US super committee declares failure

[Skybird]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15830176

Oooops. What a surprise.

[yubba]

da !!!

[Takeda Shingen]

Another triumph for American politics.

[AVGWarhawk]

At least they are consistent. Waste of time, money and resources. :down:

[Madox58]

At lest everyone that was holding thier breaths for a positive result should be dead by now.
Thus cutting down on the population problem.
To bad those involved didn't hold thier breaths.
At lest they would have done some good.

[Torplexed]

The stupor committee. :nope: Designed to kick the can down the road.

[Rilder]

Amerika is obviously not giving enough motivation to these politicians to get stuff done.

I propose we surround the capital building with cannons, each hour they keep up this crap a salvo gets fired.

What you don't want to compromise with someone of a different political party? "FIRE"

[MothBalls]

A congressional committee tasked with reducing the deficit by $1.2tn (£762bn) has failed to come to an agreement.In any other job in the world, if you fail to meet your objectives, you get fired*. Except congress, failure ensures you'll get re-elected. Gerrymandering guarantees they'll get re-elected anyway.

I say we fire the entire committee and hire one that can get the job done.





*except weathermen, who can be wrong more often than not and still keep their jobs.

[Platapus]

A bunch of children more concerned with their party than running the country. :nope:

Great empires are not conquered from without but conquered from within.

What a cancer congress has turned out to be. :nope:

I usually try to come up with a snarky and almost witty comment, but words escape me.

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Well, Obama said he'd veto any attempt to reverse the automatic spending cuts that kick in as a result of this. No doubt the SubSim conservatives shall be in here shortly to sing his praises, right? RIGHT?? :har::har::har:

[Buddahaid]

Yup. At least they got payed.

http://imgs.sfgate.com/comics/paidapp/ccicomics/2011/11/18/badreporter.jpg

[AVGWarhawk]

Well, Obama said he'd veto any attempt to reverse the automatic spending cuts that kick in as a result of this. No doubt the SubSim conservatives shall be in here shortly to sing his praises, right? RIGHT?? :har::har::har:

Yep. However, while the stupid committee was sitting around waiting for lunch over the past two weeks BO was jet setting around the globe. Perhaps his being part of the discussions with the committee would have best served the country. :hmmm:

[Skybird]

The trenches in this ideological warfare are so deep that you need high ladders to get a look outside. If they cannot even agree to save 1.2 billion OVER TEN YEARS, then you know what to expect of future fiscal policy in the US.

Additional to the classical ideological differences and the battle between rich and poor, a new battleline makes itself felt more and more: that between old and young people. I predict this battle over distribution of money will surpass any other former fight - in dimension, in complexity, and simultaneity of multiple fronts opening.

[AVGWarhawk]

Additional to the classical ideological differences and the battle between rich and poor, a new battleline makes itself felt more and more: that between old and young people. I predict this battle over distribution of money will surpass any other former fight - in dimension, in complexity, and simultaneity of multiple fronts opening.

I believe in good old fashion work and working hard. The 'give me' generation needs to get over the 'gimme'. The battle line between young and old people? What battle line do you speak of? When the young actually battle for something perhaps a line can be drawn at that time.

[Takeda Shingen]

The trenches in this ideological warfare are so deep that you need high ladders to get a look outside. If they cannot even agree to save 1.2 billion OVER TEN YEARS, then you know what to expect of future fiscal policy in the US.

Seriously. A drop in the bucket in terms of overall debt. The terrible irony is that there were many people, some here on this very forum, who believed (and probably still believe) that governmental gridlock would save us. Not that either party's agenda is any better. If government spending and heavy regulation could save us, this crisis would have turned around. Instead, Team D argues that the problem is they weren't able to spend enough. Conversely, if deregulation and lower taxes could have saved us, this crisis wouldn't have happened in the first place. And yet, Team R argues that that the problem is that they weren't able to cut enough.

I don't have an answer to any of this mess. I suppose this puts me in the company of all of our political leaders except for the fact that I am willing to admit this ignorance. However, I can tell you what is not working, and that is the American government.

[Sea Demon]

Regrettably, failure was inevitable from the very get-go! It was never meant to be a workable solution. :down:

[Skybird]

Seriously. A drop in the bucket in terms of overall debt.

Ah, English numbers... :doh: What a "Billionen" means in German, in English is called trillion. What English calls billion, in German is "Milliarden".

I meant to say 1.2 trillion.

[Tribesman]

Ah, English numbers... :doh: What a "Billionen" means in German, in English is called trillion. What English calls billion, in German is "Milliarden".

No, what you have there is American English which is different from English

[Skybird]

I believe in good old fashion work and working hard. The 'give me' generation needs to get over the 'gimme'. The battle line between young and old people? What battle line do you speak of? When the young actually battle for something perhaps a line can be drawn at that time.
The battleline of saving priviliges for old have-somes, who become numerous, while few and fewer have-nots should pay for that. The clients of the Republican, tend to have - demgraphically - overaged voting groups, then the Democrats. More of the old ones vote Rep, than young ones. The parties know that, and they wil decide fiancial issues accordingly - so that they get the max votes in return.

I read that by several American commentators in summer, too, when the battle was up for the budget. It seems it is not just my exotic assessement from outside. American soceity is overaging like European ones. Very very very big problem, you cannot solve it by arguing for people creating even more babioes, can you. If you want to know how bad such things can become, look at Japan, and to a lesser degree: China. The social-cultural distortions caused by and damagin g fundamental pillars of soceity, are nothing but disastrous.

And we are heading the same way.

But when you manage to get yourself stuck right in the middle of something, then the only way out is right through the mass of it.

[soopaman2]

Partisanship strikes again.

