BarcardiAll the WizardsUnder A Rock: AfganistanRegistered Userregular
edited January 2010
Fox seems to have replaced gone back to its roots, but with a wonderfuly distracting picture of the white pimp guy that is very distracting. Also TERROR TERROR TERROR! It seems to be their fallback position whenever they fail.
Norway don't have a debt do they? I seem to remember them paying it off with their oil-money.
There are only four countries that don't.
Brunei, Palau, Liechtenstein and Macau.
That's it. That's the whole list. Everyone else is in debt to somebody somewhere.
Right. There are plenty of countries that owe money to the US.
When you actually add all those debts together, the US is still in debt, but not by nearly as much. (And China still has a ridiculous surplus, but not quite as much.)
Spectrum on
0
JuliusCaptain of Serenityon my shipRegistered Userregular
Norway don't have a debt do they? I seem to remember them paying it off with their oil-money.
There are only four countries that don't.
Brunei, Palau, Liechtenstein and Macau.
That's it. That's the whole list. Everyone else is in debt to somebody somewhere.
At about 2/3rds the size of the state of New Jersey, Brunei is larger than the rest of those countries put together. In addition, it is basically resting on a giant sea of oil.
I don't even think there's a million people in all of them put together.
Norway don't have a debt do they? I seem to remember them paying it off with their oil-money.
There are only four countries that don't.
Brunei, Palau, Liechtenstein and Macau.
That's it. That's the whole list. Everyone else is in debt to somebody somewhere.
At about 2/3rds the size of the state of New Jersey, Brunei is larger than the rest of those countries put together. In addition, it is basically resting on a giant sea of oil.
I don't even think there's a million people in all of them put together.
I think that's kind of his point. Real countries (real because they're not supertaxhavens who rely on tourism and being really, really small) all have debt. Even super-rich countries like Norway, who sit on a pile of resources, have debt.
Being in debt is not a huge deal. It's shit when you have lots of debt, but it's not like a normal debt really matters for a country.
In any case I think those of us that are sensible realize the US needs to fix its debt, but worrying about it when the country is hemmoraging jobs and the states are mostly on the verge of bankruptcy is a really bad time to do it
override367 on
0
GoslingLooking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, ProbablyWatertown, WIRegistered Userregular
Norway don't have a debt do they? I seem to remember them paying it off with their oil-money.
There are only four countries that don't.
Brunei, Palau, Liechtenstein and Macau.
That's it. That's the whole list. Everyone else is in debt to somebody somewhere.
Right. There are plenty of countries that owe money to the US.
When you actually add all those debts together, the US is still in debt, but not by nearly as much. (And China still has a ridiculous surplus, but not quite as much.)
Here's what happens when you add the debts together.
The ten countries furthest in the black (in US dollars):
China, 440.011 billion
Germany, 235.257 billion
Japan, 157.079 billion
Saudi Arabia, 139.041 billion
Russia, 102.331 billion
Norway, 83.802 billion
Kuwait, 70.594 billion
Switzerland, 44.847 billion
Sweden, 40.429 billion
Libya, 39.217 billion
The ten countries furthest in the red (in US dollars):
United States, -673.266 billion
Spain, -154.036 billion
Italy, -73.200 billion
Greece, -51.482 billion
United Kingdom, -45.392 billion
France, -45.327 billion
Australia, -42.833 billion
Turkey, 41.416 billion
India, -33.330 billion
Portugal, -29.437 billion
And for reference, we were in the black in living memory. Like, 1991.
Gosling on
I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
SpectrumArcher of InfernoChaldea Rec RoomRegistered Userregular
edited January 2010
Yeah, thanks for reposting those. We're still hilariously in debt, but it's at least no longer in the trillions.
Spectrum on
0
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
edited January 2010
It's interesting to see a country with a standard of living like China's decide how to deal with a surplus. Sure, you could raise the standard of living, improve healthcare and services, but then if at some point you can't continue to do so, people will get pissed off.
They were mostly saving during the good times so they can spend a metric fuckton when bad things (TM) happened. Which they did. Their stimulus package as a percent of GDP was absolutely huge. And infrastructure focused, unlike ours.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Not just oil. Russia has a crap load of natural resources.
Not to mention a resources:consumer ratio about 1/4th that of America.
Russia is fairly empty, compared to America. 22 people per sq. mi. compared to 81.
Siberia skews the hell out of that.
Hey, resources are resources. I'm sure population densities are otherwise fairly analogous in non-hellscape regions.
Non-Siberian regions are slightly less dense than the US (Russia's population is much smaller than I thought: 141 million estimated). ~63.6/square mile.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
0
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
That's the way Keynesian is supposed to work. Ironic that the communists do our capitalist system better than we do.
