Just getting into economics... How long does the US economy have before it falls?

Not necessarily so you're deliberately presenting a red herring to hide from your previous error. It is not appreciated

Greece isn't relevant to the conversation. You've gone from red herring to deliberate 'noise'

 

_____________

Actually, the takeover of the US financial system started in 1913 with the establishment of the privately owned and controlled Federal Reserve System.

Any serious student of US economics should read The Creature From Jekyll Island.

Also Eustace Mullins' [video=youtube;Ul3Iyq1i_30]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ul3Iyq1i_30[/video]

All money in the US and most of the rest of the world is created from and only from debt. Debt must increase to repay this debt.

It is difficult for most to wrap their minds around this money is debt concept, but it's the reality.

The reality is printed right on the Federal Reserve Note.

A note is evidence of a debt. All we have today for our medium of exchange is debt, an IOU.

IOU what?

More debt.

When the this debt Ponzi scheme collapses, the US economy will collapse until a new monetary system is established.

This collapse happened in Iceland, and the Icelanders handled it correctly and that is why we never hear of Iceland.

Irish missed their chance.

The Greeks are getting their opportunity right now for a proper response. We'll see how they deal with the problem of Central Bank debt.

That is why the banksters are scared sh*tless - there is no solution to the problem fiat currency creates and they know it.

Once the rest of us know it, they are toast.

 

Correct....tell the banks and debt holders to take a hike. Repeal legal tender laws...remove taxes on gold and silver and the rest will take care of itself. Iceland as you pointed out is the PRIME example of what needs to be done. The difference is the people in power, not the politicians, are benefiting from the status quo. When the dollar fails, yes it is going to fail as all fiat currencies do eventually, the citizens are left with very little while the banks and corporations/majority shareholders reap the rewards. It has happened over and over and over and over and over and over throughout history. History is currently repeating itself.

The US is insolvent. We have been playing kick the can down the road for over 4 decades. The dollar is finished. When will it collapse? Really depends on how long the rest of the world namely the emerging economies continue to allow us to get away with it. We will be at war within 5 years.....world war likely against many of those emerging countries. Again...history will repeat itself.

 

Can you refer me to one economic publication in support of your position? (Careful now that you choose something a little bit more serious than the Babylonian Brotherhood)

 

____________________________

What standard do you use to judge acceptable "economic publications?"

Ones that support the status quo? Perhaps a publication put out by the Federal Reserve System?

Or publications that simply put for the facts that those of us who can think critically can decide for ourselves whether to accept the premises put forth or not?

Or do you like others to do your thinking for you and thus have your opinions formed by those you don't even know?

The US is insolvent. Even a donkey's arse can see that. And it is a fact of history that all fiat currencies eventually fail. Without exception.

Do you think the FED has a publication that will tell you that? If so - LMFHO

 

That's the amusing aspect of my request: folk give the game away by responding with what they deem acceptable. What comic would you choose?

 

Afraid to answer the question w/o asking a question?

 

Don't be shy now. What comic would you choose?

 

You're slithering.

Just answer the question if you expect to sit at the adult table.

 

____________
You're here with an agenda and that is why you will not answer these types of questions.

I already know the answer.

The publications you approve of are all owned and controlled by jewish sources.

These sources vett the "information" they allow their readers to hear about and thus control the
debate.

A growing number of us are on to these tactics.
Very successful, so far.
But the tide is turning.

 

You're clearly ignorant of scholarly resource and there is no reason to ask why. Goodbye

 

The Federal Reserve did not create the national debt. The national debt was well over 100% from WWII, then was paid down through the economic growth the New Deal and spending stimulus fostered asfter the war. As the higher incomes and profits were taxed at higher marginal rates, the debt was reduced as a percentage of GDP. Around 1973 was where the US saw it's peak for prosperity for all, until the oil shocks, and later, the rise of the Reaganistas lowering real wages.

But, the US is not in any danger of economic collapse, unless the conservatives conduct a coup of momentous proportions and finally turn the US into a banana republic.

The Federal Reserve is merely a central banking system, and lender of last resort. There's nothing unconstitutional about that. It's a quasi-public/private venture, and it's generally served well since the New Deal.