But taking sides is so cool. I love that American politics has become the Yankees/Red Sox rivalry.

Winning no matter what the cost is great in sports...

But not in a country of 300 mil people.

How's that infighting, sabotaging fellow Americans thingy working out for you guys? BOTH SIDES...

We oughta be ashamed of ourselves.

[Takeda Shingen]

Ah, English numbers... :doh: What a "Billionen" means in German, in English is called trillion. What English calls billion, in German is "Milliarden".

I meant to say 1.2 trillion.

No worries, I knew what you meant. When you are talking about 4 trillion dollar annual deficits, 1.2 trillion over 10 years really is small potatoes.

[AVGWarhawk]

The battleline of saving priviliges for old have-somes, who become numerous, while few and fewer have-nots should pay for that. The clients of the Republican, tend to have - demgraphically - overaged voting groups, then the Democrats. More of the old ones vote Rep, than young ones. The parties know that, and they wil decide fiancial issues accordingly - so that they get the max votes in return.




It was the "old have some" that built the country. What privileges did they not earn? The "have not's" paying for it? Paying for what? The day to day obscure things such as roads, police, fire, water, sewerage and safety of the country? Everyone enjoys these and should pay for them. The old have some pay like anyone else. The parties understand the demographics of the members. That is a given. Sadly what has been home grown is the 'welfare and entitlement' state. This has compounded over the past two years and added to a already mismanaged welfare system. The battle lines are between young and old are manifested from a misguided notion that somehow something is owed to the them. No one promised the young a rose garden.

[Ducimus]

As much as it pains me to think it, but in a 100 years from now, this era in which we live will be lectured in Social Studies and American History classes across the country. This particular chapter will probably be labeled something along the lines of, "The decline and ending of the American Century".

[Skybird]

It was the "old have some" that built the country. What privileges did they not earn? The "have not's" paying for it? Paying for what? The day to day obscure things such as roads, police, fire, water, sewerage and safety of the country? Everyone enjoys these and should pay for them. The old have some pay like anyone else. The parties understand the demographics of the members. That is a given. Sadly what has been home grown is the 'welfare and entitlement' state. This has compounded over the past two years and added to a already mismanaged welfare system. The battle lines are between young and old are manifested from a misguided notion that somehow something is owed to the them. No one promised the young a rose garden.

The problem is the yopung ones should pay for the old. More old. And then more. With inflation marching. And few and fewer young ones being born and making it to tax-.payer ranks. At the same time these young ones are expected to raise and fiannce families. And save for their own high age, when they cannot work anymore.

Being young these days, is a penalty. The worst penalty since WWII. Looking at the daughters of close friends of miney, and hearing the very bad stories of offsprings of families my parents are befriended with, really breaks my heart. A system that was designed that so and so many young ones should pay for so and so many old ones, now turns into something where the young ones are one third less in numbers, and decreasing, but should pay for twice as many old ones, with higher prices, smaller wages, smaller social security, and greater uncertainty for the future. They get eaten up alive, without having chances to consider their own future safety.

The young ones are bitten in the ar$e, to use a German proverb.

It will get worse. Much worse. You can't fight the numbers, the problem is one of pure mathematics.

[Skybird]

As much as it pains me to think it, but in a 100 years from now, this era in which we live will be lectured in Social Studies and American History classes across the country. This particular chapter will probably be labeled something along the lines of, "The decline and ending of the American Century".
That is correct, I think. The era of the American empire is coming to an end in this time. A classical case of imperial overstretch in the periphery, and collapsing implosion in the centre. I point to Paul Kennedy, Herrfried Münkler and van Crefeld, who all have described these terms. In the end the American empire is just another one that has refused to learn anything from the lesson its predecessors has suffered.

The EU also counts as such a case. Imperial overstretch, getting a bigger bite than one can swallow. The EU is even more classic an example maybe, than America.

[Ducimus]

That is ncorrect, I think. The era of the American empire is coming to an end in this time.

That's exactly what i meant. Only, it will take a 100 years from now, for the US to admit it as a people. Only then will it be studied. Until such time, pride being what it is, we as a people won't admit to it.

[AVGWarhawk]

The problem is the yopung ones should pay for the old. More old. And then more. With inflation marching. And few and fewer young ones being born and making it to tax-.payer ranks. At the same time these young ones are expected to raise and fiannce families. And save for their own high age, when they cannot work anymore.

The problem is the government set up the program so the young pay for the old. It was named Social Security. I am one of the young ones (46) raising and financing a family. I have a 401K savings plan to supplement Social Security when I retire. I have a mortgage that will be paid by retirement age or sooner. I get these through hard work.

Being young these days, is a penalty. The worst penalty since WWII. Looking at the daughters of close friends of miney, and hearing the very bad stories of offsprings of families my parents are befriended with, really breaks my heart. A system that was designed that so and so many young ones should pay for so and so many old ones, now turns into something where the young ones are one third less in numbers, and decreasing, but should pay for twice as many old ones, with higher prices, smaller wages, smaller social security, and greater uncertainty for the future. They get eaten up alive, without having chances to consider their own future safety.

1/3 less in numbers does not raise what is taken from your pay I believe. Furthermore, one day these young ones will be old and will need a supplement to Social Security. Depending on Social Security alone for retirement is a very bad plan. Social Security was never to be a retirement plan nor sold as one to the public at large. In reality, the Social Security is nothing but a fund that the government raids when they feel like it. The young should save for retirement if a pension plan is not offered where they work.

The young ones are bitten in the ar$e, to use a German proverb.

Only if they let it.

It will get worse. Much worse. You can't fight the numbers, the problem is one of pure mathematics.

