(POL) Stimulus'ed out yet? You ain't seen nothin yet...

[SirFozzie]

You know what? I give up. I can't pay attention to all this. It's voodoo economics. It's nearly Zimbabwe-in in insanity.

BBC NEWS | Business | US unveils new $1.5 trillion plan

US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has unveiled a comprehensive bank bail-out plan worth at least $1.5 trillion (£1.02 trillion).

Under the plan, the size of a key Federal Reserve lending program will be expanded to $1 trillion from $200bn.

In addition, a public-private investment fund of $500bn will be created to absorb banks' toxic assets and could be expanded to $1 trillion.

"Critical parts of our financial system are damaged," Mr Geithner said.

"Instead of catalyzing recovery, the financial system is working against recovery, and that's the dangerous dynamic we need to change," he added.

The new plan is aimed at restoring confidence in the damaged financial system and restarting bank lending.

The key question now is how eager the private sector will be to participate both in the new investment fund and the new Federal Reserve lending programme.

Meanwhile, the US Senate has backed an $838bn economic stimulus package which will now have to be reconciled with the House of Representatives version.

[Arles]

It's going to cost $15 for a loaf of bread after all the inflation occurs from these bailouts. I have a feeling our wages won't rise at the same level...

[Flasch186]

I think we're inflating to equilibrium or close to it....were not working from baseline IMO right now.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Seems like it would make as much sense to just start printing more money.
Which is probably going to have to happen anyway since I'm not sure how they plan to tax us enough to pay for all of this without needing bailouts on the single individual level.

It's getting to the point where I'm starting to wonder if this was all carefully orchestrated & planned to finally accomplish a large scale income redistribution scheme.

[rowech]

It's become 100% crystal clear that the Democrats had some unbelievable motives in winning this presidency and they are going to destroy any sense of a free market. It's horrible to watch this happen and know nothing can be done about it. It's also amazing how quickly this is happening. They are destroying the United States of America. Period. (and yes, Republicans helped their last 8 years)

[DaddyTorgo]

lol - really...the paranoia is astounding. it's not a partisan thing.

to think that somebody engineered this, and that anybody is excited about it

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

I think we're inflating to equilibrium or close to it....were not working from baseline IMO right now.

Flasch: Here's the thing. I'm independent, leaning left. I am the people they have to have firmly on your side because there's no way in hell the right-side of the ledger is going to view this as anything but anathema.

And they've completely lost me. The numbers just don't register. They have no meaning. It's more money then you could ever see in a lifetime. It's funny money.

There has to be a point where if the lending market won't budge, like Sisphyus of greek mythology, we decide "We're not going to push that boulder up the hill no more" and just step aside and let it go before it starts back on its own side and runs us over on the way.

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by rowech

It's become 100% crystal clear that the Democrats had some unbelievable motives in winning this presidency and they are going to destroy any sense of a free market. It's horrible to watch this happen and know nothing can be done about it. It's also amazing how quickly this is happening. They are destroying the United States of America. Period. (and yes, Republicans helped their last 8 years)

rowech: I have my biases, but give me a break. The people to blame is thiose people who believed that tweaked the right way, everyone could make more money then inflation. Pursuit of the almighty dollar, and damn the long term consequences, Freed of oversight, and rules, and enforcement, the money making wheel would forever spin faster and faster.

News flash. TANSTAAFL.

The Machine over the last eight years got unbalanced, overloaded and pushed faster then it could go and now the smoke is pouring out of it, and there's the sounds of metal stressed beyond the breaking point, and you want to blame the new mechanic who just got on scene?

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

lol - really...the paranoia is astounding. it's not a partisan thing.

to think that somebody engineered this, and that anybody is excited about it

That's the thing, the "solution" are old-school, nothing new and to be expected. Especially when they feel they MUST do something RIGHT THIS MINUTE. No time to fix the root causes, just throw enough money at the symptoms and they hope that something will stick.

It is amazing to me that they have this much money to spread around. Times sure have changed when everyone was critical of the Rep Congress spending money like drunken sailors.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Pursuit of the almighty dollar, and damn the long term consequences, Freed of oversight, and rules, and enforcement, the money making wheel would forever spin faster and faster.

You are talking about the current bailouts and stimulus bills, right?

