For those concerned about US debt

[BigBallinStalin]

http://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/2013/03/fun-debt-graphs.html

5 minute read.

[Ace Rimmer]

It took me 4 minutes.

The gist: "We don't know what the f*ck is going to happen in the future. It could be all rosy if we have great growth or it could go further to shit".

[PLAYER57832]

No, the giist is that the CBO is full of ... sh*t, so ignore them.

The problem? They don't get into anything about WHY those figures differ, at the root, or the many outside factors that will have very critical impacts.

[BigBallinStalin]

No, the giist is that the CBO is full of ... sh*t, so ignore them.

Exactly, but the people who won't ignore them are the ones who should.

[BigBallinStalin]

Also, correcting for the rosy predictions using modest assumptions reveals terrible outcomes which may occur 20 years sooner than the CBO predicted.

[rdsrds2120]

We have to hide this thread before Scotty gets back, haha.

BMO

[greenoaks]

We have to hide this thread before Scotty gets back, haha.

BMO

or keep the thread and don't let Scotty back

[PLAYER57832]

No, the giist is that the CBO is full of ... sh*t, so ignore them.

Exactly, but the people who won't ignore them are the ones who should.

No, the folks who want to criticize need to come up with better data --- or at least pay attention to what the data actually says instead of what they want to claim it says..

And I don't agree that CBO data is garbage, its just limited in its scope.

[BigBallinStalin]

No, the giist is that the CBO is full of ... sh*t, so ignore them.

Exactly, but the people who won't ignore them are the ones who should.

No, the folks who want to criticize need to come up with better data --- or at least pay attention to what the data actually says instead of what they want to claim it says..

And I don't agree that CBO data is garbage, its just limited in its scope.

Oh, sure, can't say anything until you spend millions of dollars collecting original data. Makes total sense.

I'd love for you to expand on that.

[Nola_Lifer]

We have to hide this thread before Scotty gets back, haha.

BMO

or keep the thread and don't let Scotty back

+1haha

[Fruitcake]

Also, correcting for the rosy predictions using modest assumptions reveals terrible outcomes which may occur 20 years sooner than the CBO predicted.

I may be wrong but it all looks pretty imminent.

BBS, what do you think should happen to stop this from occurring?

[_sabotage_]

For those concerned about US debt, don't worry. The Fed's partial audit revealed we have made more than 16 trillion in unauthorized loans to banks far and wide. Worry that your savings will be devalued and buying power dashed.

[Gillipig]

Create government financed companies manufacturing the things you have China make for you now, and grant them subsidies for sale in the U.S, or, lower the wages until you can out-compete China. That's basically the only two options you have if you want to get back your industry jobs. Take your pick.

[PLAYER57832]

No, the giist is that the CBO is full of ... sh*t, so ignore them.

Exactly, but the people who won't ignore them are the ones who should.

No, the folks who want to criticize need to come up with better data --- or at least pay attention to what the data actually says instead of what they want to claim it says..

And I don't agree that CBO data is garbage, its just limited in its scope.

Oh, sure, can't say anything until you spend millions of dollars collecting original data. Makes total sense.

I'd love for you to expand on that.

Try paying attention to natural resource data, to numbers and kinds of disability claims... and to the (lack of) money being invested in education, projections for numbers of technically qualified graduates.... not to mention lack of funding into true alternatives to our oil/natural gas/coal based economy.

(just to name a very few points).

The CBO data is correct, but has to be taken in contexts. (note the "s"). Most of the above criticism is about objecting to projections to a point are already defined as being inaccurate .. thr trouble is those criticizing don't have any better data, they just want to criticize.

[PLAYER57832]

Also, correcting for the rosy predictions using modest assumptions reveals terrible outcomes which may occur 20 years sooner than the CBO predicted.

I may be wrong but it all looks pretty imminent.

BBS, what do you think should happen to stop this from occurring?

He cannot give the real answer, because the real answer lies in understanding that the very basis of any economy is its natural resources... and that most projections in that forum have been grossly misrepresented.

Also, too many economic projections try to hold things like technological fixes as either assumed or irrelevant, without considering how those fixes really come about.

[BigBallinStalin]

Also, correcting for the rosy predictions using modest assumptions reveals terrible outcomes which may occur 20 years sooner than the CBO predicted.

I may be wrong but it all looks pretty imminent.