I don't believe in living with gloom and doom. Mathematically sitting on ones butt not doing or attempting to do something about the issue is not the answer either. Attempting to become a productive member of society will give one a far better shot of living comfortably later in life.

[Skybird]

You seem to be not aware how pension plans and retirement systems work, on a system-lebel I mean. They do not put the money aside that you pay in. The so-called generation-treaty - it is called like that over here in Europe - instead demands the future young ones to pay for those living today and becoming old tomorrow. It is a snowball system - and if you look at it you will see that the American insurrance companies and pension system do not work any different from our ways here, in principle. If there would be sufficient money saved to cover all future emands, we would not have a crisis today. Fact is - we have not even a fraction of those future demands. We have nothing, and expect to make those future payments by future debt-rising, and the fwewer young ones paying for the pensions of more and more old.

And do not be so sure of your payment plans that you mentioned, mortage and all that. Friends of friends of mine had the same setup like you claim for yourself. Some years ago, they lost it all when their mortage was sold to another bank, or better, a foreign (=US) investor who cancelled the treaty and demanded to be payed out. They couldn't do that and so like several thousand others lost both the house, the payments so far, and had no compensation. The family is in free fall since then.

What I mean is you put a lot of trust into rules that in fact are just ink on paper. Whgen the sh!t hits the fan, this paperstuff will not save you. And when somehwere higher in the food chain it gets decided accordingly, you will get eaten, in the name of a higher good or inevitable sacifices that need to be accepted. Right this is what is happening to hundreds of thousands of families in Greece, Spain, Italy currently, but also in other countries, including Germany. It is happening in your country, too - counting by the high hundreds ofg thousands.

And do me and yoursrelf and all of us a favour - leave ideology out of this. Ideology too will not save you or me or any of us.

[Platapus]

As much as it pains me to think it, but in a 100 years from now, this era in which we live will be lectured in Social Studies and American History classes across the country. This particular chapter will probably be labeled something along the lines of, "The decline and ending of the American Century".

We are living through a significant part of our history. Let's just hope the history books clean it us so we don't look like total idiots. :O:

[STEED]

Fiddle while the everyday person pays.

Time to bash some heads together, maybe.

[Platapus]

So the US congress has adopted suicide bomber type mentality "I will take the entire country down just to prove that the other side is wrong"

While across the big pond, the EU is legally not recognizing the relationship between water and hydration.

And we wonder why aliens have chosen not to visit us?

Human thought is so primitive it's looked upon as an infectious disease in some of the better galaxies. That kind of makes you proud, doesn't it? huh?

That was supposed to be a funny line from Men in Black.......after this weeks headlines, I wonder. I am not laughing. :nope:

[AVGWarhawk]

You seem to be not aware how pension plans and retirement systems work, on a system-lebel I mean. They do not put the money aside that you pay in. The so-called generation-treaty - it is called like that over here in Europe - instead demands the future young ones to pay for those living today and becoming old tomorrow. It is a snowball system - and if you look at it you will see that the American insurrance companies and pension system do not work any different from our ways here, in principle. If there would be sufficient money saved to cover all future emands, we would not have a crisis today. Fact is - we have not even a fraction of those future demands. We have nothing, and expect to make those future payments by future debt-rising, and the fwewer young ones paying for the pensions of more and more old.

I'm very aware of how pension and retirement plans work. I have annuities/IRA in Deutsche Bank for my retirement. These are left in trust to my kids to avoid inheritance tax. I also carry a 401k savings plan at my place of employment. I do not own a pair of rose colored glasses. I don't depend on anyone to finance my retirement. Pension plans, by and large, do not exist anymore in the US. I have not worked for a company that offered a pension plan. I think unions have a pension type plan that the union pays dues to participate in. What company has any type of retirement plan were employees do not pay into the plan to pay for current retired employees if it is a pension plan? The companies without pension plans usually offer a 401k saving plan the employee contributes to. What debt am I paying other than Social Security to look after the elderly? Again, pensions are a thing of the past and have been for a long time. The day of getting the gold watch after 50 years of service to a company are gone. Depend on one self for retirement. Not others, SS or the lottery. Not good plans IMO. Is there anything else you would like to discuss concerning planing for retirement?


And do not be so sure of your payment plans that you mentioned, mortage and all that. Friends of friends of mine had the same setup like you claim for yourself. Some years ago, they lost it all when their mortage was sold to another bank, or better, a foreign (=US) investor who cancelled the treaty and demanded to be payed out. They couldn't do that and so like several thousand others lost both the house, the payments so far, and had no compensation. The family is in free fall since then.

Loans are sold all the time. Often a week after signing the contract. Banks only like to keep loans that are signed by persons with stable income and a history of stable bill paying. Furthermore, cancel a treaty, you mean contract? How can a bank not honor a contract? The bank entered a contract. Terms can not be changed on the original contracts. It sounds like your friends were into a balloon payment loan. http://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/balloonloan.asp#axzz1eT84WKec





And do me and yoursrelf and all of us a favour - leave ideology out of this. Ideology too will not save you or me or any of us.

No, hard work and playing your cards right saves yourself. Sitting on the internet pointing out all the ills of the world does no good for anyone. Hanging out waiting for someone to pay your way is not a viable pension/retirement plan.

[AVGWarhawk]

Skybird,

How fitting for our conversatation:

The plans, which he intended to be as simple for employees as pensions, now offer too many investing options and too many opportunities to make mistakes, he says. “I would blow up the system and restart with something totally different,” he told SmartMoney.com. “Blowing up the existing structures is the only way we can simplify them.”

This is why I have my 401k with Great West. I pay Great West to handle my 401K.

