The happiest people in the world

[Damocles]

Believe me I agree that regulation of banks is necessary.

I also believe that government should maintain spending within their means and that governments do not go bankrupt unless they outstrip their means manifoldly.


And the biggest deficits have come under republican control.

True, and that is what lost them their power. it is also true that the closest we got to a balance was when there was a balance in government.

But it doesn't change that the lesson here. The "happiest people" may simply be the "most oblivious". The ease at which they got loans easily contributes to their "happiness". Allowing them to spend more than they earned on things like trips, etc.

One lesson, and one we have to learn very quickly here or we're doomed, is that we should not overspend frivolously and when the economy comes back we need to start paying down the debt rather than increasing it in good times.

 

[charver]

I agree that bank regulations are a necessity and never argued otherwise.

Believe me I agree that regulation of banks is necessary.

I also believe that government should maintain spending within their means and that governments do not go bankrupt unless they outstrip their means manifoldly which cannot possibly be solely due to the banks deregulation.

Maybe not under normal circumstances but we're not living through normal circumstances here.

In terms of it's size Iceland suffered the biggest banking collapse in world financial history. That kind of thing can have quite significant consequences.

 

[uscitizen]

Well, if you put it in the oven, you gotta pay the price...

Pretty much what I said before we invaded Iraq.
I know OT but I could not resist.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Believe me I agree that regulation of banks is necessary.

I also believe that government should maintain spending within their means and that governments do not go bankrupt unless they outstrip their means manifoldly.


And the biggest deficits have come under republican control.

Do you really want to trot out that nonsense? Because you know that the deficits in the coming years are going to dwarf anything in the past... even the Bush years.

Deficits are run by the government as a whole, they are not run by the White House. The coming deficits are not Obamas fault, yet they will occur while he is in office.

additionally, when one or both Houses of Congress is controlled by one party and the White House by another, then both parties are to blame.

 

[Damocles]

Maybe not under normal circumstances but we're not living through normal circumstances here.

In terms of it's size Iceland suffered the biggest banking collapse in world financial history. That kind of thing can have quite significant consequences.

Especially when you are overspending to begin with.

Ignoring that their own spending contributes to their own financial issues is solely to make some people "feel better".

 

[evince]

One more history lesson that shows unfettered markets lead to doom.


Where is the history lesson that shows social progams and sound regulations combined with Capitalism leads to doom?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Maybe not under normal circumstances but we're not living through normal circumstances here.

In terms of it's size Iceland suffered the biggest banking collapse in world financial history. That kind of thing can have quite significant consequences.

A valid point.... the following lends to that line of thought....

http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/economicsunbound/archives/2008/10/iceland_goes_ba.html


"Where does the crisis go next? Most exposed are countries with large amounts of external debt relative to the size of their economy. A quick calculation suggests that by this measure, the U.S. is relatively well off, with external debt about equal to GDP. Japan’s external debt is about 40-50% of GDP, as is Canada’s (these numbers may change as I refine my calculations). Italy is at about 100%, and Germany and France are in the 140-150% range.

From this perspective, the U.S.—with its external debt mostly in dollars—looks like a bastion of stability. The euro zone has some weaknesses—Belgium and the Netherlands have uncomfortably high debt levels, and Ireland is extremely high. But there is a political framework in place which should allow political leaders to take effective action if they want.

The biggest dangers are for the UK and Switzerland. These countries, although much bigger than Iceland, are major financial intermediaries with big external debts. What’s more, they are outside the major currency blocs, with debt denominated in foreign currencies. That means if their currency starts to devalue, their debts will become more and more onerous.

And now we are in very tricky waters, which are looking uncomfortably like the Great Depression. The major players are the U.S., the Eurozone, Japan, and China. The question is: Will they act collectively, or will they engage beggar-thy neighbor policies? "

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

One more history lesson that shows unfettered markets lead to doom.


Where is the history lesson that shows social progams and sound regulations combined with Capitalism leads to doom?

Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are all regulated and are all substantially underfunded. As the boomers continue to retire and age, you will get your example.... IF we do not act to fix those problems.

 

[Bonestorm]

Especially when you are overspending to begin with.

Ignoring that their own spending contributes to their own financial issues is solely to make some people "feel better".

Damo - You have to present evidence that Iceland was "overspending" to begin with. You haven't done so. I haven't read a single person anywhere in any publication available in print or online that attributes the bankruptcy of Iceland to its generous social policies. Except you. Think about that for a while.

 

[Damocles]

Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are all regulated and are all substantially underfunded. As the boomers continue to retire and age, you will get your example.... IF we do not act to fix those problems.

We need to act before it hits the fan. One lesson we should have learned from very recent history is that "projections" done by even the best of the government agencies are fundamentally and inescapably flawed.

We need to fix this now before it becomes a problem, yet the politicians won't touch it until it is...

We cannot seem to learn from anything, even when it happens right in front of our face. The substantial debt held by nations' governments across the world will not change how we think or act one iota, even as they fail. Because we want to spend that money on programs that are "needed" for one group or another. Nobody would give up their pet program for the greater good. We're screwed.

We won't change how we think or act especially so if we do not even recognize that such debt helped to bankrupt their government and why that debt was accrued.

 

[evince]

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

with facts like these the republican party may never hold high office again.

 

[charver]

Especially when you are overspending to begin with.

Ignoring that their own spending contributes to their own financial issues is solely to make some people "feel better".

I don't "feel better" either way. There's very little to "feel better" about.

 

[Damocles]

I don't "feel better" either way. There's very little to "feel better" about.

Sorry. I'm not speaking about you. I speak to those who think the programs could not possibly have contributed to their overspending and the high rate of debt they had attained. If we ignore the fact that they had a high debt before they started trying to bail out banks we might be able to pretend that their spending couldn't have anything to do with what happened. But we shouldn't.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

with facts like these the republican party may never hold high office again.

LMAO... that chart shows debt as a percentage of GDP Desh... do you actually comprehend what it means?

WHY is it going down at times and WHY is it going up?

Is it because GDP growth is at a higher rate than spending growth? Or the other way around?

Not arguing as to whether Bush sucked... he clearly did... but when you have the country in a recession and spending continues at the same pace or higher, then it HAS to increase as a percentage of GDP.

 

[charver]

Sorry. I'm not speaking about you. I speak to those who think the programs could not possibly have contributed to their overspending and the high rate of debt they had attained. If we ignore the fact that they had a high debt before they started trying to bail out banks we might be able to pretend that their spending couldn't have anything to do with what happened. But we shouldn't.

Ok, fair enough.

But i would say that if you look at the sheer scale of the Icelandic crisis i'd wager they'd be suffering terribly even if their economy had been running a healthy surplus for the last decade.

Essentially, their banks, stock market and currency have blown. For a country that size where the financial sector was such a powerhouse in their economy (a bit like ours which is really, really, scary) as soon as it went down everything else followed - currency, stock market, everything.

And when those liabilities exceed your GNP by such a massive amount there is nowhere left to go but to the IMF with a begging bowl. If we go the same route there isn't enough money in the IMF to bail us out, which should scare the shit out of everyone else in the world because that will cause major ripples and make Iceland look like the equivalent of a lost penny.