[SirFozzie]

Bucc: I'm critical too. I do agree with Rowech (to a point) that we have to take our medicine, now matter how bad it tastes (even with some spending sugar to try to take our mind of it). I just say the burden of fault isn't where he claims it is.

edit (to your last post) No. I'm talking about the Gordon Gekko-ish "Greed is not only good, but it's the only way" and "Free Markets are the answer to every question" methods of the last decade, combined with enforcement and regulatory dismembership, that led companies to constantly chase the short term dollar at the expense of general health

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by rowech

It's not paranoia anymore. It's the complete destruction of the economy. Just going to take several years before you're going to see it. It's toast. (of course that toast will cost $20)

It baffles me that people feel the economy must constantly go forward. It MUST go backward from time to time. It is self correcting. Five years of crap is better than the complete destruction of things 10 years from now.

that may be true, but i fail to see how you can assign responsibility for that to one political party or another.

shit, you don't see the liberals on the board claiming that it was all the fault of the administration that has been in power for the last 8 years, although you're happy to claim that it was part of some master plan by the party that's been in power for less than a month.

it's not one party or another. both parties have a vested interest in the economy continuing to run smoothly. and honestly the financial + monetary policies of the fed and the treasury are largely independent of the political parties

[rowech]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

that may be true, but i fail to see how you can assign responsibility for that to one political party or another.

shit, you don't see the liberals on the board claiming that it was all the fault of the administration that has been in power for the last 8 years, although you're happy to claim that it was part of some master plan by the party that's been in power for less than a month.

it's not one party or another. both parties have a vested interest in the economy continuing to run smoothly. and honestly the financial + monetary policies of the fed and the treasury are largely independent of the political parties

Guess you missed the part where I said both parties had part of the blame.

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Flasch: Here's the thing. I'm independent, leaning left. I am the people they have to have firmly on your side because there's no way in hell the right-side of the ledger is going to view this as anything but anathema.

And they've completely lost me. The numbers just don't register. They have no meaning. It's more money then you could ever see in a lifetime. It's funny money.

There has to be a point where if the lending market won't budge, like Sisphyus of greek mythology, we decide "We're not going to push that boulder up the hill no more" and just step aside and let it go before it starts back on its own side and runs us over on the way.

I disagree. $ has been disappearing at an enormous clip. I go back to the shoe box in the closet to prove the point. We're literally only print a portion of the money that has simply gone away, ne'er to be spent again so I do not believe that hyper-inflation is on the other side of this.

NOW, if you want to argue our country's bond rating vs. the willingness of the world to lend to us or use the $ as a debt instrument than we have a different tact but I do NOT agree that we're over-inflating at this time.

Could I be wrong? yes, but to say that we are now is wrong IMO. The gov't will have a much easier time controlling inflation than trying to fight what is going on now, which is deflation.

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by rowech

Guess you missed the part where I said both parties had part of the blame.

Give me a break, rowech: 95% of your post was decrying one side of the issue, damning them all to hell and sundry, and then "oh yeah. The other side sucks too".

[rowech]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Give me a break, rowech: 95% of your post was decrying one side of the issue, damning them all to hell and sundry, and then "oh yeah. The other side sucks too".

I'm livid at what the Democrats are doing to handle this situation. It's unfathomable.

However, both sides are completey responsible for putting us into this mess.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

edit (to your last post) No. I'm talking about the Gordon Gekko-ish "Greed is not only good, but it's the only way" and "Free Markets are the answer to every question" methods of the last decade, combined with enforcement and regulatory dismembership, that led companies to constantly chase the short term dollar at the expense of general health

And I was refering to the pursuit of the almighty dollar in federal give-aways, and damning the long term consequences of interest debts and inflation; coupled with lack of oversight, rules, and enforcement in how the bailout and stimulus will be spent or being held accountable. It is simply the federal money making wheel continuing to spin faster and faster.

[Noop]

Dumb question. Why is deflation so bad? Does that mean I can by two bags of chips and a soda for a dollar?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Noop

Does that mean I can by two bags of chips and a soda for a dollar?

Yeah ... problem is, you won't have the dollar because you work(ed) for the chip and soda manufacturer.

[SirFozzie]

And to a point, I agree with you, Bucc. Let's say this. The wheel has been unbalanced too far one way, and now in an attempt to right the ship, they're tilting it too far the other way.