Education didn’t work to stop employees from sabotaging their own futures, he contends, but legislation might. “We need a legislative mandate that when you change jobs, the money needs to be retained in a retirement account – there cannot be an option of ‘here’s a check, you decide,’” Benna says. He also advocates mandating all employees be auto-enrolled in the plans, and that their contributions be automatically increased one percentage point per year to a maximum of 10% to 15%.

Sound advise IMO.

Despite these misgivings, Benna insists the plans are benefiting millions of employees. He gets rankled whenever someone suggests the workforce would be better off had the 401(k) never been born, noting that the pension system was more fraught that many remember. “I am not anti-defined-benefit plan – in fact I sold them for decades– they are great, but only for those who stay with the same company for 20 or 30 years.”

Play your cards correctly.


http://blogs.smartmoney.com/encore/2011/11/22/father-of-the-401ks-tough-love/

[Skybird]

A simple question. Consider that all people having pension plans and savings all of a sudden become old and go to the bank on the same day, demanding the money they payed in over the past 45 years or so.

Do you think there is any bank having enough money to pay them out - all of them?

I answer it for you. No, there is no bank in the world able to do that. Because there is not sufficient cash for the demands accumulated. And by cash I mean cash that is covered by real value, not just inflationary money or chips stamped out in the Fed's stamping machine.

It is therefore assumed that future generations should come up for equal ammounts of money that you have payed in in the past - because the money you have payed in, already is gone right now while we speak. This is what the socalled generation pact is about. Or better: was about. But it is a classical snowball system. It cannot keep rolling forever.

And if you put your money under your bed in hiding, you still would lose value, because inflation and cold progression eats up parts of it every year. The situation is so worse even in haiuled Germany that the finance business is begging the politicians to allow a chnage by law: a chnage that would allow them to reduce the demanded-ba-law guaranteed minimum interest rates for life insurrances and several other financial "products". A decade ago or so thes einterest rates hit a high over here - and are now more and more killing the business because these additional paybacks need to be created by business. But they cant produce these increases anymore, forcing them to pay them by consuming their vital last-reserve iron-savings first, and then making debts themselves - lowering their credibility in the business, and making it even more costly for them to borrow money.

My mother gets her life insurrance payed out next year, a treaty of a lightly different format. My parents got info, and now hope that they get back at least the value that they have invested. But that is uncertain, to put it mildly. The paying out probably will create them a loss. And that says something, becasue lfie insurrances had been more popular in germany than in any other Wetsern country. What stocks and bonds are in England and the US to secure your private future, in Germany traditonally have been life insurrances, because they were so safe.

What I mean is this: the Deutsche Bank does not have your money right now. It hopes that business will ruinning so that at payday it can create a profit that allows them to pay your money plus interest back. Right now, your money is in nirwana. And whether it comes back from there is a question as uncertain or as safe as the question of whether or not you will keep your "safe" job over the coming years. Say, how many of your people have lost their jobs in the past three years, without it being their fault? We read your headlines over here, too. ;)

This is the whole point. Bad consumer climate means less business for banks. Fewer employees means fwewer consumers and net tax payers. Declining numbers of younger workers and increasing numbers of old pensioneers mean higher tax burden for fewer workers, and cuts. More low-wage jobs and higher taxes mean less possibilities for young ones to form families, or so save for their own future.

[AVGWarhawk]

A simple question. Consider that all people having pension plans and savings all of a sudden become old and go to the bank on the same day, demanding the money they payed in over the past 45 years or so.

Do you think there is any bank having enough money to pay them out - all of them?

Will the bank have all of the money to pay out if all go to the bank on the same day? No. Will there be a run on the bank one the same day in 45 years? No. The odds that all will run on the bank in a single day are astronomical. Retirement age across the board does not fall on the same day for everyone. People don't all of a sudden become old. They become gradually old and hopefully plan on their retirement. Furthermore, when one retires one does not go to the bank and pull out all their saving. The money sits and is used as needed so the retired individual can survive the long haul and also hope on making some interest on the monies.



I answer it for you. No, there is no bank in the world able to do that. Because there is not sufficient cash for the demands accumulated. And by cash I mean cash that is covered by real value, not just inflationary money or chips stamped out in the Fed's stamping machine.

The system has been running on paper for decades. Nothing has changed. Only the value of the dollar has changed. In the end it is only paper. And again, the entire body of people retiring will not storm the banks demanding their money.


It is therefore assumed that future generations should come up for equal ammounts of money that you have payed in in the past - because the money you have payed in, already is gone right now while we speak. This is what the socalled generation pact is about. Or better: was about. But it is a classical snowball system. It cannot keep rolling forever.

There is no generation pact in the US. There is a little system called Social Security. Originally the system was not to be considered the sole provider of retirement funds. It is only part of a larger picture. Pension plans and savings accounts were to be part of the retirement plan. Over the years some smart one decided a better system called 401K savings plan would be better. Many companies accepted this plan because it relieved them of the burden of pensions. Pensions went out the window. However, many companies did sponsor the 401k plan and also did some company matching to what the employee put into the account. If the employee treated the account as a savings for retirement and did not dip into the account then all should be well. The burden was now on the employee to participate in the 401k savings plans and also could go on their own with IRA accounts. There is no pact, however, I'm required to pay into Social Security every pay period. That is fine. I'm helping a older retired person. I would hope when I retire that I would receive the same. If not, no love lost, I will have saved for my own retirement. Is Social Security the best system? No sir. It is the only system we have to offer. But, one can always save on their own.


And if you put your money under your bed in hiding, you still would lose value, because inflation and cold progression eats up parts of it every year. The situation is so worse even in haiuled Germany that the finance business is begging the politicians to allow a chnage by law: a chnage that would allow them to reduce the demanded-ba-law guaranteed minimum interest rates for life insurrances and several other financial "products". A decade ago or so thes einterest rates hit a high over here - and are now more and more killing the business because these additional paybacks need to be created by business. But they cant produce these increases anymore, forcing them to pay them by consuming their vital last-reserve iron-savings first, and then making debts themselves - lowering their credibility in the business, and making it even more costly for them to borrow money.

