How QE Boosted Inequality To Levels Surpassing The Great Depression

[Brain357]

Solutions:

1) Stop scaring corporations into moving their operations overseas.
2) Create an atmosphere that encourages small businesses (and big businesses) to thrive instead of burdening them with top-heavy regulations and tax burdens.
3) Reduce government's influence and presence in the free market.
4) Stop letting the environmentalists block all attempts to use America's natural resources and start drilling for oil here in America (on a larger scale). We could rapidly pay off our national debt and become a lending nation instead of a borrowing nation. We would put millions back to work in good paying jobs and we would reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

For starters ...

Please do me a favor. Pick one of those points.....the one that you think is the most important.

Thanks.

Actually, the 4 points are intertwined but I would really like to see America become the world's number 1 producer of oil. I would like to see a second industrial revolution on our shores. I do believe we should do so responsibly and without destroying waterways, forests, etc. but I believe it can be done. Unfortunately, the government has so over-regulated industry that they've forced many strong companies to move elsewhere (thanks, in part, to the various globalist treaties we've signed and thanks, in part, to greedy unions).

Anyway, I'm not sure if I answered your request.

So you think we should focus on a limited resource? That doesn't seem like a great idea even without taking into account the possible damage to the environment.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Dummy Obama and his conga line of failures are epic.

QE was nothing more than putting off the pain.. Kick the can down the road.. on and on..

The chickens will come home to roost

-Geaux

The "Massive Gift" That Keeps On Giving: How QE Boosted Inequality To Levels Surpassing The Great Depression

A week ago, the official truth about QE, once upon a time mischaracterized as being a means to boost US employment (which is misreported in such an optimistically biased way that even the Fed now admits is ridiculous, and had to scrap its forward guidance as a result) and grow the economy, emerged when the Fed's Fisher admitted that "QE was a massive gift intended to boost wealth."

The story here: The "Massive Gift" That Keeps On Giving: How QE Boosted Inequality To Levels Surpassing The Great Depression | Zero Hedge

What are you blaming Obama for, exactly?

 

[DriftingSand]

Should oil be traded in a currency other than dollars.....what would the impact be on our economy?

I am not going to engage in a battle of semantics here. The dollar and oil are linked......period.

LOL. The dollar and milk are linked; the dollar and pork are linked; the dollar and asphalt are linked; the dollar and Twinkies are linked; the dollar and shoe laces are linked. So what?

 

[DriftingSand]

Please do me a favor. Pick one of those points.....the one that you think is the most important.

Thanks.

Actually, the 4 points are intertwined but I would really like to see America become the world's number 1 producer of oil. I would like to see a second industrial revolution on our shores. I do believe we should do so responsibly and without destroying waterways, forests, etc. but I believe it can be done. Unfortunately, the government has so over-regulated industry that they've forced many strong companies to move elsewhere (thanks, in part, to the various globalist treaties we've signed and thanks, in part, to greedy unions).

Anyway, I'm not sure if I answered your request.

So you think we should focus on a limited resource? That doesn't seem like a great idea even without taking into account the possible damage to the environment.

We should focus on that resource as well as others. The oil industry sustains lots of other businesses as well. It creates jobs in the welding industry; trucking industry; retail supply houses that sell safety equipment, tools, steal, and other supplies; food industry; and many other contributing businesses.

It would put a lot of folks back to work and off of the government doles.

I believe that the oil industry would get us out of our current economic crisis in a big hurry. In the meantime, Americans could continue researching alternative energy solutions.

 

[Brain357]

Actually, the 4 points are intertwined but I would really like to see America become the world's number 1 producer of oil. I would like to see a second industrial revolution on our shores. I do believe we should do so responsibly and without destroying waterways, forests, etc. but I believe it can be done. Unfortunately, the government has so over-regulated industry that they've forced many strong companies to move elsewhere (thanks, in part, to the various globalist treaties we've signed and thanks, in part, to greedy unions).

Anyway, I'm not sure if I answered your request.

