Moderator: Community Team
Ace Rimmer wrote:You're ignoring the flip side of this. We are paying close to no interest for houses, cars, etc that are financed. I would say for the majority of people (not to mention the majority in the age 20-30 bracket) this has a bigger impact than a higher interest rate on savings would have. I'd rather have .5% interest on my savings account, 3.5% mortgage interest and 3% auto loan interest than having higher savings interest and higher loan interest.
I'm not saying keeping rates super low is the best thing to do (I'm no economist) but I do much better off personally by having low interest rates on loans and zero interest rates on my savings.
EDIT: I am outside this age range (added as a disclaimer)
John Adams wrote:I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace, that two are called a law firm, and that three or more become a Congress! And by God I have had this Congress!
Ace Rimmer wrote:You're ignoring the flip side of this. We are paying close to no interest for houses, cars, etc that are financed. I would say for the majority of people (not to mention the majority in the age 20-30 bracket) this has a bigger impact than a higher interest rate on savings would have. I'd rather have .5% interest on my savings account, 3.5% mortgage interest and 3% auto loan interest than having higher savings interest and higher loan interest.
I'm not saying keeping rates super low is the best thing to do (I'm no economist) but I do much better off personally by having low interest rates on loans and zero interest rates on my savings.
EDIT: I am outside this age range (added as a disclaimer)
Ace Rimmer wrote: I'd rather have .5% interest on my savings account,
Ace Rimmer wrote: I do much better off personally by having low interest rates on loans and zero interest rates on my savings.
BigBallinStalin wrote:Your ability to save money by collecting on interest has been significantly curtailed.
Placing your money in savings accounts, certificates of deposits, or money-market funds will only yield you a loss, as inflation robs you of your future savings.
Good luck playing on the stock and bonds market. Hope you studied finance and have enough capital to lose during your inevitable trial-and-error phase. Hey, maybe you could hire a financial manager! Shouldn't cost too much!
You can thank the Federal Reserve for its bang-up job in "saving" the economy. According to its estimates and stimulus, the economy should be exploding in growth today.
Saving Capitalism from Itself,
The Federal Reserve
patches70 wrote:Yes, inflation is good if you are in debt.
However, if-Ace Rimmer wrote: I'd rather have .5% interest on my savings account,
you don't have a .5% interest rate here, you have a -2.5% real rate. You'd be wise to do something else with that money than let it sit in a savings account to die. You're losing money man, and getting nothing in return for it.Ace Rimmer wrote: I do much better off personally by having low interest rates on loans and zero interest rates on my savings.
Because you are in debt.
I know your not going to pay any attention, but here it is anyway. You will find it in your best interests to get out of debt and stay out of debt. Time's running out. The things about the monetary system that you think favor you, are unsustainable. When our system resets, and it will reset, people like you will be in a very bad jam.
But hey, continue on as you see best for yourself, I wish nothing but good luck, sir.
Army of GOD wrote:BBS, can you be my financial adviser for free please?
Ace Rimmer wrote:You're ignoring the flip side of this. We are paying close to no interest for houses, cars, etc that are financed. I would say for the majority of people (not to mention the majority in the age 20-30 bracket) this has a bigger impact than a higher interest rate on savings would have. I'd rather have .5% interest on my savings account, 3.5% mortgage interest and 3% auto loan interest than having higher savings interest and higher loan interest.
I'm not saying keeping rates super low is the best thing to do (I'm no economist) but I do much better off personally by having low interest rates on loans and zero interest rates on my savings.
EDIT: I am outside this age range (added as a disclaimer)
nietzsche wrote:What BBS is trying to say that there are not many incentives to earn and save money?
Army of GOD wrote:BBS, can you be my financial adviser for free please?
nietzsche wrote:Something tells me that in spite that inflation is higher than savings ratings, most people who have money is still waiting on the sidelines with it. There's so much uncertainty.
Is the economic-outlook always like this? And old person could answer this.
Timminz wrote:The best way I've seen to get a decent rate of return on your money, is to own a successful business.
Timminz wrote:The best way I've seen to get a decent rate of return on your money, is to own a successful business.
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
john9blue wrote:i have been thinking about this over the past few months... i'm considering investing in some kind of precious metal once i get my student loans paid off and get a decent amount of cash in the bank. i've also dabbled in forex.
BBS (or whomever else thinks they have a good answer): what should i do with my money to protect it from the stoopid fagets that run our economy?
Phatscotty wrote:Timminz wrote:The best way I've seen to get a decent rate of return on your money, is to own a successful business.
meh....or sit back and do nothing....
let your mind do all the work
BigBallinStalin wrote:Ace Rimmer wrote:You're ignoring the flip side of this. We are paying close to no interest for houses, cars, etc that are financed. I would say for the majority of people (not to mention the majority in the age 20-30 bracket) this has a bigger impact than a higher interest rate on savings would have. I'd rather have .5% interest on my savings account, 3.5% mortgage interest and 3% auto loan interest than having higher savings interest and higher loan interest.
I'm not saying keeping rates super low is the best thing to do (I'm no economist) but I do much better off personally by having low interest rates on loans and zero interest rates on my savings.
EDIT: I am outside this age range (added as a disclaimer)
Sure, benefits and costs matter, but...
Hey, remember the housing crisis? Guess what predominantly caused that?
Hey, remember the bust from previous overinvestment in auto manufacturing? Guess what predominantly caused that?
Oh, wait! How the hell are people going to pay for these things in the future when so many alternatives of extremely safe forms of savings have been rendered unprofitable?
Then, how will all the deficit spending and reckless monetary policy be eventually paid for? (1) Through inflation and (2) through more instability in the economy as relatively safer savings are rednered less profitable--or at a loss.
So, you're right in that you might get a cheaper car or house at the cost of inherent instability in the economy, increased uncertainty, $1.6 trillion of excess reserves just waiting to be released, and then the following boom and bust with its decreased job security, unemployment, wage cuts, capacity to save money for hard times, etc.
All because... hey, mortgage rates for cars and houses are great when they're so low? It's not good in the long-run. Not good at all, my friend.
thegreekdog wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:Ace Rimmer wrote:You're ignoring the flip side of this. We are paying close to no interest for houses, cars, etc that are financed. I would say for the majority of people (not to mention the majority in the age 20-30 bracket) this has a bigger impact than a higher interest rate on savings would have. I'd rather have .5% interest on my savings account, 3.5% mortgage interest and 3% auto loan interest than having higher savings interest and higher loan interest.
I'm not saying keeping rates super low is the best thing to do (I'm no economist) but I do much better off personally by having low interest rates on loans and zero interest rates on my savings.
EDIT: I am outside this age range (added as a disclaimer)
Sure, benefits and costs matter, but...
Hey, remember the housing crisis? Guess what predominantly caused that?
Hey, remember the bust from previous overinvestment in auto manufacturing? Guess what predominantly caused that?
Oh, wait! How the hell are people going to pay for these things in the future when so many alternatives of extremely safe forms of savings have been rendered unprofitable?
Then, how will all the deficit spending and reckless monetary policy be eventually paid for? (1) Through inflation and (2) through more instability in the economy as relatively safer savings are rednered less profitable--or at a loss.
So, you're right in that you might get a cheaper car or house at the cost of inherent instability in the economy, increased uncertainty, $1.6 trillion of excess reserves just waiting to be released, and then the following boom and bust with its decreased job security, unemployment, wage cuts, capacity to save money for hard times, etc.
All because... hey, mortgage rates for cars and houses are great when they're so low? It's not good in the long-run. Not good at all, my friend.
But BBS, don't we want economy and we can't have economy unless we spend more money!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users