credit card debt.

    There is no money to pay for the debt we've racked up. If Obama was to collect every dollar, pound, sheckle, lira, and dubloon in the entire world, we would still owe tens of trillions of dollars.
    As I said in my previous post, part of what you have to realize is that most of this tens of trillions of dollars is literally made-up debt from made-up profits based on made-up derivative instruments. In the 80s and 90s, people realized that there was a finite supply of money but in order to keep making salaries that would make Croesus blush, they had to keep showing record profits. Instead of finding ways to take money from their competitors, they found ways to sell the debt they were carrying to their competitors (and to buy their competitors' debt)....and found ways to insure the new debt, essentially betting on whether their loan to another company to own a sum of their own debt would be paid back.....

    So, now we (collectively as a country and as the First-World) owe hundreds of trillions of dollars, much of it to China, who has been more than happy to print money and sell us cheaply produced shit in order to finance our laughing-gas huffing financial wizards' economic dreams of an empire built entirely on unicorns. So, to add to the hilarity of the above, we're basically counting on China to continue being its efficient, brutal self in order to keep the dream of the First-World alive. Because if the yuan tanked tomorrow, China would probably start calling its loans due, and everyone would be eating dog food well into the next century.

    necroSYS on
  • necroSYSnecroSYS Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2009
    Well, I was attempting to summarize as much as possible, and even though I missed a few key parts, as well as your suggestions, I still ran pretty long.

    The sad thing is, that wall of text could easily swell up to 1000 times that size without adding much more detail and just explaining more "cause/effect" situations.

    That's how bad the situation is.

    I agree, but I think it's important to mention the whole CDS or How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Mark Everyone's Debt A1 phenomenon.

    necroSYS on
  • Pi-r8Pi-r8 Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Well, I was attempting to summarize as much as possible, and even though I missed a few key parts, as well as your suggestions, I still ran pretty long.

    The sad thing is, that wall of text could easily swell up to 1000 times that size without adding much more detail and just explaining more "cause/effect" situations.

    That's how bad the situation is.

    Aside from the fact that your wall o' text has a ridiculous anti-business and anti-bank bias to it (There's a reason that most of the world's richest countries also have a well developed financial industry, you know- they provide an important service), it also has nothing to do with the federal reserve bank, which was the original thread topic.

    Pi-r8 on
  • necroSYSnecroSYS Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2009
    Pi-r8 wrote: »
    (There's a reason that most of the world's richest countries also have a well developed financial industry, you know- they provide an important service)

    No, savings and loan institutions provide an important service. Most financial industry companies' only service is fucking everyone in the world over in the name of pretend money and massive, irresponsible greed.

    necroSYS on
  • necroSYSnecroSYS Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2009
    Pi-r8 wrote: »
    it also has nothing to do with the federal reserve bank, which was the original thread topic.

    Read the subject and the OP again. The topic is broader than just the Fed.

    necroSYS on
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Pi-r8 wrote: »
    Well, I was attempting to summarize as much as possible, and even though I missed a few key parts, as well as your suggestions, I still ran pretty long.

    The sad thing is, that wall of text could easily swell up to 1000 times that size without adding much more detail and just explaining more "cause/effect" situations.

    That's how bad the situation is.

    Aside from the fact that your wall o' text has a ridiculous anti-business and anti-bank bias to it (There's a reason that most of the world's richest countries also have a well developed financial industry, you know- they provide an important service), it also has nothing to do with the federal reserve bank, which was the original thread topic.
    Well, oddly enough, the last three words in the title cover his wall of text, and yet, your comment does nothing except bring up completely vague opposition.

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud on
  • Just_Bri_ThanksJust_Bri_Thanks Seething with rage from a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2009
    Easy now. Let's please skip past the hostility stage and continue with the yummy, yummy infodump.

    Just_Bri_Thanks on
    ...and when you are done with that; take a folding
    chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
  • CantidoCantido Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Can we ask the government to turn off The End of the World?