Capitalism requires strong government, to ensure that the caste structure of industry doesn't seep into the political world. We run into problems because everyone tries to maintain the illusion of freedom and rugged individualism, which serves to lay the mental framework for allowing large corporate entities to operate without any expectation of serving stakeholders as opposed to just stockholders.
A father moves his family into an apartment because he's unable to pay his mortgage, and he should feel bad about not living up to his end of a contract. The bank takes the guy's house instead of mayne working with him, and it's just business.
It gets worse when you start giving corporations freedoms, protecting those in the corporations from wrongdoing.
Oh you blew up the global economy? Oh well, here's a generous severance package.
In China I'm sure they'd also get a generous severance package and a nice retirement to an unmarked prison deep underground
no, they just get executed
china's really big on executing corrupt officials
And with none of that drama queen bullshit like lethal injection or Electric chair. Just a 9 mill to the back of the head. Quick and deadly if done by a professional.
Kipling217 on
The sky was full of stars, every star an exploding ship. One of ours.
my (someone limited) understanding of the national debt is this. Almost every economist agrees that having some debt is healthy, and that if we let it grow out of control that would be really bad. Almost no one agrees on just how much debt is too much, though.
Most people agree that we're getting really close to that threshold, though.
my (someone limited) understanding of the national debt is this. Almost every economist agrees that having some debt is healthy, and that if we let it grow out of control that would be really bad. Almost no one agrees on just how much debt is too much, though.
Most people agree that we're getting really close to that threshold, though.
By doing things that will bring it back to sanity and keep it from spiraling out of control in the long term.
my (someone limited) understanding of the national debt is this. Almost every economist agrees that having some debt is healthy, and that if we let it grow out of control that would be really bad. Almost no one agrees on just how much debt is too much, though.
Most people agree that we're getting really close to that threshold, though.
Strangely, those people were nowhere to be found when we bought two wars, two tax cuts, and a drug plan on credit.
my (someone limited) understanding of the national debt is this. Almost every economist agrees that having some debt is healthy, and that if we let it grow out of control that would be really bad. Almost no one agrees on just how much debt is too much, though.
Most people agree that we're getting really close to that threshold, though.
Strangely, those people were nowhere to be found when we bought two wars, two tax cuts, and a drug plan on credit.
Uh, yeah, they were.
I'm not talking about, like, teapartylol. Actual economists thought that we were spending at an absolutely irresponsible rate under Bush the Lesser.
(Edit: Medicare Part D was actually widely lambasted by a lot of Republican pundits as being unnecessary and expensive at the time.)
my (someone limited) understanding of the national debt is this. Almost every economist agrees that having some debt is healthy, and that if we let it grow out of control that would be really bad. Almost no one agrees on just how much debt is too much, though.
Most people agree that we're getting really close to that threshold, though.
Strangely, those people were nowhere to be found when we bought two wars, two tax cuts, and a drug plan on credit.
Uh, yeah, they were.
I'm not talking about, like, teapartylol. Actual economists thought that we were spending at an absolutely irresponsible rate under Bush the Lesser.
(Edit: Medicare Part D was actually widely lambasted by a lot of Republican pundits as being unnecessary and expensive at the time.)
Salvation is correct here.
It was economists and others talking about how Bush/Cheney were running us into such massive debt that started the whole "If you don't go along with the President, the terrorists will win!" rhetoric.
Suppose that the government was able to, through unheard-of competency, spend every dollar in such a way that its GDP multiplier was high enough for new tax revenue to completely offset the increase in interest on the national debt caused by the borrowing of that dollar. What would then be the risks of continued borrowing at a high rate? Would foreign governments be able to assert influence via the holding of this debt? If so, could you only borrow from domestic entities, and what kind of macroeconomic effects would that have?
I'm not sure if anyone knows the answers to these questions, but I find them interesting.
Suppose that the government was able to, through unheard-of competency, spend every dollar in such a way that its GDP multiplier was high enough for new tax revenue to completely offset the increase in interest on the national debt caused by the borrowing of that dollar. What would then be the risks of continued borrowing at a high rate? Would foreign governments be able to assert influence via the holding of this debt? If so, could you only borrow from domestic entities, and what kind of macroeconomic effects would that have?
I'm not sure if anyone knows the answers to these questions, but I find them interesting.
The vast majority of our debt is domestic. I doubt any single country holds enough of that 25% foreign debt to influence much.
Suppose that the government was able to, through unheard-of competency, spend every dollar in such a way that its GDP multiplier was high enough for new tax revenue to completely offset the increase in interest on the national debt caused by the borrowing of that dollar. What would then be the risks of continued borrowing at a high rate? Would foreign governments be able to assert influence via the holding of this debt? If so, could you only borrow from domestic entities, and what kind of macroeconomic effects would that have?
I'm not sure if anyone knows the answers to these questions, but I find them interesting.