BBS, what do you think should happen to stop this from occurring?

Haha, to stop this from occurring?

Oh wow, the USG would have to cut spending significantly--especially on Medicare and Medicaid. Increasing taxes allows them to continue their deficit spending (because they're politicians), so taxes won't work. The 'cost-savings' from Obamacare look more imaginative with every year--as new information pops up which they failed to predict.

They need to cut spending, but the politicians lack the willingness and their constituents really would be upset if all that ill-gotten goods was taken from them (e.g. see Player, Mets, JB, Fitz, the 'liberals', haha).


The FED would have to stop pushing down interest rates, which make the costs of government borrowing lower--which allows the politicians to continue low-cost deficit spending while making half-assed attempts to lower debt and spending.



If none of the above happens, then things may get worse sooner.

[BigBallinStalin]

Also, correcting for the rosy predictions using modest assumptions reveals terrible outcomes which may occur 20 years sooner than the CBO predicted.

I may be wrong but it all looks pretty imminent.

BBS, what do you think should happen to stop this from occurring?

He cannot give the real answer, because the real answer lies in understanding that the very basis of any economy is its natural resources... and that most projections in that forum have been grossly misrepresented.

Also, too many economic projections try to hold things like technological fixes as either assumed or irrelevant, without considering how those fixes really come about.

You've been failing to really provide any details of this new Rant of yours, so we can ignore it.

[PLAYER57832]

Also, correcting for the rosy predictions using modest assumptions reveals terrible outcomes which may occur 20 years sooner than the CBO predicted.

I may be wrong but it all looks pretty imminent.

BBS, what do you think should happen to stop this from occurring?

He cannot give the real answer, because the real answer lies in understanding that the very basis of any economy is its natural resources... and that most projections in that forum have been grossly misrepresented.

Also, too many economic projections try to hold things like technological fixes as either assumed or irrelevant, without considering how those fixes really come about.

You've been failing to really provide any details of this new Rant of yours, so we can ignore it.

Like I said ... you cannot give a real answer.

[Fruitcake]

Also, correcting for the rosy predictions using modest assumptions reveals terrible outcomes which may occur 20 years sooner than the CBO predicted.

I may be wrong but it all looks pretty imminent.

BBS, what do you think should happen to stop this from occurring?

He cannot give the real answer, because the real answer lies in understanding that the very basis of any economy is its natural resources... and that most projections in that forum have been grossly misrepresented.

Also, too many economic projections try to hold things like technological fixes as either assumed or irrelevant, without considering how those fixes really come about.

You've been failing to really provide any details of this new Rant of yours, so we can ignore it.

Like I said ... you cannot give a real answer.

Well, to be precise, I did not request a 'real' answer per se. I asked BBS what he thinks should happen to stop this from occurring. No matter, he has answered my question and given me food for thought.

[saxitoxin]

What about the notorious ultra-ultra-ultra-ultra-ultra-ultra- .... ultra-ultra ... ultra-right-wing radio network, NPR and the super-super-super-super ... super ... super-fascist magazine The Atlantic?

Disability Insurance: America's $124 Billion Secret Welfare Program

Social Security's disability insurance program, which over 20 years has quietly morphed into one of the largest, yet least talked about, pieces of the social safety net. Since the early 1990s, the number of former workers receiving payments under it has more than doubled to about 8.5 million, as shown in Planet Money's graph below. More than five percent of all eligible adults are now on the rolls, up from around 3 percent twenty years ago. Add in children and spouses who also get checks, and the grand tally comes to 11.5 million.

Are disabilities just becoming more common? According to economists such as MIT's David Autor, the evidence says no. Instead, it seems two things have happened: Qualifying for disability got easier, and finding work got harder.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc ... am/274302/

[patches70]

What about the notorious ultra-ultra-ultra-ultra-ultra-ultra- .... ultra-ultra ... ultra-right-wing radio network, NPR and the super-super-super-super ... super ... super-fascist magazine The Atlantic?

Disability Insurance: America's $124 Billion Secret Welfare Program

Social Security's disability insurance program, which over 20 years has quietly morphed into one of the largest, yet least talked about, pieces of the social safety net. Since the early 1990s, the number of former workers receiving payments under it has more than doubled to about 8.5 million, as shown in Planet Money's graph below. More than five percent of all eligible adults are now on the rolls, up from around 3 percent twenty years ago. Add in children and spouses who also get checks, and the grand tally comes to 11.5 million.

