Where's the Birth Certificate?

[Dog Wonder]

From the boards model of character.

 

[SparrowHawk]

From the boards model of character.

Thanks I'm glad you've been paying attention. So how is the $4/gall gas working for ya?

How's the Ground beef @ $3.49/lb instead of $2.49 (when B.O. took office workin' for you?

This is what happens when you have a POTUS who doesn't know that to much debt causes commodities to inflate. See you can't claim/blame this on Bush, as woeful as he was we did still maintain our top flight Credit Rating. THAT he did inherit from Bush.

 

[Ms Tree]

Demand out side of the US is growing. Consumption in the US is increasing. Speculators are running the markets. The biggest export (not one of the biggest exports) is fuel. We are exporting to the tune of $88 billion dollars. Less supply of gas in the US means highers prices. I guess Obama could impose a export tax but ....OH the republicans would never support a tax even if it would mean lower prices at the pump. Then you have the issues in the ME and a few other factors but I am sure none of this had any affect and will not affect the price of fuel.

Everyone complains but no one is willing to sacrifice a dam thing to do anything about it.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Demand out side of the US is growing. Consumption in the US is increasing. Speculators are running the markets. The biggest export (not one of the biggest exports) is fuel. We are exporting to the tune of $88 billion dollars. Less supply of gas in the US means highers prices. I guess Obama could impose a export tax but ....OH the republicans would never support a tax even if it would mean lower prices at the pump. Then you have the issues in the ME and a few other factors but I am sure none of this had any affect and will not affect the price of fuel.

Everyone complains but no one is willing to sacrifice a dam thing to do anything about it.

As usual because you ignore anything critical of the Empty Suit, you've ignored the fact that the massive explosion of debt is responsible for the Inflation of the price of both Gas & Groceries. You can lay the blame for this recurrence at the feet of Bush & Obama and still have plenty of blame left over for Congress and the Federal Reserve.

 

[Ms Tree]

Perhaps you could just post your talking points somewhere to save me the embarrassment of posting things that are not relevant?

Did I say that the debt had nothing to do with the price of oil/fuel? You are the one who likes to blame everything on Obama. There is far more at work on the the price of oil/fuel than just the fact that we are in debt.

 

[Dog Wonder]

As usual because you ignore anything critical of the Empty Suit,

Actually, I ignore anyone who never has anything new to say.

It gets boring.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Perhaps you could just post your talking points somewhere to save me the embarrassment of posting things that are not relevant?

Did I say that the debt had nothing to do with the price of oil/fuel? You are the one who likes to blame everything on Obama. There is far more at work on the the price of oil/fuel than just the fact that we are in debt.

Yes there is a lot more than debt alone. However the ROOT cause of the problem is debt and the fiat currency upon which it is based. If and until those factors are addressed we are going to careen from one burst bubble to another. Nowhere is this cycle being displayed better then it the EEC and the near collapse of the Euro under the weight of cumulative debt

It is the fundamental battle between the currently in vogue Keynesian School of Economics versus the Austrian School. Right now the Austrian School is being revisited due to what many feel is the abject failure of the current Keynesian model.

As to Obama. honestly the only reason I'm as far up his arse as I am am is because I want to give Progressives a does of their own medicine. Barack Obama is merely the symptom of the disease, just as Bush was. The primary difference between the is their skin pigmentation. So to me Obama might as well be called "Black Bush" and Bush "White Obama" merely two wings on the same liberty robbing bird of prey

 

[Ms Tree]

The more I read and think about the debt argument the less it holds water. The last big spike in fuel prices was under Bush which was when our debt was about 4 trillion less. Oil is a world commodity. China is paying the same per a barrel of oil as Germany and India is paying the same per barrel at S. Africa is. While the US economy has affects on certain aspects of the world economy, the price of oil seems to be only slightly affected by it. Our debt is quite a bit higher than it was when the price of oil was higher than it is now. What has increased since the last price spike is demand, tension in the ME and fuel exports from the US.

I am sorry this does not fit into your world view.

By admitting what the rest of already figured out quite some time ago discredits your arguments even more if that is even possible. Perhaps basing arguments based on principle and logic might be a nice change of pace.