    Cantido on
    3DS Friendcode 5413-1311-3767
  • ronyaronya Arrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
    edited May 2009
    I thought the Fed's rate was important in terms of monetary policy.

    Well, it is. It can't drag nominal interest rates below zero. It can push real interest rates below zero by cooperating with the Treasury. Real interest rates are part of monetary policy. What about it?

    ronya on
    aRkpc.gif
  • YarYar Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    The Fed is buy hundreds of billions of dollars in treasury bonds. Which is pretty fucking close to the government just printing money. But the purchase of all these bond drives their value sky-high and their yield into the gutter, which is what drives mortgage rates. Which is what caused mortgage rates to recently fall to their lowest rates in the history of ever. Like lower than we've ever measured here in the U.S., but I think the UK says they were lower back during Shakespeare or something.

    This significantly eases (but does not reverse) the housing slump, because it makes it really affordable to get a loan again, even though you can't do the crazy loans anymore.

    That's what the fed is doing.

    Yar on
  • SavantSavant Simply Barbaric Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    necroSYS wrote: »
    Essentially, the companies have been screwing Average Joe for decades while getting rich. While trying to get richer, they screw Average Joe even more. When they run out of ways to screw Average Joe, they go to the government, which gives them the tax money that Average Joe gave the government to run the country.

    Average Joe decides that he needs to save his money since everyone else is being irresponsible with their money, which is a little late with his two mortgages, the $80,000 SUV payment, and nearly $40,000 in credit card debt.

    There is no money to pay for the debt we've racked up. If Obama was to collect every dollar, pound, sheckle, lira, and dubloon in the entire world, we would still owe tens of trillions of dollars.
    As I said in my previous post, part of what you have to realize is that most of this tens of trillions of dollars is literally made-up debt from made-up profits based on made-up derivative instruments. In the 80s and 90s, people realized that there was a finite supply of money but in order to keep making salaries that would make Croesus blush, they had to keep showing record profits. Instead of finding ways to take money from their competitors, they found ways to sell the debt they were carrying to their competitors (and to buy their competitors' debt)....and found ways to insure the new debt, essentially betting on whether their loan to another company to own a sum of their own debt would be paid back.....

    So, now we (collectively as a country and as the First-World) owe hundreds of trillions of dollars, much of it to China, who has been more than happy to print money and sell us cheaply produced shit in order to finance our laughing-gas huffing financial wizards' economic dreams of an empire built entirely on unicorns. So, to add to the hilarity of the above, we're basically counting on China to continue being its efficient, brutal self in order to keep the dream of the First-World alive. Because if the yuan tanked tomorrow, China would probably start calling its loans due, and everyone would be eating dog food well into the next century.

    It's not that simple. China and the US have a murder-suicide pact or mutually assured economic destruction if either tries to do anything too drastic. We owe them boatloads of money, but it is boatloads of paper money (US dollars) that we have control over. The US has the power of the printing press, which it wouldn't if it owed China a bunch of gold or foreign currency, which would necessitate alchemy, counterfeiting, or defaulting on the debt if we couldn't pay. The last one, defaulting on foreign currency, happens more often than you would probably like, and Russia did it not too long ago.

    Additionally, we are buying a bunch of China's cheap crap (in turn with our crappy paper money), and they are in trouble if we have to stop buying it since they are a highly export geared developing economy. That will require them to focus inwards or find other buyers, and quickly because they'll be a lot of lost jobs and political turmoil if they don't.

    As for the Federal Reserve, no one seems to be talking about it much, but it is a bit of a long subject, and depends on how much you know about how our banking system works.

    Savant on
  • Pi-r8Pi-r8 Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Pi-r8 wrote: »
    Well, I was attempting to summarize as much as possible, and even though I missed a few key parts, as well as your suggestions, I still ran pretty long.