Are disabilities just becoming more common? According to economists such as MIT's David Autor, the evidence says no. Instead, it seems two things have happened: Qualifying for disability got easier, and finding work got harder.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc ... am/274302/

Whoa whoa whoa! What do they mean "finding work got harder?" According to Player all the job numbers are back to where they are supposed to be before the crash.

After 2 years, the employment rates, hiring rates, etc go back to at least what they were before.

And before the crash it was economic Goldilocks as the pundits and government officials tried to make believe.

You mean after some $6 trillion of new debt, stimulus, bailouts, legislative fixes, overhauling of healthcare, that we are still screwed?
Oh, never mind, deficits don't matter any more. Why worry about government debt? We can just print more money! Wheeee!!!

[Lootifer]

What about the notorious ultra-ultra-ultra-ultra-ultra-ultra- .... ultra-ultra ... ultra-right-wing radio network, NPR and the super-super-super-super ... super ... super-fascist magazine The Atlantic?

Disability Insurance: America's $124 Billion Secret Welfare Program

Social Security's disability insurance program, which over 20 years has quietly morphed into one of the largest, yet least talked about, pieces of the social safety net. Since the early 1990s, the number of former workers receiving payments under it has more than doubled to about 8.5 million, as shown in Planet Money's graph below. More than five percent of all eligible adults are now on the rolls, up from around 3 percent twenty years ago. Add in children and spouses who also get checks, and the grand tally comes to 11.5 million.

Are disabilities just becoming more common? According to economists such as MIT's David Autor, the evidence says no. Instead, it seems two things have happened: Qualifying for disability got easier, and finding work got harder.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc ... am/274302/

Hehehe, I do love a very simple rhetoric on what is a very complicated scenario.

Gogo gadget american politics democracy!.

[saxitoxin]

What about the notorious ultra-ultra-ultra-ultra-ultra-ultra- .... ultra-ultra ... ultra-right-wing radio network, NPR and the super-super-super-super ... super ... super-fascist magazine The Atlantic?

Disability Insurance: America's $124 Billion Secret Welfare Program

Social Security's disability insurance program, which over 20 years has quietly morphed into one of the largest, yet least talked about, pieces of the social safety net. Since the early 1990s, the number of former workers receiving payments under it has more than doubled to about 8.5 million, as shown in Planet Money's graph below. More than five percent of all eligible adults are now on the rolls, up from around 3 percent twenty years ago. Add in children and spouses who also get checks, and the grand tally comes to 11.5 million.

Are disabilities just becoming more common? According to economists such as MIT's David Autor, the evidence says no. Instead, it seems two things have happened: Qualifying for disability got easier, and finding work got harder.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc ... am/274302/

Hehehe, I do love a very simple rhetoric on what is a very complicated scenario.

Gogo gadget american politics democracy!.

YOU'RE A COMPLICATED SCENARIO, BRO!

[DoomYoshi]

More reason to dislike growth.

As long as the US economy is in a tailspin, the likelihood that it gets an extremist government increases. I am sick of Repocrats. Give us extremism to the extreme.

And then crush the Habsburgs.

[PLAYER57832]

Also, correcting for the rosy predictions using modest assumptions reveals terrible outcomes which may occur 20 years sooner than the CBO predicted.

I may be wrong but it all looks pretty imminent.

BBS, what do you think should happen to stop this from occurring?

He cannot give the real answer, because the real answer lies in understanding that the very basis of any economy is its natural resources... and that most projections in that forum have been grossly misrepresented.

Also, too many economic projections try to hold things like technological fixes as either assumed or irrelevant, without considering how those fixes really come about.

You've been failing to really provide any details of this new Rant of yours, so we can ignore it.

Like I said ... you cannot give a real answer.

Well, to be precise, I did not request a 'real' answer per se. I asked BBS what he thinks should happen to stop this from occurring. No matter, he has answered my question and given me food for thought.

Yeah, and my answer was not appropriate in this case, either.


That said, cutting medical costs really means placing limits on care by some entity other htan insurance companies. Its not folks like myself standing in the way there, its the right wing who wants no limit on keeping "grandma" alive and is against even basic sex education in schools.


My point on the rest is just that if we don't have an good alternative energy source or a handle on the global climate change issues, likely water as well... none of the above will matter.