 

[SparrowHawk]

The more I read and think about the debt argument the less it holds water. The last big spike in fuel prices was under Bush which was when our debt was about 4 trillion less. Oil is a world commodity. China is paying the same per a barrel of oil as Germany and India is paying the same per barrel at S. Africa is. While the US economy has affects on certain aspects of the world economy, the price of oil seems to be only slightly affected by it. Our debt is quite a bit higher than it was when the price of oil was higher than it is now. What has increased since the last price spike is demand, tension in the ME and fuel exports from the US.

I am sorry this does not fit into your world view.

By admitting what the rest of already figured out quite some time ago discredits your arguments even more if that is even possible. Perhaps basing arguments based on principle and logic might be a nice change of pace.

When was Oil at its peak under Bush? Roughly the same time as the housing bubble burst. We were better able to absorb that "hit" because our debt to GDP ration was far lower (Hovering around 75 to 80%). Now under Obama the ratio of Debt to GDP is right around 100%. It's the ratio that makes things worse now. The blame that can be clearly laid at Obama's feet is allowing the debt to increase in a Keynesian feeding frenzy of Government Spending. Bush shares only slightly less blame. He had the opportunity to let Freddie & Fannie fail and liquidate the debt and auction them off and rid ourselves of the bad debt/investment. Doing so would have the housing industry on the road to recovery now. Medicare part D contributed as much debt as the 2 wars did as well.

To me the only open issue between Bush and Obama is which one gets hung first? So do we go by years of service? Highest amount of debt accumulated on a monthly basis? Or hang the simultaneously?

 

[Ms Tree]

Do you even read what you write? Just curious.

If anything you said had any link to the truth then then the price of oil would reflect it but alas they do not. The bubble burst in early to mid 07. The price of oil did not pass $100 till Feb 08 and did not peak till Jul 08. The price dropped back below $100 in Oct 08 yet the housing market and dept spending was still continuing. Crude actually dropped to $37 in Feb 09 but spending was still going on. Any way, as you can see, your theory about debt and crude prices does not seem to match the price of fuel.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Do you even read what you write? Just curious.

If anything you said had any link to the truth then then the price of oil would reflect it but alas they do not. The bubble burst in early to mid 07. The price of oil did not pass $100 till Feb 08 and did not peak till Jul 08. The price dropped back below $100 in Oct 08

I said around as in near the time the bubble burst. In a complex economy events overlap, not in a nice neat order.

yet the housing market and dept spending was still continuing.

As are the continued and ongoing economic malaise. brought on by?? DEBT

Crude actually dropped to $37 in Feb 09 but spending was still going on.

Yes, due to a softening of demand and the speculation bubble bursting. Why did it burst? Crappy Economy brought on by? DEBT

Any way, as you can see, your theory about debt and crude prices does not seem to match the price of fuel.

I see it as proof that debt and an economy based on Government spending (European Democratic Socialism, USSR, etc) is doomed to failure

 

[Ms Tree]

Demand did not drop 80%. Demand in the US dropped less than 10%. I'm around 100 yrs old give or take 60 years. The debt has been increasing at a steady rate yet the price of crude has not even come close to matching the debt. Our economy does not dictate the price of oil that China, Greece or any other country pays yet they all pay the same amount. Crude is a world wide commodity. Our economy has a minimal affect on the price of crude. The price of gas now is more a result of the fact that gas exports are at a record high because the oil companies can sell it at a higher rate abroad then locally.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Demand did not drop 80%. Demand in the US dropped less than 10%. I'm around 100 yrs old give or take 60 years. The debt has been increasing at a steady rate yet the price of crude has not even come close to matching the debt. Our economy does not dictate the price of oil that China, Greece or any other country pays yet they all pay the same amount. Crude is a world wide commodity. Our economy has a minimal affect on the price of crude. The price of gas now is more a result of the fact that gas exports are at a record high because the oil companies can sell it at a higher rate abroad then locally.

NO! But the Debt to GDP ratio has climbed to the point where Commodity Inflation is the net result of the combination of debt, fiat currency. If you look at Japan's economic problems brought on by fiat currency and the same Quantitative Easing currently in vogue at the Federal Reserve

Just In Case you think I pull this out of my ass

Bernanke: US Recovery Could Go Off 'Massive Fiscal Cliff'

Thursday, 01 Mar 2012 07:15 AM

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on Wednesday offered a tempered view of the U.S. economy, pouring cold water on the notion recent upbeat signs herald a stronger recovery.