I don't put my money under the bed. That would be silly and nonproductive. As far as interest rates, the Fed here plays with the rate all the time in hopes to bolster the economy. I can not comment on the German state of economic affairs.

My mother gets her life insurrance payed out next year, a treaty of a lightly different format. My parents got info, and now hope that they get back at least the value that they have invested. But that is uncertain, to put it mildly. The paying out probably will create them a loss. And that says something, becasue lfie insurrances had been more popular in germany than in any other Wetsern country. What stocks and bonds are in England and the US to secure your private future, in Germany traditonally have been life insurrances, because they were so safe.

What I mean is this: the Deutsche Bank does not have your money right now. It hopes that business will ruinning so that at payday it can create a profit that allows them to pay your money plus interest back. Right now, your money is in nirwana. And whether it comes back from there is a question as uncertain or as safe as the question of whether or not you will keep your "safe" job over the coming years. Say, how many of your people have lost their jobs in the past three years, without it being their fault? We read your headlines over here, too.


I'm fully aware of what Deutsche Bank operates. My money is spread across mutual funds and is based on a companies growth, etc. Making money or losing money as the stock market goes up and down only proves that paper is lost...not actual money. The market is always full of uncertainty. There is never any guarantee your money invested will make money. Nothing ventured is nothing gained. As I grow older I realize that I can't take it with me. What I can do is put money into securities, annuities, and IRA under a trust to my wife and daughters who will live off a nice dividend monthly. Inheritance tax can not be exercised on a trust and the Fed does not get any more of my hard earned money.


This is the whole point. Bad consumer climate means less business for banks. Fewer employees means fwewer consumers and net tax payers. Declining numbers of younger workers and increasing numbers of old pensioneers mean higher tax burden for fewer workers, and cuts. More low-wage jobs and higher taxes mean less possibilities for young ones to form families, or so save for their own future.

There is less business for banks because the once flowing credit line to anyone with a heart beat has ceased. It's that simply. The current economic situation was a conglomerate of all parties involved screwing the pooch. As far as fewer consumers and tax payers, to some extent there is. But, those collecting unemployment still make purchases and have to pay taxes on the unemployment collected. It is not a tax free ride. Federal tax is paid. Furthermore, these individuals have to pay Social Security as well. Again, unemployment benefits in the US are taxable and include Social Security payments as well. The only difference is lesser monies collected on the lower unemployment income. To finish, I would hope that young ones would take financial responsibility and not produce offspring that could not be sustained without assistance. Unfortunately, this is not the case and it burdens the system with a crappy program we affectionately call welfare. Welfare discussion is a entire different thread.

[August]

One word: Land. Forested land bought cheap and under cheap forest growth property tax rates. That's where I put my money.

[Tribesman]

One word: Land. Forested land bought cheap and under cheap forest growth property tax rates. That's where I put my money.
Forestry goes up and down like any other sector, like any other sector cheap tax rates invite investment which eventually has to be stopped as it ruins the market otherwise.
However it might soon be a time to invest in forestry for the very very long term as that sector is closely linked with the constuction sector and as that sector is seriously tanking so people will be wanting to dump their forestry holdings before the current market dives completely.

[AVGWarhawk]

It is the land Tribesman. The forest for the trees is just a small bonus.

[Platapus]

One word: Land. Forested land bought cheap and under cheap forest growth property tax rates. That's where I put my money.

I believe it was Will Rogers that advised people to buy land because the government can't make any more of it. :yeah:

[Skybird]

Will the bank have all of the money to pay out if all go to the bank on the same day? No. Will there be a run on the bank one the same day in 45 years? No. The odds that all will run on the bank in a single day are astronomical.

Then you have not read your history books. It happened many times in the Europpean hiostory of the past 300 years alone. In America 90 years ago, in Germany 80 years, in arfgentinia 10 or 15 years ago. In Greece in the turmoil when they got rid of the dictatorship. Advise is that if they return to the Drachme´, they should close the borders and close bankls for one week. It happened in Korea, Japan during the market crash 20 years ago.


Retirement age across the board does not fall on the same day for everyone. People don't all of a sudden become old. They become gradually old and hopefully plan on their retirement. Furthermore, when one retires one does not go to the bank and pull out all their saving. The money sits and is used as needed so the retired individual can survive the long haul and also hope on making some interest on the monies.

You do not get my point. My point is that a rush oin the bamks for whatever a reason, will end in chaos, and the point is that the banks right now do not have the money to sevrio9ce all their obliogations. BY FAR NOT. Even the most optmistic estimations IU read say they can service just 20% of these obligationsif they wqould become valid, and how thin the capital basis of banks really is you can see that they try to lease money from each other - and why the m istrust bringing this to a standstill has been an issue in the past two years that kept politicians and govenments and central banks rotating at 110%. It leads to no credits given to consumers and small businesses.

If the currency crashes, or the economy - and that is anything but an astronomically small chance - then all that paper stuff is not worth anything anymore. If inflation starts to speed up, you lose money, and if it starts to galop, you lose the fudnaments of your future, and if it reaches rocket speed then you spend all your savings - for half a leaf of bread.

Euro collapsing. US debts 15 trillion. US budget deficit 100% of GDP. How many trillions have been estimated to have been destroyed in the past three years of crisis? The last estimations I heared ranged from 12 to 20 trillion. But it could be even more.