I saw some quotes in the article that led this that made me sick to my stomach.

"Investors want clarity, simplicity, and resolution. This plan is seen as convoluted, obfuscating, and clouded," said James Ellman, Seacliff Capital president.


"It's not big enough. There are few details. The administration is trying to buy time and they don't get the fact that we need to get something yesterday," said Joseph LaVorgna, chief US economist at Deutsche Bank Securities in New York.

They don't want details.. really. They don't want black and white. They want a quick band aid, with loads of loopholes and get-bys so they can do whatever they want with it.. They think they have a better idea on what to do with the money then anyone else. So give it to them, and they'll do it right this time, honest.

We do need spending to a point. I looked at the things cut from the Stimulus bill, and by and large, I don't have a problem with them being cut. I look at a list of the things remaining, and a lot of it, I have no problem with it. But we need to be carefully aligning the system back into place, not whackin it with a great big hammer.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by rowech

I'm livid at what the Democrats are doing to handle this situation. It's unfathomable.

However, both sides are completey responsible for putting us into this mess.

the same policies the republicans were trying you mean?

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

And to a point, I agree with you, Bucc. Let's say this. The wheel has been unbalanced too far one way, and now in an attempt to right the ship, they're tilting it too far the other way.

I don't know if I agree with that view, it seems very selective. I look at the last 40 years and basically seen the same thing over and over, just more federal spending and increased federal powers. There were times of boom and bust (early 70s were bad, so were the early 80s, early 90s and early 00s..wait a minute...could this be a cycle?). The federal govt has never been smart about doing a lot of things economically because they usually just add more layers of complexities to an already complex set of laws, rules and expenditures.

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by Noop

Dumb question. Why is deflation so bad? Does that mean I can by two bags of chips and a soda for a dollar?

and you wont buy it for a dollar because you think it'll be $.90 in two wks....obviously a coke and chips may be on a different timeline but you get the idea.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

and you wont buy it for a dollar because you think it'll be $.90 in two wks....obviously a coke and chips may be on a different timeline but you get the idea.

Like gasoline prices?

[DaddyTorgo]

deutsche bank securities isn't likely to benefit from the bailout money directly Foz. they're not lining up for TARP funds. And they're so diversified - I'm not sure what their books are looking like lately off the top of my head, but i don't recall seeing anything about them being in any type of unusual trouble. And Seacliff Capital is an investment manager not a bank or anything.

edit: check that, here's some baseline numbers off wikipedia

Revenue	▼ € 13.490 billion (2008)
Net income	▼ € -3.896 billion (2008)
Total assets	▲ € 2.202 trillion (2008)
Total equity	▼ € 34.442 billion (2008)

[SirFozzie]

Bucc: I'm talking about a regulatory environment that enabled companies to "cook the books" and report things that just weren't true, cuz, "Gosh darnit, we have to report a bigger profit or the investors will flee." and get away with it.

That enabled a regulatory environment that enabled Bernie Madoff. No one thought that "wait, here's a guy who constantly beats everyone else, no matter what the market.. and he won't say how he does it, because it's "too complicated to explain".. something may be wrong here.." Instead it was.. "Hey! Free Money! I'd better sign up with him! He can do magic, no matter the enviroment".

And let's not forget the housing credit market. People gambled that people with bad credit would forever be able to pay off their loans, and cooked the books on it, reporting bad debt as good.. because after all, they've been able to pay so far....

(edit: I'm off line for a bout a half hour, heading home)

[SFL Cat]

I've seen nothing so far to convince me this isn't a REPEAT of the Jimmy Carter administration. We hit double digit inflation then and I have no doubt we'll see it again...perhaps at an accelerated rate since we're talking about a titanic boost in already astronomical deficit spending plus an unprecedented grab of power from the private sector by the government.

[lcjjdnh]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

and you wont buy it for a dollar because you think it'll be $.90 in two wks....obviously a coke and chips may be on a different timeline but you get the idea.

And since everyone keeps hoarding money figuring things will always be cheaper, the economy spirals downward.

In addition, if you have borrowed money, the real rate of interest you will pay becomes higher during deflation. It's good for lenders, but bad for borrowers.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Bucc: I'm talking about a regulatory environment that enabled companies to "cook the books" and report things that just weren't true, cuz, "Gosh darnit, we have to report a bigger profit or the investors will flee." and get away with it.