 

If the wingnuts follow through with "starve the beast" to move to the banana republic, you could see the US economic importance slip away. The Europeans, with their single currency, are going to have a much larger fall, unless the periphery start breaking the ties to the euro. I think we may finally see the exit of Greece soon. It will be good for the Greeks to break away, as their inability to devalue is hurting their economy badly.

 

http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=70

http://epi.3cdn.net/55d8ba5873e5bd097e_avm6b8rb1.pdf

The House Progressive Caucus offers the only budget proposal to forge a path towards fiscal stability through budget surpluses and paying off the Federal debt.




http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/

http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...rease-deficit/2012/03/20/gIQAQ0cyPS_blog.html

Paul Ryan's GOP budget proposal increases the Federal deficits and debt, and offers no way to pay for it.

 

This entire quote scares me. It once again tells me printing is the way out.

 

Don't forget Ron or Rand Paul's budget proposals. The Paul Ryan budget, however, is garbage.

I would much rather have a congress full of progressives and libertarians than the scum in there now.

 

Falls to what? The living standards of a third world country? I think that is already happening.

 

A cretinous comment that you won't be able to defend without making elemental error

 

Revier does not know how to answer a question directly.

 

He had his chance to be useful and blew it. Shame really. The statement 'folk give the game away by responding with what they deem acceptable' is accurate. We get a range from the mises.org drones to those that think copying and pasting forbes opinion pieces is the dog's...

 

You can't "get into economics as a hobby." To really understand economics you have to take years of college level classes from unbiased instructors. Before getting into all these wild predictions you have to know the nuts and bolts stuff. One word of caution people like Glenn Beck and a lot of the right wing posters on this forum don't know anything about economics. Most of the right wingers on this forum are not very well educated and are economic failures in their personal lives. Ask any number of them what they do and they will say they are a truck driver or something like that. You will not learn economics from people like that. The only thing you will learn from them is Obama is a communist and the Federal Reserve is evil.

If you truly want to help your country get a solid education. Don't just shoot your mouth off about things you don't understand. Here's a free lesson in economics... People like the quick easy route. Since a lot of the unwashed masses don't want to put in the work to get a solid eduction they denounce everything academic and think they can get spoon fed the right answers by TV and internet personalities like Glenn Beck. You cannot learn economics from someone peddling an agenda. Anyway if you don't at minimum read some college level introductory economics texts you will be forever confused. A lot of the statements on this forum are either unrealistic or just flat out false.

 

I agree that you can't get good economic info from pundits, but I don't think you need a full on University education to follow the subject to some degree. It's not true. You can get a general understanding of most subjects via introductory texts, and it's not always reasonable to go take a college course.

 

You won't with economics. Introductory texts are just about training the mind so that realistic models can be digested

 

What a mix of ideas - right and wrong and some that contradict each other.

#1 - years of college are not required to learn economics if (as you state) a person is willing to put in the work. In this age of the internet, the material is readily available.

#2 - you limit ignorance to the "right" and single out Beck. The left is just as ignorant, willing to denounce everything academic that questions their ideology, and loves to be spoon fed answers from their own media personalities. As to Beck, if you actually watch his shows (it takes more than one), you will find he has a solid understanding of economics - but as with most things, you have to do your homework. Beck has chosen a side and thats not unreasonable, but he is pushing an agenda and where there is room for interpretation, he will interpret it to his advantage. But so do most people.

#3 - "Most of the right wingers on this forum are not very well educated and are economic failures in their personal lives. " Really? Do you ask everyone their occuputaion, education, and net worth? And what are most of the left wingers? There is ignorance on both sides. However, based on the sales ratings and customer reviews at Amazon, conservatives seem to be studying a lot more than liberals.

 

Economic analysis has shown clear differences. Consider, for example, the 'Fox effect' where manipulation of voter (i.e. the creation of a homogeneity where objective thought is curtailed) occurs. The same effect is not found in liberal media.

Economists are more likely to be liberal than conservative. The conservative is also more likely to suffer from the authoritarian personality where intellectualism is shunned