The system has been running on paper for decades.
Na und...? It worked for some time in the past, so it will work forever, and in all future to come, no matter what? This myth is one of the prime busters for civilisations falling. Read Jared Diamond, he wrote about right this quite extensively: civilisaiton choosing the path to doom becasue they thought that becasue the old ways have been in the past they necessarily will be there in the future. When I say that world history if filled from A to Z with examples of civilisation and regional powers illustrating this, then that is no exaggeration. Not at all. Another important one is this: when there is only one fish left in the lake, then people say: so what? I get it nevertheless, because if I don't do it, then somebody else will. These two ways of thinking have probably contributed more to the extiction of civilisations that fell due to overstretch or starvation, than any other reason.

And we still have not learned from their example.


Nothing has changed.

Are you kidding? Have the past three years taught you nothing? The past decades' states and socieities ran on the basis of increasing debts. Not just the private consumer households, but the state (=political parties bribing the voters)These debts now are so high that they start to paralyse and overwhelm states - and I do not speak of Greece only . I speak of America, England, Germany, France.


Only the value of the dollar has changed. In the end it is only paper. And again, the entire body of people retiring will not storm the banks demanding their money.
The problem of changing age patterns is real, no serious researcher knowing the statistics of dmeogrpoahy denies them. We cannot avoid them - they will get us. Fewer and fewer people have to pay for more and more old. Have less and elsser to raise fam ilies and support them,. have less and lesser for secfuring their own future. That is the stuff social explosiuons are made of - revolutions, civil war. Becasue the system you trust so much in living on and on - the system of financing all on tic, and leaving the bills to pay to later generations, this system is currently in the process of imploding. Your model does not work anymore, the weight of debts is to crushing. Nations, the structural social integrity of them, collapse under these debts The states lose the ability to act, they lose degrees of freedom, they lose the freedom of choice in their decisions, they loose the diversity of options.

There is no generation pact in the US. There is a little system called Social Security. Originally the system was not to be considered the sole provider of retirement funds. It is only part of a larger picture. Pension plans and savings accounts were to be part of the retirement plan. Over the years some smart one decided a better system called 401K savings plan would be better. Many companies accepted this plan because it relieved them of the burden of pensions. Pensions went out the window. However, many companies did sponsor the 401k plan and also did some company matching to what the employee put into the account. If the employee treated the account as a savings for retirement and did not dip into the account then all should be well. The burden was now on the employee to participate in the 401k savings plans and also could go on their own with IRA accounts. There is no pact, however, I'm required to pay into Social Security every pay period. That is fine. I'm helping a older retired person. I would hope when I retire that I would receive the same. If not, no love lost, I will have saved for my own retirement. Is Social Security the best system? No sir. It is the only system we have to offer. But, one can always save on their own.

There is the same generaiton pact working in your place, like over here. In the banking business and all saving and pension projects they manage. Like I try to explain to you several times now. This is no wicked socialism. This is the mathematics of debt-driven banking business. And I do not mean credit cards and buying more cloathes and TVs than you can afford.


I don't put my money under the bed. That would be silly and nonproductive. As far as interest rates, the Fed here plays with the rate all the time in hopes to bolster the economy. I can not comment on the German state of economic affairs.
You are wrong. The Fed HAS done like that, but now has reached the lowest possible interst rate, almost nill pc. It can no longer decrease it, that option is gone. Why do you thionk it has switched on the printing machine and tries to talk the world into doing the same? All the world should accepot to m ake more debts so that more money is circulating so that more cash flows into the US to keep it floating for some time longer. Problem is this solves nothing, but multiplies the problem over time, it just buys time in which nothing can be done, and the final scale of the disaster is even bigger.

I'm fully aware of what Deutsche Bank operates. My money is spread across mutual funds and is based on a companies growth, etc. Making money or losing money as the stock market goes up and down only proves that paper is lost...not actual money. The market is always full of uncertainty.
If all your money would be existent in this way, then a babk rush would not hurt any bank. But the truth is that its value currently is in a state of non-existence, seen from the future day when yoiu get it back, hopefully. Becasue the profits they now make (or lose), do get spend and given away TODAY. Currently all you have is the promise of theirs to give it back to you, with a small bonus. But they need to earn it. Your money you gave them has been spent for obligations of theirs in the present and past. Who will finance in the future the income they need to pay your share back to you one day, is written in the stars currently. Judging from today I would say that many people getting payed out in let's say 20-30 years, can assume themselves to be lucky if they survive the inflation that is inevitably coming and if the oney they get back has so much value in buying power that inflation has just killed the interest profits they once hoped for. But as I said in my earlier post, these already are shrinking and are in high danger RIGHT NOW.

There is never any guarantee your money invested will make money. Nothing ventured is nothing gained. As I grow older I realize that I can't take it with me. What I can do is put money into securities, annuities, and IRA under a trust to my wife and daughters who will live off a nice dividend monthly. Inheritance tax can not be exercised on a trust and the Fed does not get any more of my hard earned money.

It does. Who do you think pays for the many bailouts in the end? Why pays for "system-relevant" banks? In Europe we currently learn that in a club of 27 players the collapse of just one player with an economic contribution of not even 3% of the union's economy still has the potential to shake the whole house.


There is less business for banks because the once flowing credit line to anyone with a heart beat has ceased. It's that simply.
It is simple in itself, but just one of several reasons.

The current economic situation was a conglomerate of all parties involved screwing the pooch. As far as fewer consumers and tax payers, to some extent there is. But, those collecting unemployment still make purchases and have to pay taxes on the unemployment collected. It is not a tax free ride. Federal tax is paid. Furthermore, these individuals have to pay Social Security as well. Again, unemployment benefits in the US are taxable and include Social Security payments as well. The only difference is lesser monies collected on the lower unemployment income.
The situation is better described as a historical process unfolding over several decades. And those parties participating in it and causing it - will not stop to do so. We get this lesson shown time and time again, currently.