That enabled a regulatory environment that enabled Bernie Madoff. No one thought that "wait, here's a guy who constantly beats everyone else, no matter what the market.. and he won't say how he does it, because it's "too complicated to explain".. something may be wrong here.." Instead it was.. "Hey! Free Money! I'd better sign up with him! He can do magic, no matter the enviroment".

And let's not forget the housing credit market. People gambled that people with bad credit would forever be able to pay off their loans, and cooked the books on it, reporting bad debt as good.. because after all, they've been able to pay so far....

(edit: I'm off line for a bout a half hour, heading home)

And those have only happened in the past 8 years???? (looking up the dates for Enron...hmmm...and the dates for the early 1990s California housing bust) I see that just a continuum of the same trend that has been spiraling downwards (with periods of booms and busts) for quite some time (since the advent of easy credit).

[cartman]

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

I've seen nothing so far to convince me this isn't a REPEAT of the Jimmy Carter administration. We hit double digit inflation then and I have no doubt we'll see it again...perhaps at an accelerated rate since we're talking about a titanic boost in already astronomical deficit spending plus an unprecedented grab of power from the private sector by the government.

And how is it any different than the beginning of the Reagan presidency, where the administration was having to deal with the slumping economy they inherited from the other party, and decided to spend their way out of it?

[SFL Cat]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

That enabled a regulatory environment that enabled Bernie Madoff. No one thought that "wait, here's a guy who constantly beats everyone else, no matter what the market.. and he won't say how he does it, because it's "too complicated to explain".. something may be wrong here.." Instead it was.. "Hey! Free Money! I'd better sign up with him! He can do magic, no matter the enviroment".

Which goes back to the old adage that everyone seems to know and quote, but no one seems to follow, "If it looks too good to be true...it probably is."

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by cartman

And how is it any different than the beginning of the Reagan presidency, where the administration was having to deal with the slumping economy they inherited from the other party, and decided to spend their way out of it?

And the Dem Congress under Tip O'Neill was legendary in giving away federal dollars, as long as he gave Reagan his military expenditures.

[SFL Cat]

And how is it any different than the beginning of the Reagan presidency, where the administration was having to deal with the slumping economy they inherited from the other party, and decided to spend their way out of it?

The Nixon administration's economic policies launched the malaise of the 1970s IMO...the Carter administration's "fixes" exacerbated the problem. So far things are looking creepily similar.

[SportsDino]

We're about to see the death of modern capitalism, one way or another... not that modern capitalism is a good thing, I've pointed out the flaws and how it has strayed for months now (and that was just scratching the surface). The thing is the politicos and banks are going to ride this horse right to the breaking point before economics itself lays down a smack down.

For the deflation crowd out there, do you think prices rose in the last two decades at the rate of imaginery bank leveraged money? Guess what, no... if you follow through the math on a massive money printing scheme to replace bank leveraged dollars, you get REAL inflation (as in I go to the store with a wheelbarrow of dollars to buy groceries). Deflation only exists in the artificially inflated values of the banks, hell even the damn market realizes this, it is why shorting the banks has been a valuable major gamble every time I did it. If we keep trying to replaced super-leverage with 'official government backed leverage' we are going to be in for one hell of a DECADE, not just a couple years.

[SportsDino]

BTW, this is hardly a surprise. It became clear before the first bailout (heck go back to the first company level bailout) that this was going to be a never ending cycle of handouts. Incentives, its not just for theoretical games anymore! If the path to money looks easier through government handouts than cleaning up your business, you are gonna be damn sure to see these lazy 'leaders' get in the welfare line. They are no better than all the people they criticized as 'go get a job you bums' who were in line for welfare cheese.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

The Nixon administration's economic policies launched the malaise of the 1970s IMO...the Carter administration's "fixes" exacerbated the problem. So far things are looking creepily similar.

What "fixes" so far have exacerbated the problem? There hasn't been a stimulus bill passed yet, so there is no way to say one way or the other what the impact has been.

You have been trying to link Obama to Carter since way back in the primaries, and you've already made up your mind that Obama=Carter, no matter what happens.

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by SportsDino

We're about to see the death of modern capitalism, one way or another... not that modern capitalism is a good thing, I've pointed out the flaws and how it has strayed for months now (and that was just scratching the surface). The thing is the politicos and banks are going to ride this horse right to the breaking point before economics itself lays down a smack down.