Really, the question at that point is "why the fuck are you borrowing," since after the initial investment to get it kick-started you're in a positive feedback loop.
The problem is that if we don't go in to deeper debt, then our economy risks collapse.
There are better ways of doing things than what we are doing right now, but unfortunately they require a certain modicum of finesse that would be impossible to get through our overly partisan political system, because every single man and woman in congress is far more concerned with pushing their personal agenda and getting re-elected than they are about the health and strength of our nation's economy.
So, for the time being, we have no choice but to accrue more debt.
The problem is that if we don't go in to deeper debt, then our economy risks collapse.
There are better ways of doing things than what we are doing right now, but unfortunately they require a certain modicum of finesse that would be impossible to get through our overly partisan political system, because every single man and woman in congress is far more concerned with pushing their personal agenda and getting re-elected than they are about the health and strength of our nation's economy.
So, for the time being, we have no choice but to accrue more debt.
Yeah, maybe if we started actually saving some money during boom years then we would be able to cover deficit spending during bad years. Because the deficit spending is what keeps all the regular people from getting completely fucked by the economy.
Unfortunately our plans during boom years recently have been "cut taxes!!!!!!"
The problem is that if we don't go in to deeper debt, then our economy risks collapse.
There are better ways of doing things than what we are doing right now, but unfortunately they require a certain modicum of finesse that would be impossible to get through our overly partisan political system, because every single man and woman in congress is far more concerned with pushing their personal agenda and getting re-elected than they are about the health and strength of our nation's economy.
So, for the time being, we have no choice but to accrue more debt.
Yeah, maybe if we started actually saving some money during boom years then we would be able to cover deficit spending during bad years. Because the deficit spending is what keeps all the regular people from getting completely fucked by the economy.
Unfortunately our plans during boom years recently have been "cut taxes!!!!!!"
That's also generally been our plan during bust years.
Or, alternatively, cut taxes and then start a war. And then blame the democrats for the deficit.
It gets worse when you start giving corporations freedoms, protecting those in the corporations from wrongdoing.
Oh you blew up the global economy? Oh well, here's a generous severance package.
In China I'm sure they'd also get a generous severance package and a nice retirement to an unmarked prison deep underground
no, they just get executed
china's really big on executing
Fixed.
Seriously, China is big on capital punishment.
In any case, capitalism doesn't require a government to be strong but smart. A strong government can push businesses away. A smart government will keep them in line, but still keep them around. China is having good growth because business is very cheap there. Financial services out of Hong Kong have very little oversight, while the manufacturing is done on the mainland where the people tend to have a pretty low standard of living. Shanghai, for example, makes LA smog at its worst look like a light fog.
A smart capitalism government is more like the high tech manufacturing countries like South Korea.
It gets worse when you start giving corporations freedoms, protecting those in the corporations from wrongdoing.
Oh you blew up the global economy? Oh well, here's a generous severance package.
In China I'm sure they'd also get a generous severance package and a nice retirement to an unmarked prison deep underground
no, they just get executed
china's really big on executing
Fixed.
Seriously, China is big on capital punishment.
In any case, capitalism doesn't require a government to be strong but smart. A strong government can push businesses away. A smart government will keep them in line, but still keep them around. China is having good growth because business is very cheap there. Financial services out of Hong Kong have very little oversight, while the manufacturing is done on the mainland where the people tend to have a pretty low standard of living. Shanghai, for example, makes LA smog at its worst look like a light fog.
A smart capitalism government is more like the high tech manufacturing countries like South Korea.
chinese officials have openly said that they want capitalism to run apeshit for as long as possible before the public wises up and starts clamoring for regulation
they're probably concerned with becoming the new global hegemon over anything more long-term
I mean not Oklahoma or Texas big, but they like it well enough.
Huh? The US executed 52 people last year. China executes several thousand people every year. Even with comparing the populations, the Chinese like their executing.
Posts
Also i got this when i googled health care.
When you actually add all those debts together, the US is still in debt, but not by nearly as much. (And China still has a ridiculous surplus, but not quite as much.)
Yeah but there's a list of other small countries who don't pay of their debt because they have really no need to at all.
It's a tiny list though.
I don't even think there's a million people in all of them put together.
I think that's kind of his point. Real countries (real because they're not supertaxhavens who rely on tourism and being really, really small) all have debt. Even super-rich countries like Norway, who sit on a pile of resources, have debt.
Being in debt is not a huge deal. It's shit when you have lots of debt, but it's not like a normal debt really matters for a country.
Here's what happens when you add the debts together.
