I see they have the Economic Prophecy machine running at full capacity these days.

DOOM!!! DOOM I SAY!!! DOOM!!!

Funny how "growth" the only solution to the problem.
Funny how "sustainable" isn't even on the table.

That's like wanting to build high speed rail when the trains you already have suck.

/Growth is just another word for wealth redistribution -- upward.

It's going to take time for the middle class to get used to being plebes then things will settle down

Love them or hate them, but until the Boomers die and pass on their wealth the economy of the world is going to stagnate. As they die we will see the largest wealth transfer between generations that the world has ever seen.

HotIgneous Intruder: /Growth is just another word for wealth redistribution -- upward.

You're a moron.

Stocks bonds and treasuries on a precipitous slide, gold silver copper oil grains livestock and all soft commodities likewise, real estate is useless, currencies and cash are losing propositions, and most of the nasdaq is declining.

So, a serious question: where the hell is the money going? Was it all speculative smoke and mirrors on margin to begin with?

the great depression isn't all that applicable to the world economy as it is anyways (same goes for the japanese lost decade), so what's to say the 19th century example applies either?

either way, it's back to basics time for the world economy, economics without the magic as it were

hurdboy: Slaves2Darkness: Love them or hate them, but until the Boomers die retire and pass on their wealth the economy of the world is going to stagnate. As they die retire, we will see the largest wealth transfer between generations that the world has ever seen.

FTFY.

Or stop wanting 25% Y-o-Y returns on their IRAs. Whichever comes first. Occupy kiddies, wanna know why Wall Street profits are through the roof? Go take a look at your dads' 401K quarterlies.

Know how I know you don't have a 401k?

YixilTesiphon: HotIgneous Intruder: /Growth is just another word for wealth redistribution -- upward.

You're a moron.

Yes.

If onereally want to rock the financial markets and the economy of the world for the next 20 or 30 years, lets put the US in the crapper and make the dollar poisonous.

Hmmm...

NewportBarGuy: If we remain with the status quo, I stand by my prediction of no significant turnaround until 2047.

Under your general assumption and not accounting for any super inflation to bring our debt in-line, the US won't exist in 2047.

Bad_Seed: [imgs.xkcd.com image 461x295]

My Hobby? Not really. It is the job of the CBO and GAO to do that. In addition, their extrapolations are a wee bit more involved than you portray.

The "money" the govt's are "printing" and doling out isn't going into the functional cash economy, but instead it's disappearing into the black holes that are insolvent banks' balance sheets.

If growth means artificial economic bubbles that pop and destroy the wealth that was created, then growth is an illusion. Alternatively, we are left with stable sustainable economic options, which the plutocrats will never agree to adopt because they cannot steal money fast enough.

/Or we can all die broke and on social security and Medicare (if we're lucky) just like Ayn Rand, which is the fate that awaits most of us serfs.

NewportBarGuy: Pretty much. Not unless we do something. I'm not very optimistic.

This. The sooner people realize it will never again be the way it was in the late 90s-early 2000s, the sooner we'll get over this whole thing.

HeadLever: If onereally want to rock the financial markets and the economy of the world for the next 20 or 30 years, lets put the US in the crapper and make the dollar poisonous.

Hmmm...

[endoftheamericandream.com image 640x466]

Whole lot of lended "money" that's never going to get paid back.
NEVER.

HeadLever: Under your general assumption and not accounting for any super inflation to bring our debt in-line, the US won't exist in 2047.

*snerk.*

NewportBarGuy: We could see a significant turnaround if we dealt honestly with tax policy and budget spending at the federal and state level within a few years.

If we remain with the status quo, I stand by my prediction of no significant turnaround until 2047.

It's a joke how we deal with economic issues and we deserve the malaise we have.

I'd say we're going to facing continuous deleveraging for the next 30 or 40 years.
The debtors have to literally die off.

HotIgneous Intruder: Funny how "growth" the only solution to the problem.
Funny how "sustainable" isn't even on the table.

That's like wanting to build high speed rail when the trains you already have suck.

/Growth is just another word for wealth redistribution -- upward.

"There are three ways to do things boy: the right way, the wrong, and the Max Power way!"

"Isn't that just the 'wrong' way?"

"Yes, but faster!"

HotIgneous Intruder: Whole lot of lended "money" that's never going to get paid back.
NEVER.

Uh, that yellow line is not lended money. That is the interest obligation and you bet your gold eagle we have to pay that. In fact, we have to pay that before we pay any of those other obligations.

HeadLever: Bad_Seed: [imgs.xkcd.com image 461x295]

My Hobby? Not really. It is the job of the CBO and GAO to do that. In addition, their extrapolations are a wee bit more involved than you portray.

No, the one you posted isn't. You can't forecast 70 years into the future. Scary looking charts showing exponential debt growth are used to try to frighten Congress into actually agreeing something, but as a prediction of what's actually going to happen, they are less than useless.

HeadLever: HotIgneous Intruder: Whole lot of lended "money" that's never going to get paid back.
NEVER.

Uh, that yellow line is not lended money. That is the interest obligation and you bet your gold eagle we have to pay that. In fact, we have to pay that before we pay any of those other obligations.

Easily created digital promises to pay, you mean.
Which is why we're here to begin with.

Lending is never a solution to too much debt.
There was so much lending across so many sectors that it'll never be paid back; the banks know this and so do the govts. Now their only goal is to survive the deleveraging party for the next several decades.

High oil prices threaten global economy, IEA warns

Birol said crude prices could rise to $150 by 2015 if oil-producing countries in the Middle East and North Africa don't invest $100bn a year to maintain existing fields and develop new ones.