For the deflation crowd out there, do you think prices rose in the last two decades at the rate of imaginery bank leveraged money?

yes, it was funny money from top to bottom, from the CDO's to the MBS' to the Leveraged loans to the Collateral to the appraisals to the prices to the taxes paid, it was an inflationary bubble that when pricked started to trickle into other asset classes. Now that the the money movement has gotten through pretty much as many asset classes as there are/were there is no place left to hide. We now have the deflationary effects which the gov't HAS to fight to get us to land at some sort of equilibrium.

[Buccaneer]

One could say that the magnitude of all of this, compared to the Nixon or Reagan years, is quite different. But not exactly. The GDP has gone up 500% since 1980, and personal consumption has increased 5-folds as well. All with a US population increase of 34% and a rapid increase in the global economies.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0104575.html

[SFL Cat]

Originally Posted by cartman

What "fixes" so far have exacerbated the problem? There hasn't been a stimulus bill passed yet, so there is no way to say one way or the other what the impact has been.

You have been trying to link Obama to Carter since way back in the primaries, and you've already made up your mind that Obama=Carter, no matter what happens.

The proposed fixes in the "Stimulus" Bill. If everything works like you seem to think it will and we become the U.S. of Shangra-La, feel free to crow all you want. I think it's a disaster waiting to happen and will put us in an economic mailaise for the next decade.

I'm not a fan of massive deficit spending, the one area I fault Reagan for not standing up to the Democrats and vetoing some of those budgets they sent to his desk like he said he would.

The Fed operates with money it takes from us or borrows. In business, when you operate that way, you ALWAYS reach the point where there just aint no mo money to be had. Even if they raise taxes on everyone, the Fed is still going to have to start printing more money, and inflation is going to go through the roof.

[SportsDino]

I'd rather have the government buy up a whole bunch of property on the cheap with that trillion dollars, than give it to a failing market to save us. We are going beyond Keynesian economics here to something that is just plain imaginary and paying lip service to having any basis in rationality.

As an independent, both Bush and Obama have been spend crazy and taking the wrong road. They even seem to have the same general interests pushing their primary buttons (they just differ in some of the special interests they are going to dole out cash towards).

[Dutch]

Speaking of inflation.

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsO...5160AM20090210

U.S. offers $2 trillion bank plan but stocks slump

By Glenn Somerville
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Treasury chief Timothy Geithner on Tuesday unveiled a new bank rescue plan that would put $2 trillion to work mopping up bad assets and restoring credit, but stock markets plunged on fears it would not work.

Global markets had intensely awaited Geithner's ideas for a plan mixing private and public funding to stabilize a financial system tottering under the weight of bad mortgages, but were disappointed over the scant details provided.

The Dow Jones industrial average ended down 4.6 percent -- its biggest one-day percentage drop since December 1 -- with bank stocks hit particularly hard. U.S. government bonds rose as investors scrambled for safe-haven debt.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

The proposed fixes in the "Stimulus" Bill. If everything works like you seem to think it will and we become the U.S. of Shangra-La, feel free to crow all you want. I think it's a disaster waiting to happen and will put us in an economic mailaise for the next decade.

I'm not a fan of massive deficit spending, the one area I fault Reagan for not standing up to the Democrats and vetoing some of those budgets they sent to his desk like he said he would.

The Fed operates with money it takes from us or borrows. In business, when you operate that way, you ALWAYS reach the point where there just aint no mo money to be had. Even if they raise taxes on everyone, the Fed is still going to have to start printing more money, and inflation is going to go through the roof.

Where have I stated that the proposals are the magic fix? What I'm saying is that nothing has been done yet, and there has yet to be any impact felt. You've already pronounced them a dismal failure before anything has even been agreed upon.

Besides, wasn't it Dick Cheney, Republican Alpha Male, who reminded us that "Reagan proved deficits don't matter"?

[SFL Cat]

Actually the Senate has passed their version of the "Stimulus" package. So now its only a matter of the Senate and House Democrats getting to the point where they can join hands and sing Kumbayah.

[SportsDino]

Back of the napkin calculation:
$2 trillion
Assume 400 million peasants.