The ten countries furthest in the black (in US dollars):
China, 440.011 billion
Germany, 235.257 billion
Japan, 157.079 billion
Saudi Arabia, 139.041 billion
Russia, 102.331 billion
Norway, 83.802 billion
Kuwait, 70.594 billion
Switzerland, 44.847 billion
Sweden, 40.429 billion
Libya, 39.217 billion
The ten countries furthest in the red (in US dollars):
United States, -673.266 billion
Spain, -154.036 billion
Italy, -73.200 billion
Greece, -51.482 billion
United Kingdom, -45.392 billion
France, -45.327 billion
Australia, -42.833 billion
Turkey, 41.416 billion
India, -33.330 billion
Portugal, -29.437 billion
And for reference, we were in the black in living memory. Like, 1991.
It's an oil state.
SteamID: devCharles
twitter: https://twitter.com/charlesewise
SteamID: devCharles
twitter: https://twitter.com/charlesewise
Not to mention a resources:consumer ratio about 1/4th that of America.
Russia is fairly empty, compared to America. 22 people per sq. mi. compared to 81.
Siberia skews the hell out of that.
Hey, resources are resources. I'm sure population densities are otherwise fairly analogous in non-hellscape regions.
SteamID: devCharles
twitter: https://twitter.com/charlesewise
Non-Siberian regions are slightly less dense than the US (Russia's population is much smaller than I thought: 141 million estimated). ~63.6/square mile.
Capitalism requires strong government, to ensure that the caste structure of industry doesn't seep into the political world. We run into problems because everyone tries to maintain the illusion of freedom and rugged individualism, which serves to lay the mental framework for allowing large corporate entities to operate without any expectation of serving stakeholders as opposed to just stockholders.
A father moves his family into an apartment because he's unable to pay his mortgage, and he should feel bad about not living up to his end of a contract. The bank takes the guy's house instead of mayne working with him, and it's just business.
Oh you blew up the global economy? Oh well, here's a generous severance package.
In China I'm sure they'd also get a generous severance package and a nice retirement to an unmarked prison deep underground
no, they just get executed
china's really big on executing corrupt officials
And with none of that drama queen bullshit like lethal injection or Electric chair. Just a 9 mill to the back of the head. Quick and deadly if done by a professional.
Most people agree that we're getting really close to that threshold, though.
By doing things that will bring it back to sanity and keep it from spiraling out of control in the long term.
Strangely, those people were nowhere to be found when we bought two wars, two tax cuts, and a drug plan on credit.
Uh, yeah, they were.
I'm not talking about, like, teapartylol. Actual economists thought that we were spending at an absolutely irresponsible rate under Bush the Lesser.
(Edit: Medicare Part D was actually widely lambasted by a lot of Republican pundits as being unnecessary and expensive at the time.)
Salvation is correct here.
It was economists and others talking about how Bush/Cheney were running us into such massive debt that started the whole "If you don't go along with the President, the terrorists will win!" rhetoric.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
I'm not sure if anyone knows the answers to these questions, but I find them interesting.
The vast majority of our debt is domestic. I doubt any single country holds enough of that 25% foreign debt to influence much.
Really, the question at that point is "why the fuck are you borrowing," since after the initial investment to get it kick-started you're in a positive feedback loop.
There are better ways of doing things than what we are doing right now, but unfortunately they require a certain modicum of finesse that would be impossible to get through our overly partisan political system, because every single man and woman in congress is far more concerned with pushing their personal agenda and getting re-elected than they are about the health and strength of our nation's economy.
So, for the time being, we have no choice but to accrue more debt.
Yeah, maybe if we started actually saving some money during boom years then we would be able to cover deficit spending during bad years. Because the deficit spending is what keeps all the regular people from getting completely fucked by the economy.
Unfortunately our plans during boom years recently have been "cut taxes!!!!!!"
What, and actually follow a USEFUL bible lesson?
That's also generally been our plan during bust years.
Or, alternatively, cut taxes and then start a war. And then blame the democrats for the deficit.
Fixed.
Seriously, China is big on capital punishment.
In any case, capitalism doesn't require a government to be strong but smart. A strong government can push businesses away. A smart government will keep them in line, but still keep them around. China is having good growth because business is very cheap there. Financial services out of Hong Kong have very little oversight, while the manufacturing is done on the mainland where the people tend to have a pretty low standard of living. Shanghai, for example, makes LA smog at its worst look like a light fog.
A smart capitalism government is more like the high tech manufacturing countries like South Korea.
SteamID: devCharles
twitter: https://twitter.com/charlesewise
I mean not Oklahoma or Texas big, but they like it well enough.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
chinese officials have openly said that they want capitalism to run apeshit for as long as possible before the public wises up and starts clamoring for regulation
they're probably concerned with becoming the new global hegemon over anything more long-term
Huh? The US executed 52 people last year. China executes several thousand people every year. Even with comparing the populations, the Chinese like their executing.
SteamID: devCharles
twitter: https://twitter.com/charlesewise