Gregor.us - Latest Comments in Washington’s Dilemma

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

Grainy Eva — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 04:54:17 -0000

Well, what happened to the first two major fields that needs proper budget funding in order to keep all things on the right track: health and education? How are these people supposed to make it if the health insurance doesn`t cover their needs for medical assistance, in an environment threatened by recession and unemployment? I am telling you, this is where the collapse makes way into the nation`s life. More and more people turn to Narconon programs because they live in a system that has made them weak and vulnerable. I am not saying this is the system`s fault and the people are entitled to fall vulnerably in front of vices, it`s just that this weakness chain is going on up to the further consequences that we see nowadays.

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

ChristopherBPurrowes — Sun, 11 Jul 2010 14:10:03 -0000

Banks will also charge customers if they have to write to them about an infraction of bank rules, such as exceeding the union bank california overdraft limit or defaulting on loan repayments. This means that defaulting customers have to repay the debt as well as the additional charges.

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

edvaard — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 12:12:29 -0000

In 2006 I was asked how bad it could get. My answer made people choke. Here was my answer.
If it is bad, you will pimp out your wife.
If it is worse, you pimp your sister.
If it is really bad,you pimp your daughter.
But you probably won't be pimping your mother.
Notice the wife goes first.

The first to go will likely be young women to the middle east on Emirates Airlines -- they just got the A380. If this isn't a reality for you as the Russians what happend 15 years ago.

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

wagelaborer — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 10:53:38 -0000

It's not called debt forgiveness. It's called bankruptcy, and it's the usual end to speculation and bubbles. Citigroup, Bank of America, etc., are overextended and should be allowed to fail. Instead, taxpayers are bailing them out.
This is unprecedented. The dot-com bubble wasn't bailed out. The railroad bubble wasn't bailed out. The Wall St bubble of the 20s wasn't bailed out.
I get that allowing bankruptcy will collapse the economy. But those of us on the bottom are screwed either way.

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

Crude Oil Trader — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 11:46:27 -0000

I will have to quote [hopefully with your blessing].....Sarcasm is the new analysis. Love it!

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

Chris — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 10:13:07 -0000

I think that you hit the nail on the head in pointing out that too much "production" is simply leveraging past production. Not sure about this though:

"savings currently is little more than debt service."

On a typical $60k household income, the current 7% savings rate has $4200 annual run rate. I believe this is after debt service expense. So there is considerable precautionary savings being built. As well there should as high unemployment looks to be with us a while.

How do you arrive at the statement that savings is little more than debt service? Maybe I am misinterpreting it.

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

RHondo — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 14:11:21 -0000

I don't believe the federal government will use taxpayers dollars to bail out or maintain the standard of living that Californians enjoy. The fact that they don't want to pay for that standard themselves and wish the nation to pick up the tab says a lot about how far we have fallen.

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

joshfactor — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 11:23:02 -0000

sorry but a federal bailout is the wrong answer to a well described problem. It allows states to continue to pass the buck of runaway public costs down the road for a harder day of reckoning. its true that the country needs substantial infrastructure & education investment to build for the future. but there is no future when mega corporations ship professional US jobs overseas, hire illegal immigrants instead of american labor for blue collar jobs, health care insurers gouge businesses & deny coverage to the sick, wall street banks gouge consumers on their credit cards, create a derivatives bomb & pass it to the taxpayers, & public sector costs are inflated by public employee unions. Not to mention the powerful lobbies who have more power than presidents to effect changes in the law. There are a lot of problems to fix, & more deficit spending is not a solution, but a problem in of itself. Obama will have to beat very powerful interests who are making these problems, & so far we do not see the gumption in him to do so, as evidenced by the mortgage bankruptcy reform defeat.

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

Terry J Leach — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 16:48:31 -0000

WOW!! I makes total sense to me. We have to "produce" something besides securitized assets. I knew most of what is said in this post, but somehow here it worst.

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

benjie t. — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:48:33 -0000

Gregor:

Your comment recently about the Portlands (OR: recently blue) Denvers (CO: newly blue) and Austins (TX: watch this space!) of the USA struck me. I'm quite interested in hearing more of your thoughts on this sort of thing, particularly how the legacy political baggage shapes the range of futures. Boston, Albany and Sacramento seem fated to gridlock at this point, don't they?

-benjie t.

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

gregorylent — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:44:11 -0000

my take on this ... managing public expectations has been the sole goal of all economic actions in the usa for a year now ... "everybody knows the dice are loaded", to quote leonard cohen ...

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

gregorylent — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:23:48 -0000

i do like something in the phrase "federal power will decline amidst this severe economic recession" ... seems like a boon in some ways ...

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

Eric Garland — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 12:54:03 -0000

@rewealth is doing great work on this. Check www.placestoinvest.com - He has an actual methodology for assessing which places (not necessarily states or countries) are most likely to be revitalized in the coming years. We all need to go bowling or something and talk this out.

