Dollar at Risk of Crashing, Triggering Inflation

[Messino]

So now that the Federal Reserve (which is an entity mostly comprised of british bankers and is not part of the Federal Govt at all) is printing out even MORE money by buying $600 BILLION in US Bonds, thus making the American Dollar much weaker.. Oil is going to skyrocket again as the rest of what we import into this country because this will cause foreign currencies to get stronger. Everything is going to be very expensive for now on...

 

 

 

 

http://www.cnbc.com/id/40007252

[metsfan]

It's a good move that will accelerate the recovery, dollar will be OK.

 

- A

[EE Broadway Local]

You sure, metsfan? This economy has been pretty down and for awhile now at that.

[SubwayGuy]

The Federal Reserve does not care about this, and it is stupid and shortsighted. This is because politicians care more about getting re-elected than doing the right thing for this country. They won't raise your taxes, but everything in your life will become more expensive which is a tax in and of itself. The problem with this kind of tax is the money goes to foreigners like CHINA who owns a ton of our damn debt.

 

With idiots in charge, we are SCREWED. Saving your money isn't a safe option when they do this either because the value of your savings goes to hell.

 

And this will not stimulate the economy. It might prop it up temporarily, but it will not restore the economy to success. The economy will never be the same again until we start bringing REAL jobs that produce things back into this country. No more shadow puppet shell game stock market economy. If we cling to that we are doomed.

[metsfan]

There has actually been deflation, over the last year. Once the recovery really takes hold (next 2-3 quarters) any inflation will be kept under control by the subsequent recovery of the credit market.

 

- A

[CenSin]

The problem with this kind of tax is the money goes to foreigners like CHINA who owns a ton of our damn debt.

Being ethnically Chinese, I wonder what kind of position I should take. B)

 

f.y.i.: The Japanese also own a ton of debt.

[Tokkemon]

There has actually been deflation, over the last year. Once the recovery really takes hold (next 2-3 quarters) any inflation will be kept under control by the subsequent recovery of the credit market.

 

- A

 

You don't get it do you? The economy is not good. Prices have not fallen and jobs have not been created. There is very high unemployment across the board. Deflation has nothing to do with this. There has been no recovery. Things are as bad as they were in Sept. 2008. We've just gotten used to it at this point, and we make ourselves feel better by calling it "deflation". lol.

 

As for the topic at hand, the Fed is absolutely nuts. If the dollar crashes, I'm going back to Canada with it's amazingly stable banking system which actually makes *sense*.

[Messino]

 

As for the topic at hand, the Fed is absolutely nuts. If the dollar crashes, I'm going back to Canada with it's amazingly stable banking system which actually makes *sense*.

 

Thats the reason the Canada wasnt affected by the Sept 2008 Plunge. They have strict banking codes and werent giving no dox loans out to anyone who asked. I remember when the USD was worth ¢0.50 more than the CAD. Now they are almost about even.. The dollar is falling and that means everything imported will be getting VERY expensive and this time there will be no compensation by raising employees salaries..

[Y2Julio]

Yup, 1.00 CAD = 0.995618 USD. Seems like it's a bad time for me to go visit my friend in Toronto for Christmas.

[SubwayGuy]

There has actually been deflation, over the last year. Once the recovery really takes hold (next 2-3 quarters) any inflation will be kept under control by the subsequent recovery of the credit market.

 

- A

 

Do you even know what that means? The credit market is not going to recover. Bad loans were made with a term of 30 years. If someone is defaulting on that loan now, the banks are going to be losing money from the loan for the next 30 years. Of course, they're all turning around and making trading profits and paying themselves big bonuses, but their lending divisions as a result (which are separate from their trading operations) are NOT going to "open" credit up because they are losing money in that department. All the bailout and stimulus money they got didn't open up the credit markets, nor will it. They look after their own profits and high salaries first.

 

The credit market recovering is not necessarily a good thing either. I don't get why so many people don't understand this. Credit is only good if you use it to make a profit. IE take a 5% loan to grow your business 6% annually. Or take a 5% loan to pay down a 7% loan. Or take a 5% loan and use it to buy an asset that appreciates at 8% annually. Credit is NOT good if it just leads to more borrow and spend, or serves as a substitute for cash, which just necessitates the Federal Reserve and Bernanke rolling out the printing press one more time and printing up some more Funny Money as we spiral deeper and deeper into debt both as individuals and as a country. If the CLIMATE does not improve for American workers and small businesses, it doesn't matter how much credit is available because they are all going to be defaulting in the end. Solving that requires PROTECTIONISM, WORKER'S RIGHTS, and STIFF FEES OR TAXES on companies that outsource or use foreign suppliers. The proceeds of which can be used to pay down debt owed by this nation to foreign creditors and reduce the gaping hole in every fiscal year's budget known as "Debt Service" aka Interest.

 

You can only build a house of cards so high before it caves in on itself. If things keep going the way they are going the next recession is going to make 2008 look like the good times.