More than 90% of global crude production growth during the next 20 years will come from that region, led by Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Algeria and United Arab Emirates, Birol said.

"Recent developments, including the Arab spring, have changed the mindset of many governments," Birol said. "In some countries, oil investments have been diverted to social spending. Oil policies are taking on a more nationalistic tone, which means not to increase production as much as is needed in the world market." (new window)

Elephant, drawing room, etcetera. Frankly, it seems unlikely that the economic growth rate of the post-WWII era will ever be seen again, unless something entirely new comes along. Plus, there are all these other problems the fellow mentioned in TFA. Hard to see how the bad debt problem goes away anytime soon...years and years of deleveraging.

Today has parallels with the Long Depression, sure, and no doubt with the Great Depression, too, but something tells me that when today shows up in my kids' high school history texts, everyone's going to snicker at our attempts to force-fit it into a comparison rather than taking it on its own merits.

Do I have my own predictions for how this is going to turn out? No. The various economies are too intertwined with each other and too tightly tied to things that ought to be irrelevant, like petty political scandals, for anyone to predict anything. Hell, an earthquake might level Hollywood tomorrow, no doubt garroting the US economy and, by means of all that intertwining, probably disembowelling the EU and maybe even China while it's at it. On the other hand, tomorrow some technological breakthrough might show us the light at the end of a much shorter tunnel than we expect. It's doubtful, but the future is kind of like that.

In short, the current depression/recession/thingy is probably going to prove unique in almost every particular, the same as the Great Depression did before it and no doubt the Long Depression and all the other ones did before that. The future is as slippery as greased mercury.

hurdboy: zipperlip: Know how I know you don't have a 401k?

I have three, actually. Next? The one from a former employer that was in all sorts of real estate stuff is worth about a third of what it was when I left that company in 2005.

Cue the DJIA graphic from the Office of the Minority Leader.

/My retirement holdings are largely a moot point because I'll probably end up on disability before I can draw on them without penalty

Okay, so where do you get off saying IRA holders are seeking 25% YOY returns and that dad's 401k quarterlies reflect Wall St.'s capital gains? I saw my portfolio values decline 40% at the crash, recover to flatline briefly @ Jan 2011 and currently stand at a 6% loss, And that doesn't even include inflationary declines related to holding cash reserves. I just thank FSM for some good dividend reinvestment plays or I'd be looking for a refrigerator box to retire in.

Bad_Seed: You can't forecast 70 years into the future.

That is why the GAO qualifies their analysis. Of course it is a crystal ball. However, they use a few more data points than one to determine the levels at which the spending obligations stack up to GDP.

Scary looking charts showing exponential debt growth are used to try to frighten Congress into actually agreeing something

Again, that yellow line is not debt. It is interest obligations on that debt.

but as a prediction of what's actually going to happen, they are less than useless.

Nope. If anticipating a exponential growth on the interest obligation is one repercussion of our debt over time (even if the magnitude can be off), then this graph can a great tool at showing folks that we need to do more to make sure that it does not happen.

/Unsustainable debt levels are unsustainable
//let's do something about it

zipperlip:
So, a serious question: where the hell is the money going?

My hypothesis is that a number of corporate entities with the ability to do so are trying to corner the market on currency.

zipperlip: So, a serious question: where the hell is the money going?

Bad Debt (new window)

One of the more interesting economic papers I have read showed that economic cycles average about 25 years. It covered the rise in the economy during the Reagan / Clinton era and the decline that started during Bush the younger's term. The study also went into the previous cycles, and showed that politics didn't matter much. I wish I could recall the name of the study or the author (though I'm sure I read it from a Fark link), but I would have to agree that it could be at least another decade to recover based on that research.

Sliding Carp:
I thought the received wisdom was that we are all such selfish pricks we were going to spend every cent we had, then spend every cent you have, then die without ever hiring you.

That's my plan. So far so good.

Why do I care what Powers Boothe has to say about the economy?

canyoneer: zipperlip: So, a serious question: where the hell is the money going?

Bad Debt (new window)

Actually, my question referred to the current capital exodus. If you're selling but not buying, where are you parking your money, big boys?

Epicanis thinks it's going to currency spec. I see that as even more dangerous than holding cash. Exchanging one fiat for another potentially less viable.

Perfect, it will start to rebound just when I'm ready to retire. So I got that going for me.

If the economy stays this way for the next 20 years, I couldn't be happier.

/ had a pretty good year actually

GaryPDX: HotIgneous Intruder: /Growth is just another word for wealth redistribution -- upward.

Then we must use "Decline" so everyone is equally poor.

YixilTesiphon: HotIgneous Intruder: /Growth is just another word for wealth redistribution -- upward.

You're a moron.

HotIgneous Intruder: Funny how "growth" the only solution to the problem.
Funny how "sustainable" isn't even on the table.

That's like wanting to build high speed rail when the trains you already have suck.

/Growth is just another word for wealth redistribution -- upward.

I love it when the guys I have marked in purple start arguing with each other.

Slaves2Darkness: Love them or hate them, but until the Boomers die and pass on their wealth the economy of the world is going to stagnate. As they die we will see the largest wealth transfer between generations that the world has ever seen.

Seeing as their wealth is tied up in phantom equity, rusting cars and garages full of used plastic "goods", I don't think you thought your plan all the way through.

The only benefit well get from their legacy is having to clean up their shiat and piss before they ship off (medical jobs, retirement home construction, end of life consulting, ect )