So you think we should focus on a limited resource? That doesn't seem like a great idea even without taking into account the possible damage to the environment.

We should focus on that resource as well as others. The oil industry sustains lots of other businesses as well. It creates jobs in the welding industry; trucking industry; retail supply houses that sell safety equipment, tools, steal, and other supplies; food industry; and many other contributing businesses.

It would put a lot of folks back to work and off of the government doles.

I believe that the oil industry would get us out of our current economic crisis in a big hurry. In the meantime, Americans could continue researching alternative energy solutions.

It's a limited resource and there has been a lot of push to get away from it. Making a push now for it would only slow alternative energy solutions. And then there is always the environmental problems too.

 

[DriftingSand]

It's a limited resource and there has been a lot of push to get away from it. Making a push now for it would only slow alternative energy solutions. And then there is always the environmental problems too.

America has billions of barrels worth of oil in the ground (including Alaska) How Much Oil Does the U.S. Have in the Ground - What Does It Mean for Investors? - Seeking Alpha.

I believe Americans are informed enough to know that 50 to 100 billion barrels is a lot and would keep us afloat for many years to come but they also realize that it is ultimately a limited resource. Therefore, I don't believe that investigating alternatives would slow down at all (especially since many companies have momentum on their side). The government could continue to offer various rewards to folks who use a cleaner form of energy while it (the government) utilizes a ready resource that is literally under our feet.

 

[Brain357]

It's a limited resource and there has been a lot of push to get away from it. Making a push now for it would only slow alternative energy solutions. And then there is always the environmental problems too.

America has billions of barrels worth of oil in the ground (including Alaska) How Much Oil Does the U.S. Have in the Ground - What Does It Mean for Investors? - Seeking Alpha.

I believe Americans are informed enough to know that 50 to 100 billion barrels is a lot and would keep us afloat for many years to come but they also realize that it is ultimately a limited resource. Therefore, I don't believe that investigating alternatives would slow down at all (especially since many companies have momentum on their side). The government could continue to offer various rewards to folks who use a cleaner form of energy while it (the government) utilizes a ready resource that is literally under our feet.

So invest in oil while investing in alternatives? Sounds pretty counter productive.

 

[Geaux4it]

The failed stimulus and 'shovel ready' jobs is proof the government doesn't create jobs. Yea, Solyndra sure worked out well.

-Geaux

The Fallacy That Government Creates Jobs

President-elect Obama has announced that he wants a big “stimulus” package to create 2.5 million jobs by 2011. Many of the details are unclear, including how much new government spending he will propose and how he is measuring job creation.

Press reports suggest the incoming administration is looking at $400 billion-$500 billion over the next two years, but the Washington Post reports that Democrats are talking about as much as $700 billion during that time period.

Not surprisingly, the prospect of all this new spending (above and beyond the record spending increases during the past eight years) has triggered a feeding frenzy among special interests. Home builders, auto companies, road builders, state and local governments, the education establishment, the food stamp lobby, the green lobby, and alternative energy companies are among the groups fighting for a place at the public trough.

It would be easy to dismiss this orgy of new spending as the spoils of war. The Democrats won the election, after all, and now they intend to reward the various special interests that supported them. But that’s not a complete explanation. Some supporters of this new spending seem genuinely convinced that the federal government can create jobs.

The Fallacy That Government Creates Jobs | Cato Institute

 

[DriftingSand]

It's a limited resource and there has been a lot of push to get away from it. Making a push now for it would only slow alternative energy solutions. And then there is always the environmental problems too.

America has billions of barrels worth of oil in the ground (including Alaska) How Much Oil Does the U.S. Have in the Ground - What Does It Mean for Investors? - Seeking Alpha.

I believe Americans are informed enough to know that 50 to 100 billion barrels is a lot and would keep us afloat for many years to come but they also realize that it is ultimately a limited resource. Therefore, I don't believe that investigating alternatives would slow down at all (especially since many companies have momentum on their side). The government could continue to offer various rewards to folks who use a cleaner form of energy while it (the government) utilizes a ready resource that is literally under our feet.