[Tokkemon]

You can only build a house of cards so high before it caves in on itself. If things keep going the way they are going the next recession is going to make 2008 look like the good times.

 

Exactly!

[SubwayGuy]

Exactly!

 

The biggest thing that people do not understand about the economy is government's role. Government's role is to regulate in the sense that it prevents one person (or company, or country) from unfairly taking advantage of another person/company/country. Except in the one example of the host country taking advantage of another country (then it is the other country's government's job to make sure that it doesn't get screwed). That is all.

 

Monetary and Fiscal policy by a central bank such as the Federal Reserve is not a substitute for a good, healthy economy. Since I like to use metaphor, if you think of the economy as a giant machine, private industry must build the ENTIRE machine, government's job is to inspect the machine and remove any unsafe parts or require them to rebuilt safely, and the Federal Reserve's job is to add a few drops of oil when individual parts threaten to groan to a halt.

 

However, the Federal Reserve cannot build a machine with oil alone. That's what they're trying to do by running the printing press as often as they have done. Government is asleep at the switch, and private industry is building a new machine in another country.

[metsfan]

You don't get it do you? The economy is not good. Prices have not fallen and jobs have not been created. There is very high unemployment across the board. Deflation has nothing to do with this. There has been no recovery. Things are as bad as they were in Sept. 2008. We've just gotten used to it at this point, and we make ourselves feel better by calling it "deflation". lol.

 

As for the topic at hand, the Fed is absolutely nuts. If the dollar crashes, I'm going back to Canada with it's amazingly stable banking system which actually makes *sense*.

 

Um, i guess you don't follow the monthly jobs reports, or the payroll numbers, or the fact that places are hiring for non-seasonal positions, i've actually seen a few more employees at places like bank branches than i've ever seen before in years, restaurants also. If you think things are as bad now as they were then, obviously you've not been paying attention. The unemployment rate was 13.x% it's now 9.6%.

 

In 2008 we were on the brink of having another 1929. That is no longer the case, things have stabilized.

 

With the seasonal position hires soon to come on-line and stores looking like they are over-stocking for the holiday season this year, i have a feeling this quarter will be where everything starts turning around & things really improve. One area that is a real indicator is the travel & tourism sector, once that improves you know we're in a full steam ahead recovery.

 

The dollar isn't going to crash. This isn't 1850, there are checks & balances and safeguards and people have way more history to base the next move on.

 

- A

[CenSin]

Um, i guess you don't follow the monthly jobs reports, or the payroll numbers, or the fact that places are hiring for non-seasonal positions, i've actually seen a few more employees at places like bank branches than i've ever seen before in years, restaurants also. If you think things are as bad now as they were then, obviously you've not been paying attention. The unemployment rate was 13.x% it's now 9.6%.

 

In 2008 we were on the brink of having another 1929. That is no longer the case, things have stabilized.

 

With the seasonal position hires soon to come on-line and stores looking like they are over-stocking for the holiday season this year, i have a feeling this quarter will be where everything starts turning around & things really improve. One area that is a real indicator is the travel & tourism sector, once that improves you know we're in a full steam ahead recovery.

 

The dollar isn't going to crash. This isn't 1850, there are checks & balances and safeguards and people have way more history to base the next move on.

 

- A

Checks and balances don't always work.

[metsfan]

Checks and balances don't always work.

 

Well, they did this time.

 

- A

[Urbanfortitude]

Well, they did this time.

 

- A

 

This is yet to be seen IMO.

[metsfan]

This is yet to be seen IMO.

 

Try tuning into cnbc or bloomburg vs fox news.

 

- A

[Urbanfortitude]

Try tuning into cnbc or bloomburg vs fox news.

 

- A

 

I could do that...oh wait I already do. Plus I got my own job search I'm doing that's turning up empty or my school schedule isn't deemed reliable by employers. I still don't see the recovery at work yet and until I'm seated in a stable job as opposed to temp gigs every two weeks I won't.

[SubwayGuy]

9.7% unemployment is hardly something to be excited about. It's better than it was before, but that's like saying that getting punched in the gut is better than getting kicked in the balls.

 

That statistic, like most statistics, can be misused and misinterpreted. For example, the 9.7% does not include "discouraged" workers who have been looking for work for an extended period of time and either given up or fallen off the radar. The 9.7% does not include underemployed workers, who work part time and want to work full time.

 

Likewise, there is a margin of error. It's not possible to know what every American is doing, try as they might. The real "unemployment/underemployment" number is much higher, and many economists even estimate it around the 18-20% mark. That's a much more meaningful commentary on the state of the economy today.

 

So I'd hold off on the ticker tape parade for a while if I were you.

 

Signed,

Someone who voted for Obama

[metsfan]

9.6, holding steady vs going up. The unemployment percent is the total number made into a percent, its not meant to represent every person, just what's going on in the last quarter. As for parade, I have no idea what the hell you're talking about. Payroll numbers (how many people on the books) went up 150,000... So again... Your argument is a bit misdirected.