To finish, I would hope that young ones would take financial responsibility and not produce offspring that could not be sustained without assistance. Unfortunately, this is not the case and it burdens the system with a crappy program we affectionately call welfare.
On this I wholeheartly agree.
But I mind you that it is not really helpful in the disadvantageous shfitnjg in the age-structure. We would need babies get born - but not in socially weak families living on welfare, where these babies later become net receivers, but in rich families where these babies become net payers. But the rich have less babies for reasons of personal comfortability, and becasue there are more poorer than richer people, with this balance also shifting to the negative. The gap between rich and poor is becomign wider and wider. Few and fewer people control more and more wealth, while more and mnore people share less and lesser of national wealth.

We are in a vortex, like a helicopter. We really are. We suck oursleves down to crash into the ground.

The state model where taxes get spend endlessly to buy voters' sympathy and to deliver an all-inclusive paradise and paying all, that with ever more debts, comes to an end, this way or the other. Either by reason and insight, or by colliding with hard, cold reality, head-on. Party's over in the West. 20 or 340 years after WWII, it was paradise. It will not be like that again, never.

[August]

It is the land Tribesman. The forest for the trees is just a small bonus.

More than a small bonus as last estimate. Once fully matured (another 10-15 years) I can expect to get anywhere from 10k to 30k per acre for that forest in today's prices. I retain ownership of the land and get to decide what the logging company can take as well as where they can put their access roads.

[Skybird]

I believe it was Will Rogers that advised people to buy land because the government can't make any more of it. :yeah:
Yes, land - valuable land, since there also is worthless land - may be a good option. Gold currently is not, the prices now are too high, the niveau of its price too instable and unpredictable. It could rise even more yes. But it cpould also make a sudden very deep fall now. It would have been a good decision to have bought golds 3 or 4 years ago. Even if it falls down hard again, chances would be that you would not suffer losses over your original investements.

Problem is states. The states are desperately looking for money. And that means new and rising taxes. And maybe even the prohibition of gold again, like we have had it both in the US and in Germany not even 100 years ago. And in times of past turmoil, property taxes in Europe for landowners have become so excessive that the possession of land turned into a meaningless affair or even a doom, when things got worse.

[August]

property taxes in Europe for landowners have become so excessive that the possession of land turned into a meaningless affair or even a doom, when things got worse.

It's a possibility I suppose but Maine has been dirt poor and very rural for quite a long time already. Raising property taxes in that part of the state would be trying to squeeze blood from a stone and they know it.

[CaptainHaplo]

Economies when to the dogs when the gold standard ended. The gold standard ended because the aliens needed the gold for their spaceships.

Now we have no gold and no economies.

The end is nigh.

[Tribesman]

It is the land Tribesman. The forest for the trees is just a small bonus.
Land is just like any other asset it goes up and down in value, what is on the land goes up and down in value too.

Once fully matured (another 10-15 years) I can expect to get anywhere from 10k to 30k per acre for that forest in today's prices.
How much would you have got for corn today last year or next year, how much has corn prices varied in the past 15 years how much will it vary in the next 15? Same for timber, plus of course is your forest guaranteed against fire and disease, is it ensured to have good growth producing good timber.
I only point out the problems with the "good" long term investment as so many people over here got their arses kicked by that "good" investment and the "nice" tax incentives that went with it.

[Tribesman]

Economies when to the dogs when the gold standard ended.
The gold standard didn't work just like the silver standard didn't work, economies have always gone to the dogs, it is what they do.

[Skybird]

It's a possibility I suppose but Maine has been dirt poor and very rural for quite a long time already. Raising property taxes in that part of the state would be trying to squeeze blood from a stone and they know it.The logic over here would be different, especially with a socialist government coming to power: possession of house, land, property = landlord. Landlord = rich. Rich = there is gold to get.

[Skybird]

Europe short on cash as bond fears deepen (http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,799397,00.html)

But if the ECB starts a massive buying tour on toxic bonds, it will just delay the open explosion of the crisis - at the price of having increased its power. If, like the other mentioned option, Germany would accept the collectivization of the union's debts, it would most likely lose its own top rating. Rating agencies already said that in that case they would downgrade Germany. Germany currently is close to a turning point in its economy, growth has stalled, we are dangerpously close to fall into a reverse movement. This would be speeding up with downrating it's credibility. And with the German economy falling andf the German financial outlook destroyed, Europe can pack its things and leave.

State bonds are no option anymore. Making debts is no option anymore. Collectivzation os debts is no option. It seems the only thing left to do is that states, in their functionality and services they provide to the people, must shrink, shrink, shrink. Which will cause a lot of social distortions and unrest.

But maybe this is the remedy that me must go through, right through the thickest midst of it. I think so. The nice thing is that it would not only tackle the economic system of state surviving only by making more and more debts, but that it would brake and thwart the EU and cut it back to much smaller sizes.

[August]

The logic over here would be different, especially with a socialist government coming to power: possession of house, land, property = landlord. Landlord = rich. Rich = there is gold to get.

Yeah we're a lot more spread out here than on your side of the pond. My land in Maine isn't even in a real town. No mayor or town council, just a big square on the map.

It is a great contrast between life in the new and old worlds.

[Skybird]

It is a great contrast between life in the new and old worlds.
Yes, that I imagine also, though I cannot tell by experience, I never was in North America. It's a very crowded place here - funny thing is, Korean friends of mine say the same about Germany. :D Germany is empty, Korea is noisy, they say.

I assume I miss some great landscapes.