So invest in oil while investing in alternatives? Sounds pretty counter productive.

Are you joking? It's extremely productive! It produces jobs in two different industries. It pays America's way out of 17 trillion in debt. It creates enough energy (at least two kinds) to keep folks warm and to keep transportation moving. I don't get your logic at all. Care to explain?

 

[Brain357]

America has billions of barrels worth of oil in the ground (including Alaska) How Much Oil Does the U.S. Have in the Ground - What Does It Mean for Investors? - Seeking Alpha.

I believe Americans are informed enough to know that 50 to 100 billion barrels is a lot and would keep us afloat for many years to come but they also realize that it is ultimately a limited resource. Therefore, I don't believe that investigating alternatives would slow down at all (especially since many companies have momentum on their side). The government could continue to offer various rewards to folks who use a cleaner form of energy while it (the government) utilizes a ready resource that is literally under our feet.

So invest in oil while investing in alternatives? Sounds pretty counter productive.

Are you joking? It's extremely productive! It produces jobs in two different industries. It pays America's way out of 17 trillion in debt. It creates enough energy (at least two kinds) to keep folks warm and to keep transportation moving. I don't get your logic at all. Care to explain?

Well we invest heavily in oil then come up with a great renewable alternative. Our oil investment drops like a rock.

 

[LoneLaugher]

So invest in oil while investing in alternatives? Sounds pretty counter productive.

Are you joking? It's extremely productive! It produces jobs in two different industries. It pays America's way out of 17 trillion in debt. It creates enough energy (at least two kinds) to keep folks warm and to keep transportation moving. I don't get your logic at all. Care to explain?

Well we invest heavily in oil then come up with a great renewable alternative. Our oil investment drops like a rock.

Oh! You are not supposed to think ahead like that, silly!

 

[Toro]

Hmmmmm. Nothing to do with oil, huh?

No.

No dollars issued are backed by oil.

Oil is traded in dollars, as are most commodities, but that is a function of being a unit of exchange, as opposed to the Federal Reserve holding oil and exchanging oil for reserve notes redeemed.

In recent months Russia and China have hinted at unpinning the dollar from the trading of oil....they know that this would devastate us.....China however stands to lose billions if they do this.

That doesn't matter much.

Most of the dollar reserves in Asia aren't held to trade commodities. Dollar reserves are held primarily to execute domestic policy, and because the United States is seen as the largest, most liquid and most stable economy in the world.

 

[Toro]

Hmmmmm. Nothing to do with oil, huh?

No.

No dollars issued are backed by oil.

Oil is traded in dollars, as are most commodities, but that is a function of being a unit of exchange, as opposed to the Federal Reserve holding oil and exchanging oil for reserve notes redeemed.

Should oil be traded in a currency other than dollars.....what would the impact be on our economy?

I am not going to engage in a battle of semantics here. The dollar and oil are linked......period.

Trading oil in currencies in dollars would have very little effect on our economy.

Also, it's not semantics. There's a big difference. When a currency is backed by a tangible asset, what that means is that the currency is pegged as a ratio to a unit of the commodity, i.e. gold, and the currency can be converted into the commodity at that fixed unit. That's not the case today as the ratio of dollars to commodities fluctuates every second, and dollars cannot be converted to a commodity at a fixed rate.

 

[DriftingSand]

So invest in oil while investing in alternatives? Sounds pretty counter productive.

Are you joking? It's extremely productive! It produces jobs in two different industries. It pays America's way out of 17 trillion in debt. It creates enough energy (at least two kinds) to keep folks warm and to keep transportation moving. I don't get your logic at all. Care to explain?

Well we invest heavily in oil then come up with a great renewable alternative. Our oil investment drops like a rock.