 

I dunno what your point is with the national employment figures vs your single personal presumably online job thing. If your schedule is too unstable, you might not get a job, has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

 

- A

[Urbanfortitude]

I dunno what your point is with the national employment figures vs your single personal presumably online job thing. If your schedule is too unstable, you might not get a job, has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

 

- A

 

Basically what the news is saying and what I'm seeing around me with not only my situation but others around me don't match up. Maybe you should take a look around you instead of posting hour after hour your whereabouts in the forum shoutbox.

[metsfan]

Just give up dude. You don't want to understand me, just want to talk at me.

 

I have fun with life, i suggest you try & do the same. "Thanks for coming in" B)

 

- A

[Urbanfortitude]

Just give up dude. You don't want to understand me, just want to talk at me.

 

I have fun with life, i suggest you try & do the same. "Thanks for coming in" B)

 

- A

 

Quit isn't in my vocab so you're out of luck there pal. Apparently it isn't in yours either. You continue to believe what you hear and read word for word and its leaving you quite a bit misconstrued. I have plenty of fun with my life and the friends I have around me. I just know how to not take everything the news says word for word. Pity that you don't. I'm supposed to believe things are working out when most of the people I know don't have work still including myself, more people are losing their health insurance by the day and our own transit system is making cuts and raising prices. You're out of your mind. Oh and btw I'm enjoying this little debacle despite how my words might be coming out in post form. So I'm not walking away from it.

[SubwayGuy]

9.6, holding steady vs going up. The unemployment percent is the total number made into a percent, its not meant to represent every person, just what's going on in the last quarter. As for parade, I have no idea what the hell you're talking about. Payroll numbers (how many people on the books) went up 150,000... So again... Your argument is a bit misdirected.

 

150,000 is the NEW claims number. It's the number of NEW unemployment claims during the month. It is NOT the total unemployment number. If 150,000 people in this entire country were unemployed that actually would be something to celebrate. Again, you have to read and understand what goes into the paper. You'd be nuts to think the total number of people collecting unemployment in this country right now is a mere 150,000.

 

NEW claims is also a meaningless number. New claims is meaningless because all it does is tell you how many people lost their jobs and filed for unemployment relative to the last month. It does not, however, tell you how many people got new jobs. It has only a partial, and incomplete correlation to the total unemployment figure, which cannot be accurately measured.

 

Example 1: New claims drop from 200,000 in January to 150,000 in February. However 300,000 people on unemployment get hired. Therefore new claims have dropped, but the total unemployment has also dropped because the 300,000 hired outpace the 150,000 who lost jobs, as a net of 150,000 people are added back to the workforce.

 

Example 2: New claims drop from 200,000 in January to 150,000 in February (same as above). However, 10,000 people on unemployment get hired. Therefore new claims have dropped, but the total unemployment has now RISEN because the 10,000 hired are engulfed by the 150,000 losing jobs, and a net of 140,000 additional people are now out of work from the previous month.

 

Therefore looking at the sentence "new claims drop from 200,000 in January to 150,000 in February" gives me absolutely no idea what the economy's state is.

 

I dunno what your point is with the national employment figures vs your single personal presumably online job thing. If your schedule is too unstable, you might not get a job, has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

 

- A

 

#1 don't presume. My online activities have nothing to do with my job, which is very much separate from my use of the computer. #2 people's "schedules" don't have to do with the underemployed status I've mentioned. Many of the few reputable news sources have reported on underemployment - people who work 35 hours a week who want to work 40, people who work 25 hours a week who want to work 35. This is a documented problem occuring in our economy and one that is not represented in the so called "unemployment" figure. By your logic, someone that wants to get 40 hours a week and works 10 instead because that's all they can get, is fully employed and happy and not part of the 9.7%. And that's wrong. This has nothing to do with people's "schedules" it has to do with the amount of work that is available. Underemployment is every bit as serious a problem as full blown unemployment. Likewise, people who know the unemployment statistic will tell you that it cannot possibly capture everyone as people do fall through the cracks.

[Urbanfortitude]

 

#1 don't presume. My online activities have nothing to do with my job, which is very much separate from my use of the computer. #2 people's "schedules" don't have to do with the underemployed status I've mentioned. Many of the few reputable news sources have reported on underemployment - people who work 35 hours a week who want to work 40, people who work 25 hours a week who want to work 35. This is a documented problem occuring in our economy and one that is not represented in the so called "unemployment" figure. By your logic, someone that wants to get 40 hours a week and works 10 instead because that's all they can get, is fully employed and happy and not part of the 9.7%. And that's wrong. This has nothing to do with people's "schedules" it has to do with the amount of work that is available. Underemployment is every bit as serious a problem as full blown unemployment. Likewise, people who know the unemployment statistic will tell you that it cannot possibly capture everyone as people do fall through the cracks.

 

Thanks for the input there. I think he was aiming that one at me though from my previous post. Still it was much better than what I could come up with