That is 5000 per peasant. That number of peasants is so large it should probably cover most of the tiny, baby peasants too. How big of a mess are the banks in that each and every one of us paying in 5000 would still not be enough to fix it?

How come only 50 billion of that is going to preventing foreclosures, which are the nominal reason for our economic meltdown?

Can you say leverage + imaginary instruments that do not even exist = 2 trillion?

Can you say "screw the banks and their games, clean up real assets those imaginary instruments are based on (only getting 50 billion btw) and let companies dealing in monopoly money with each other bite it"?

We can survive without the massive banks believe it or not, it'll be a hell of a mess, but it could be executed cleanly if we tried. But the banks and their bad decisions clearly cannot survive without us, at this point they are probably at the cancer level going to take us down with them.

[SFL Cat]

LOL, atta boy Chucky...

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

The proposed fixes in the "Stimulus" Bill. If everything works like you seem to think it will and we become the U.S. of Shangra-La, feel free to crow all you want. I think it's a disaster waiting to happen and will put us in an economic mailaise for the next decade.

I'm not a fan of massive deficit spending, the one area I fault Reagan for not standing up to the Democrats and vetoing some of those budgets they sent to his desk like he said he would.

The Fed operates with money it takes from us or borrows. In business, when you operate that way, you ALWAYS reach the point where there just aint no mo money to be had. Even if they raise taxes on everyone, the Fed is still going to have to start printing more money, and inflation is going to go through the roof.

#1 - nice to see you backtracking now and admitting that there is nothing that has been passed already that has exacerbated the problem, just that you think that it will moving forward. Not to make this a personal attack, but I'm curious as to your credentials to be able to pass judgement on macro-economic matters.

#2 - history lesson for you: Those massive Regan-years budgets were driven by military spending.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by SportsDino

Back of the napkin calculation:
$2 trillion
Assume 400 million peasants.

That is 5000 per peasant. That number of peasants is so large it should probably cover most of the tiny, baby peasants too. How big of a mess are the banks in that each and every one of us paying in 5000 would still not be enough to fix it?

How come only 50 billion of that is going to preventing foreclosures, which are the nominal reason for our economic meltdown?

Can you say leverage + imaginary instruments that do not even exist = 2 trillion?

Can you say "screw the banks and their games, clean up real assets those imaginary instruments are based on (only getting 50 billion btw) and let companies dealing in monopoly money with each other bite it"?

We can survive without the massive banks believe it or not, it'll be a hell of a mess, but it could be executed cleanly if we tried. But the banks and their bad decisions clearly cannot survive without us, at this point they are probably at the cancer level going to take us down with them.

I do agree with you on a lot of this. Wasn't it you in the other thread who said something about the amount of money being thrown at this being enough to payoff everybody's mortgage?

[SFL Cat]

Actually, based on the graph, it looks like the spikes in military spending under Reagen were less than under Eisenhower and Nixon...course those spikes correspond to Korea and Vietnam.

Looks like the deficit really got going during the Carter administration, and obviously you can't attribute those deficits to out of control military spending.

I guess the Dems were content to give Reagan his military expenditures as long as they didn't have to cut any of their social spending, but that did make those red bars grow.

[stevew]

They should have just bought all the bad mortgages 3 months ago with the other stimulus. If the people fail to pay them off, just treat it like student loans and make you never be able to bankrupt the debt away.

But this is just sillyness of an epic scale right now.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

Actually, based on the graph, it looks like the spikes in military spending under Reagen were less than under Eisenhower and Nixon...course those spikes correspond to Korea and Vietnam.

Looks like the deficit really got going during the Carter administration, and obviously you can't attribute those deficits to out of control military spending.

I guess the Dems were content to give Reagan his military expenditures as long as they didn't have to cut any of their social spending, but that did make those red bars grow.

What are you talking about??

My point was that massive military spending during the Regan years was the equivalent of social spending (and actually in most of the years outstripped it), and that was what resulted in the massive spending bills during the Regan years.

I'm not even sure how you're trying to spin that into "well the democrats should have given up some of their social spending," but I guess I shouldn't be surprised coming from you.

Please please tell me that's what you're trying to say?? Please tell me you're trying to argue the common misconception that it was the Regan-era military buildup which broke the back of the Soviet Union and forced it to implode??

Because otherwise I'm not sure what point you're trying to get at.