Bernanke told Congress that unless growth accelerated, the unacceptably high U.S. unemployment rate would not keep dropping.

But he stopped short of signaling further Fed bond purchases, dashing the hopes of some traders in financial markets who were betting on more monetary stimulus.

"The job market is far from normal," Bernanke said.

The swift decline in the U.S. unemployment rate in recent months, to a three-year low of 8.3 percent in January from 9.1 percent in August, has surprised economists both within and outside the Fed given the economy's relatively soft performance.

Last year, the economy expanded only 1.7 percent, although the fourth quarter proved to be the strongest.

"The decline in the unemployment rate over the past year has been somewhat more rapid than might have been expected, given that the economy appears to have been growing during that time frame at or below its longer-term trend," Bernanke told the U.S.House of Representatives Financial Services Committee.

Bernanke's tentative outlook knocked the Dow Jones industrial average below the symbolic 13,000 level it had closed above on Tuesday. The Dow closed off 53 points, or 0.4 percent.It is up 2.5 percent on the month.

 

[Ms Tree]

Yet none of this has any thing to do with the price of crude.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Yet none of this has any thing to do with the price of crude.

Of course it does! It's all inter related which is why there is such a diversity of theory and opinion. The Global Economy is very complex and sometimes even the worlds top minds can't agree on cause and effect. I'm just a guy who reads a great deal and slings copiers for a living. I'm an Austrian School advocate in a room full of Keynesian types. When I started reading the work of Hayek and von Misies I started to change my view. What turned me completely was Frederique Bastiat's "Broken Window Fallacy" which neatly explains how government intervention into economies is counter productive. Let me see it I can post it in its entirety.

Bastiat's original parable of the broken window from Ce qu'on voit et ce qu'on ne voit pas (1850):

Have you ever witnessed the anger of the good shopkeeper, James Goodfellow, when his careless son happened to break a pane of glass? If you have been present at such a scene, you will most assuredly bear witness to the fact that every one of the spectators, were there even thirty of them, by common consent apparently, offered the unfortunate owner this invariable consolation—"It is an ill wind that blows nobody good. Everybody must live, and what would become of the glaziers if panes of glass were never broken?"

Now, this form of condolence contains an entire theory, which it will be well to show up in this simple case, seeing that it is precisely the same as that which, unhappily, regulates the greater part of our economical institutions.

Suppose it cost six francs to repair the damage, and you say that the accident brings six francs to the glazier's trade—that it encourages that trade to the amount of six francs—I grant it; I have not a word to say against it; you reason justly. The glazier comes, performs his task, receives his six francs, rubs his hands, and, in his heart, blesses the careless child. All this is that which is seen.

But if, on the other hand, you come to the conclusion, as is too often the case, that it is a good thing to break windows, that it causes money to circulate, and that the encouragement of industry in general will be the result of it, you will oblige me to call out, "Stop there! Your theory is confined to that which is seen; it takes no account of that which is not seen."

It is not seen that as our shopkeeper has spent six francs upon one thing, he cannot spend them upon another. It is not seen that if he had not had a window to replace, he would, perhaps, have replaced his old shoes, or added another book to his library. In short, he would have employed his six francs in some way, which this accident has prevented

Bastiat's argument

Austrian theorists, and Bastiat himself, apply the parable of the broken window in a different way. Suppose it was discovered that the little boy was actually hired by the glazier, and paid a franc for every window he broke. Suddenly the same act would be regarded as theft: the glazier was breaking windows in order to force people to hire his services. Yet the facts observed by the onlookers remain true: the glazier benefits from the business at the expense of the baker, the tailor, and so on.

Bastiat argues that people actually do endorse activities which are morally equivalent to the glazier hiring a boy to break windows for him:

Whence we arrive at this unexpected conclusion: "Society loses the value of things which are uselessly destroyed;" and we must assent to a maxim which will make the hair of protectionists stand on end—To break, to spoil, to waste, is not to encourage national labour; or, more briefly, "destruction is not profit."