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

gregor.us — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 12:45:05 -0000

I hope that you always include, and don't erase, your quips from your pulbic presentations because they are very sharp, funny, and nearly always make your point.

Sarcasm is the new Analysis, baby!

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

gregor.us — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 12:39:23 -0000

I have an ongoing conversation with @nelderini about which constraints to solve for, when gauging which States in the union might be best for making one's home. A kaleidescope of answers are continually spit out, from this dialogue, depending on whether one solves for: Water, Arable Land, Transportation, city sizes that actually allow for decisions to get made/to get things done, Oil and NG resources, Days of Heating/Cooling, Access to Waterways, Education Levels, Balance Sheets.

Perhaps we should plug you in, to the next call.

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

gregor.us — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 12:34:22 -0000

Yikes.

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

Eric Garland — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 12:21:31 -0000

What do you think of the future of states like Vermont (my home state) which are addicted to Federal money, shedding jobs as fast as they can, and making zero plans for the future?

They will soon be just as broke as California, with no industry, and an a median age in some counties of 61 YEARS OLD.

If California can't do it with surging, young, dynamic populations and lots of talent, how will the others fare?

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

Eric Garland — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 12:17:07 -0000

"We" got paid in a vast wealth of increasingly-Asian made consumer goods, falsely-inflated real estate, and slightly enhanced salaries, from which we paid lower inflation-adjusted income and the highest worker productivity and least leisure time in history.

"They" got paid in cash, real estate titles, and stock, the fastest concentration of wealth in history.

But hey, the iPhone is COOL. It's worth reducing paid maternity leave down to six hours, am I right?

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

Eric Garland — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:49:01 -0000

What the hell happened such that petroleum industry analysts, venture capitalists, and competitive intelligence dudes started sounding like the College Anarchists Society? But hey, when nothing works in an even remotely rational sense, what else can you think?

Seriously though, how long has it been like this? Was stuff this messed up in the 80s and 90s and I didn't notice?

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

gregor.us — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:25:49 -0000

Good comment. Readers of my blog will know I am very much in agreement with you on all-in cost accounting of freeways and roads vs public transport. Also, as far as the new admin's approach to solving our current problems, it's getting harder for me to accept that they really are so dumb, and I wonder that they are cynical. Not a comforting thought. For now, I will go with the smidiot explanation--highly educated people overconfident in their solutions.

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

gregor.us — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:22:46 -0000

That's interesting. 26B is such a huge gap. I just don't see how they close it. But yes I fully expect amortization tricks.

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

gregor.us — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:21:33 -0000

I do think it will be interesting should we get far enough down this road, that Californians become more aware of the revenue balance between Sacto and DC. This dynamic is definately on my mind.

As for transport systems, the proper way to analyze their economic benefit or liability goes way, way beyond fare revenues. My position now is that the California Freeway system is a bigger productivity and liability sink, than any CA public transport. You have to look at all-in costs. Take a look at what the state has to spend to maintain the very inefficient highway transport system.

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

gregor.us — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:17:36 -0000

I suspect the crisis will not complete, until the old order is swept away. Alot has to fall. Products, practices, ideas, and the clownish and cynical people who run so many of the nation's institutions. It's not just govt and business. It's media, and academia too.

I think the proper stance to take now is as follows, to say : "Your ideas suck, your solutions suck, your products suck, your media and your writing suck, your beliefs suck, your infrastructure sucks, and your priorities suck."

Heh. Get yer revoution on. (so to speak)

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

gregor.us — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:13:40 -0000

On a purely human behavior and psyh. level, I remain fascinated that Sanford took a big political stand against spending largesse and called upon the ethos of restraint, given what was occuring in his personal life. As a general point, we know that sex and money are two areas where human behavior can get, uhm, very unrestrained. You know, the whole issue of human Appetites, in general.

More importantly, and more to your point, it would be a shame of this crisis does not force a radical shift in spending behavior in government(s). It will have been a waste if we don't finally confront the age-old achilles heel of democracy--which is that eventually the electorate votes itself tax cuts and spending increases--to ruin.

Re: Washington’s Dilemma

gregor.us — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:09:08 -0000

Yes. A 150K for every tax paying adult. Then combine it with new federal limits on credit creation, fractional reserve banking, and limits on personal credit extension. It would be like a mass, societal mea culpa. And then we move into a Slow Growth era. And just as you say, those not in debt get 150K too. But again, restraints would be needed to discourage consumption. Under this type of plan, public policy would move down the spectrum towards Savings. That would be a huge change to American culture.

I am open-minded on this stuff, and largely neutral. Generally I advocate ideas that will work and reduce suffering. I'm not big on moral hectoring and making people pay too much for their mistakes. However, on the other side of that equation, I agree that chaos and hazard increase if people are trained that their mistakes will have few penalties.

It's a mess. All the solutions so far are a mess. I would at least like to see a discussion of a debt jubilee, with a 150K credit to all, and then new onerous credit creation restrictions, and balanced budget laws both at Federal and State levels.

Bottom line though is that I have few solutions.