    The sad thing is, that wall of text could easily swell up to 1000 times that size without adding much more detail and just explaining more "cause/effect" situations.

    That's how bad the situation is.

    Aside from the fact that your wall o' text has a ridiculous anti-business and anti-bank bias to it (There's a reason that most of the world's richest countries also have a well developed financial industry, you know- they provide an important service), it also has nothing to do with the federal reserve bank, which was the original thread topic.
    Well, oddly enough, the last three words in the title cover his wall of text, and yet, your comment does nothing except bring up completely vague opposition.

    Oh, so this thread is now about anything that has to do with the economy? Can I post my own long rant about changes in the dollar/euro exchange rate, or how hard it is to find a job these days? That's also part of "the economy". I assumed we were gonna focus on the specific topic of what the Fed is doing with regard to the current economy.

    Pi-r8 on
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    No, I made no such statement. However, to understand how to fix the problem, one must first understand the problem, which in our case, is a multitude of problems ranging from deregulation to overproliferation of bad business.

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud on
  • necroSYSnecroSYS Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2009
    Yar wrote: »
    The Fed is buy hundreds of billions of dollars in treasury bonds. Which is pretty fucking close to the government just printing money. But the purchase of all these bond drives their value sky-high and their yield into the gutter, which is what drives mortgage rates. Which is what caused mortgage rates to recently fall to their lowest rates in the history of ever. Like lower than we've ever measured here in the U.S., but I think the UK says they were lower back during Shakespeare or something.

    This significantly eases (but does not reverse) the housing slump, because it makes it really affordable to get a loan again, even though you can't do the crazy loans anymore.

    That's what the fed is doing.

    Yeah, which addresses part of the demand issue with the credit market. The supply issue is still a problem because banks aren't able to value their assets accurately, don't know how much they need to keep on hand to cover their debts (because they couldn't possibly cover 100% of them...not even close), and are unwilling to lend any new money until they have a better idea of their own financial health.

    Which is part of the reason for the recent stress-tests the federal government has been putting banks through, to try and help them accurately value their portfolios. But I think we're still a good 10-12 months out from any significant easing on the purse strings, especially in terms of consumer lending.

    necroSYS on
  • YarYar Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    No, I made no such statement. However, to understand how to fix the problem, one must first understand the problem, which in our case, is a multitude of problems ranging from deregulation to overproliferation of bad business.
    And government interference in the lending market aggressively aimed at home ownership for the masses.

    Yar on
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Yar wrote: »
    No, I made no such statement. However, to understand how to fix the problem, one must first understand the problem, which in our case, is a multitude of problems ranging from deregulation to overproliferation of bad business.
    And government interference in the lending market aggressively aimed at home ownership for the masses.
    What?

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud on
  • YarYar Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    necroSYS wrote: »
    Which is part of the reason for the recent stress-tests the federal government has been putting banks through, to try and help them accurately value their portfolios. But I think we're still a good 10-12 months out from any significant easing on the purse strings, especially in terms of consumer lending.
    The stress tests are complete bullshit. One of the banks passed with flying colors, so they went back and kept raising the stakes and recalculating it over and over until the results were "you still need billions" and then they went with that.

    Yar on
  • necroSYSnecroSYS Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2009
    Savant wrote: »
    necroSYS wrote: »
    Essentially, the companies have been screwing Average Joe for decades while getting rich. While trying to get richer, they screw Average Joe even more. When they run out of ways to screw Average Joe, they go to the government, which gives them the tax money that Average Joe gave the government to run the country.

    Average Joe decides that he needs to save his money since everyone else is being irresponsible with their money, which is a little late with his two mortgages, the $80,000 SUV payment, and nearly $40,000 in credit card debt.