Not really. Nothing like that would happen overnight. Plus, the investments would be made by the energy companies. Many of them are investing in fossil fuels AND alternatives as we speak. I think everyone sees the writing on the wall. So the money invested in one source (fossil fuels) would be gradually reduced at a rate equivalent to the productive outcome of the other source.

 

[DriftingSand]

Are you joking? It's extremely productive! It produces jobs in two different industries. It pays America's way out of 17 trillion in debt. It creates enough energy (at least two kinds) to keep folks warm and to keep transportation moving. I don't get your logic at all. Care to explain?

Well we invest heavily in oil then come up with a great renewable alternative. Our oil investment drops like a rock.

Oh! You are not supposed to think ahead like that, silly!

So far, you've added NOTHING productive to the conversation.

 

[Antares]

Hmmmmm. Nothing to do with oil, huh?

No.

No dollars issued are backed by oil.

Oil is traded in dollars, as are most commodities, but that is a function of being a unit of exchange, as opposed to the Federal Reserve holding oil and exchanging oil for reserve notes redeemed.

Should oil be traded in a currency other than dollars.....what would the impact be on our economy?

I am not going to engage in a battle of semantics here. The dollar and oil are linked......period.

Translation "I refuse to learn and am tired of being shown just how wrong I am about everything."

 

[Antares]

No.

No dollars issued are backed by oil.

Oil is traded in dollars, as are most commodities, but that is a function of being a unit of exchange, as opposed to the Federal Reserve holding oil and exchanging oil for reserve notes redeemed.

In recent months Russia and China have hinted at unpinning the dollar from the trading of oil....they know that this would devastate us.....China however stands to lose billions if they do this.

That doesn't matter much.

Most of the dollar reserves in Asia aren't held to trade commodities. Dollar reserves are held primarily to execute domestic policy, and because the United States is seen as the largest, most liquid and most stable economy in the world.

If OUR economy is seen as the most stable in the world the world is in for a shit storm cause we have a major crash coming.

 

[Antares]

No.

No dollars issued are backed by oil.

Oil is traded in dollars, as are most commodities, but that is a function of being a unit of exchange, as opposed to the Federal Reserve holding oil and exchanging oil for reserve notes redeemed.

Should oil be traded in a currency other than dollars.....what would the impact be on our economy?

I am not going to engage in a battle of semantics here. The dollar and oil are linked......period.

Trading oil in currencies in dollars would have very little effect on our economy.

Also, it's not semantics. There's a big difference. When a currency is backed by a tangible asset, what that means is that the currency is pegged as a ratio to a unit of the commodity, i.e. gold, and the currency can be converted into the commodity at that fixed unit. That's not the case today as the ratio of dollars to commodities fluctuates every second, and dollars cannot be converted to a commodity at a fixed rate.

Not everyone feels the way you do, many economists see the resulting ripple effects of this shift as devastating.

 

[Brain357]

Are you joking? It's extremely productive! It produces jobs in two different industries. It pays America's way out of 17 trillion in debt. It creates enough energy (at least two kinds) to keep folks warm and to keep transportation moving. I don't get your logic at all. Care to explain?

Well we invest heavily in oil then come up with a great renewable alternative. Our oil investment drops like a rock.

Not really. Nothing like that would happen overnight. Plus, the investments would be made by the energy companies. Many of them are investing in fossil fuels AND alternatives as we speak. I think everyone sees the writing on the wall. So the money invested in one source (fossil fuels) would be gradually reduced at a rate equivalent to the productive outcome of the other source.

Right it would wait till lots of money has been invested in oil, then happen. Sorry, don't see it as any real solution.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Well we invest heavily in oil then come up with a great renewable alternative. Our oil investment drops like a rock.

Oh! You are not supposed to think ahead like that, silly!

So far, you've added NOTHING productive to the conversation.

So far, you have issued talking points dressed up as your original thoughts. I asked you to pick one of your suggestions for discussion....and you even fucked that up. The idea that drilling for oil will solve out problems is funny. Brain has tried to explain it to you. He has more patience for idiots than I do.