---

News just in, from German market: an emission of German bonds fund rang alarm bells today, because it was auctioned at a disastrous price of just 3.6 billion where 6 billion were expected. One third of the overall volume of emissions did not even find a customer at all. This is due to the low rates of return, resulting from the current interest rates for German bonds. So far they say and everybody hopes that it was just a singular episode. But that hope is a bit against what reasonably has to be expected. when bonds do not only a profitable return, but are in danger to even causes losses due to taxes, fees, inflation, with interest rates being so low that they cannot compensate for that (not to mention: creating a small profit), then the big question is why anybody would like to buy bonds when he knows he gets back less than he has invested, in real value.

[Skybird]

"A complete disaster" - Sovereign bond auction fizzles in Germany (http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,799550,00.html)


Germany has been considered a safe haven of financial stability amid the ongoing euro crisis -- but that may be changing. Growing mistrust from investors seems apparent after what has been described as a "disastrous" government bond auction on Wednesday. Just two-thirds of the German bonds sold, leaving analysts concerned but not panicked.

Investors seem to have lost their taste for Germany's once much sought-after government bonds. At an auction on Wednesday of the country's 10-year bonds, one-third went unsold according to the German Finance Agency, which manages the nation's debts. The federal government had initially intended to sell bond issues worth some ***8364;6 billion (around $8 billion), but managed to garner just ***8364;3.89 billion.

The leftover issuing volume of some ***8364;2.35 billion will now be offered on the so-called secondary market, where bonds already in the process of maturing are sold. Disquiet on the markets likely led to the drop in demand, the German Finance Agency said Wednesday. "The result of today's auction reflects the exceedingly nervous market environment," a spokesman said, adding that Germany still does not face a financial shortfall.

Analysts, on the other hand, weren't quite as relaxed about the situation. "This is a complete disaster," said Marc Ostwald, an analyst at Monument Strategies. Another industry expert, Ralf Umlauf from Helaba, a government bank in the states of Hesse and Thuringia, called the auction a "vote of no confidence against the entire euro zone." The event should be seen as a warning signal that shouldn't be minimized, the analyst said. "A change in sentiment has taken place," Umlauf told SPIEGEL ONLINE. In particular, foreign investors have become distrustful, he added. "They associate the investment in sovereign bonds with the risk of the euro zone," he said.

Worries Spread to Germany

In the past, Germany has been able to borrow at extremely low interest rates. At the latest auction the yield, or the markup demanded by investors, fell below the 2 percent mark for the first time in the initial public offering of 10-year bonds. It was at 1.98 percent.

Germany should consider spreading out its auctions, said Johannes Rudolph from HSBC Trinkaus. In such a nervous atmosphere, the government cannot expect to continue putting large sums on the market, he added.

"A growing number of institutional investors have reservations about German government bonds," said Eugen Keller, a financial market expert with the Frankfurt-based private bank Metzler. In light of the relatively high inflation rate, the interest rates recently offered on German bonds are too low, he said. "If Germany's responsibility for the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) euro backstop fund should increase, the risk for German sovereign bonds will also increase."

Keller, too, said he had observed a change in attitude among investors (http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,799397,00.html). "Because of the low rate of return in Germany, some investors are now cautiously going to countries that they had recently avoided," he added. "In France, or even in Ireland, chances for returns are certainly promising."

Meanwhile, the budget policy spokesman in parliament for the opposition Social Democratic Party, Carsten Schneider, warned, "Today's unsuccessful floating (of bonds) is the first concrete evidence that the crisis is not leaving Germany unscathed." He admonished Chancellor Angela Merkel and Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble to come clean about "the costs and risks that our country is facing. And about the costs that will be created if we don't do anything -- as well as the costs and risks that may be necessary in order to successfully stem the crisis." In the long term, Schneider said, Germany would not be able to continue to finance its debt at such low interest rates. Because Germany is assuming responsibility for ever greater risks, such as if the EFSF is leveraged, he warned, "we as an anchor of the euro zone could also become the (negative) focus of the markets."

Higher Interest Rates in France and Belgium

The auction of 10-year sovereign bonds is considered to be a good indicator of how yields can be expected to develop. So far, Germany had profited during the debt crisis with its status as a safe harbor for investers. The country's high creditworthiness and relatively solid public finances has long been rewarded with the best AAA rating by ratings agencies, which consider Germany to be at very low risk for an insolvency. For some time, investors had been prepared to accept very low interest rates on German government bonds.

Unlike Germany, other European countries are now forced to pay significantly higher interest rates to investors. On Wednesday, yields on sovereign bonds rose once again in certain countries, meaning they're forced to pay ever higher interest rates when they pay off old debts with new ones. Yields on 10-year French bonds jumped 0.13 percent to reach 3.6 percent. In turn, the interest rates for the offering are just below this year's high of 3.8 percent. In Belgium, 10-year bond yields rose to 5.16 percent -- the highest rate since 2002.

Following the unsuccessful auction of German bonds, the country's DAX stock index of blue-chip companies took a blow on Wednesday, falling 0.53 percent to 5,508 points. The euro also fell to sa ix-week low of $1.34.


Germany can run. But it can't hide. The EU's discussion today on enforcing EU bonds against bitter German resistence (so far), is both incompetent, and behind the signs of time.

[Betonov]

My land in Maine isn't even in a real town. No mayor or town council, just a big square on the map.

Forrest ??

Whooops. Just found the answer on the prevoius page :D

I'm currently saving money to pay for the taxes and legalities to have the ownership of the fammily forrest property written on me. About 5 hectares. Lots of wood to cut down and sell, but being on the hillside prevents me from doing it reasonably cheap :/

[Tribesman]

Betanov, when you get it signed and sealed cut it, you never know when they are going to redefine the rules