    There is no money to pay for the debt we've racked up. If Obama was to collect every dollar, pound, sheckle, lira, and dubloon in the entire world, we would still owe tens of trillions of dollars.
    As I said in my previous post, part of what you have to realize is that most of this tens of trillions of dollars is literally made-up debt from made-up profits based on made-up derivative instruments. In the 80s and 90s, people realized that there was a finite supply of money but in order to keep making salaries that would make Croesus blush, they had to keep showing record profits. Instead of finding ways to take money from their competitors, they found ways to sell the debt they were carrying to their competitors (and to buy their competitors' debt)....and found ways to insure the new debt, essentially betting on whether their loan to another company to own a sum of their own debt would be paid back.....

    So, now we (collectively as a country and as the First-World) owe hundreds of trillions of dollars, much of it to China, who has been more than happy to print money and sell us cheaply produced shit in order to finance our laughing-gas huffing financial wizards' economic dreams of an empire built entirely on unicorns. So, to add to the hilarity of the above, we're basically counting on China to continue being its efficient, brutal self in order to keep the dream of the First-World alive. Because if the yuan tanked tomorrow, China would probably start calling its loans due, and everyone would be eating dog food well into the next century.

    It's not that simple. China and the US have a murder-suicide pact or mutually assured economic destruction if either tries to do anything too drastic. We owe them boatloads of money, but it is boatloads of paper money (US dollars) that we have control over. The US has the power of the printing press, which it wouldn't if it owed China a bunch of gold or foreign currency, which would necessitate alchemy, counterfeiting, or defaulting on the debt if we couldn't pay. The last one, defaulting on foreign currency, happens more often than you would probably like, and Russia did it not too long ago.

    Additionally, we are buying a bunch of China's cheap crap (in turn with our crappy paper money), and they are in trouble if we have to stop buying it since they are a highly export geared developing economy. That will require them to focus inwards or find other buyers, and quickly because they'll be a lot of lost jobs and political turmoil if they don't.

    Well, I agree that it's kind of a murder-suicide pact, but only because America's got a far bigger market for cheaply-produced shit than the rest of the First World. China needs the US a lot less than the US needs China. We couldn't meet our paper-money obligations to China without turning inflation in the US in to a nightmare of Zimbabwean proportions.

    necroSYS on
  • KhavallKhavall British ColumbiaRegistered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Let me see if I have this right.

    All that money we thought we had doesn't exist in any way shape or form, and when we thought we were losing it we decided to make up more money?

    Khavall on
  • necroSYSnecroSYS Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2009
    Yar wrote: »
    necroSYS wrote: »
    Which is part of the reason for the recent stress-tests the federal government has been putting banks through, to try and help them accurately value their portfolios. But I think we're still a good 10-12 months out from any significant easing on the purse strings, especially in terms of consumer lending.
    The stress tests are complete bullshit. One of the banks passed with flying colors, so they went back and kept raising the stakes and recalculating it over and over until the results were "you still need billions" and then they went with that.

    Yeah, I agree. I'm just trying to explain the ostensible point behind it.

    Any stress-test that is going to look at JPMC's short-term derivatives position and not instantly have a Raiders-Ark face-meltdown is an utter farce anyway.

    necroSYS on
  • necroSYSnecroSYS Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2009
    Khavall wrote: »
    Let me see if I have this right.

    All that money we thought we had doesn't exist in any way shape or form, and when we thought we were losing it we decided to make up more money?

    No, we decided to make up more money before we even started losing it.

    necroSYS on
  • EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Yar wrote: »
    No, I made no such statement. However, to understand how to fix the problem, one must first understand the problem, which in our case, is a multitude of problems ranging from deregulation to overproliferation of bad business.
    And government interference in the lending market aggressively aimed at home ownership for the masses.
    What?

    It makes the government look good when homeownership is at an all time high.

    I'm not aware of specific government meddling, but I DO know that the government could have seen some of this crisis coming, but did nothing about it, because it would have meant clamping down on loans to the disprivelaged, which would have looked bad, politically.

    Evander on
  • necroSYSnecroSYS Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2009
    Yar wrote: »
    No, I made no such statement. However, to understand how to fix the problem, one must first understand the problem, which in our case, is a multitude of problems ranging from deregulation to overproliferation of bad business.
    And government interference in the lending market aggressively aimed at home ownership for the masses.

    Enh, I wouldn't blame the government exclusively here. Private lending institutions have been aggressively courting the sub-prime markets for decades. And sub-prime is basically code for "These people don't deserve the loans you're offering..what are you, crazy? Enjoy your default, suckers!"

    necroSYS on
  • KhavallKhavall British ColumbiaRegistered User regular
    edited May 2009
    necroSYS wrote: »
    Khavall wrote: »
    Let me see if I have this right.

    All that money we thought we had doesn't exist in any way shape or form, and when we thought we were losing it we decided to make up more money?

    No, we decided to make up more money before we even started losing it.

    Was there ever a point where money actually existed?

    Khavall on
  • necroSYSnecroSYS Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2009
    Evander wrote: »
    Yar wrote: »
    No, I made no such statement. However, to understand how to fix the problem, one must first understand the problem, which in our case, is a multitude of problems ranging from deregulation to overproliferation of bad business.
    And government interference in the lending market aggressively aimed at home ownership for the masses.
    What?

    It makes the government look good when homeownership is at an all time high.

    I'm not aware of specific government meddling, but I DO know that the government could have seen some of this crisis coming, but did nothing about it, because it would have meant clamping down on loans to the disprivelaged, which would have looked bad, politically.

    Well, the huge push in the early 2000s for everyone to own a home (whether they could pay for it or not) basically paved the way for relaxed regulations on first-time home buyers, though a lot of commercial developers took advantage of the same relaxed atmosphere.

    necroSYS on
  • necroSYSnecroSYS Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2009
    Khavall wrote: »
    necroSYS wrote: »
    Khavall wrote: »
    Let me see if I have this right.

    All that money we thought we had doesn't exist in any way shape or form, and when we thought we were losing it we decided to make up more money?

    No, we decided to make up more money before we even started losing it.

    Was there ever a point where money actually existed?

    Paper money? It existed back when it was backed by gold in Ft. Knox.

    It's kind of gotten fuzzier and fuzzier as people have stretched it and made balloon animals with it, though.

    necroSYS on
  • EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    necroSYS wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Yar wrote: »
    No, I made no such statement. However, to understand how to fix the problem, one must first understand the problem, which in our case, is a multitude of problems ranging from deregulation to overproliferation of bad business.
    And government interference in the lending market aggressively aimed at home ownership for the masses.
    What?

    It makes the government look good when homeownership is at an all time high.

    I'm not aware of specific government meddling, but I DO know that the government could have seen some of this crisis coming, but did nothing about it, because it would have meant clamping down on loans to the disprivelaged, which would have looked bad, politically.

    Well, the huge push in the early 2000s for everyone to own a home (whether they could pay for it or not) basically paved the way for relaxed regulations on first-time home buyers, though a lot of commercial developers took advantage of the same relaxed atmosphere.

    Yup.

    We really need some level of mandatory economics classes in this country. Folks need to understand that bubbles do not last forever.

    Evander on
  • ronyaronya Arrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
    edited May 2009
    necroSYS wrote: »
    Khavall wrote: »
    necroSYS wrote: »
    Khavall wrote: »
    Let me see if I have this right.

    All that money we thought we had doesn't exist in any way shape or form, and when we thought we were losing it we decided to make up more money?

    No, we decided to make up more money before we even started losing it.

    Was there ever a point where money actually existed?

    Paper money? It existed back when it was backed by gold in Ft. Knox.

    It's kind of gotten fuzzier and fuzzier as people have stretched it and made balloon animals with it, though.

    Please don't go all goldbug on us.

    ronya on
    aRkpc.gif
Sign In or Register to comment.