General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

romanmir01
The Young Turks
comments

Comments by "romanmir01" (@romanmir01) on "Obama Blames Congress For Jobs" video.

@androidk18 So the 98% of deposits didn't disappear, but got much more purchasing power due to deflation, but gov't hates deflation, because it holds debt. So it starts 'stimulating' - printing money and trying to drive prices up by inflation. They succeed with inflation of-course, it's easy to print money. But then they want to 'fix' the 2% problem with FDIC and cause massive moral hazard, which they offset with Glass Steagal, but eventually the banks become monopolies due to FDIC
1
@Rundstedt1 The matter of fact was that 1921 depression had unemployment in double digits, and by 1923 the country was back to FULL EMPLOYMENT. Full employment by 1923 and you are saying it was never a 'full recovery'. I would like to question your definition of a "full recovery" from depression, which is time of high unemployment then? WTF is it?
1
The scam of any stimulus is that it doesn't work, but the proponents have ALWAYS said one thing. One thing. It's not 'big enough'. Well, it's never big enough. You can't have a stimulus big enough to avoid having to do another stimulus, much bigger than the one before, and then another, much bigger, and they do stop having the effect with time, because the money loses so much value and creditors don't want to give credit anymore.
1
@androidk18 Instead they 'stimulate', which in reality means just printing and borrowing more money and dumping it into the system, thinking that it's cash that is needed, and that the cash must be given to whoever gov't prefers, so whoever gov't thinks must be the winner in the economy. Well, just how often is the gov't correct about that? About who is going to be the winner in the economy? They can enforce the monopoly by law and money, but they can't create a winner in the economy.
1
@Polydynamix whatever floats your bubble, mate.
1
@Rundstedt1 Gov't pushed their hand by giving them the ability that was guaranteed by the government. In normal market, which is not distorted by gov't, these people would be doing normal lending - expecting a interest and principal to be returned. Gov't destroyed the lending standards by guaranteeing and pushing for substandard mortgages - variable rate, low downpayment, or no downpayment at all, so all risk was assumed by gov't guarantee and money was provided at 0% interest. Goodbye
1
Creating jobs by spending borrowed and printed money is easy. All you do is print and borrow a bunch of money and then sign a law, that directs that money at hiring a bunch of people for all sorts of waste - infrastructure, garbage clean up etc. It's useless to the economy to print and borrow money to do infrastructure projects, it creates nothing that can be exchanged with other producing nations for goods those nations produce and send to USA.
1
@androidk18 As the banks fail because of the moral hazard of FDIC, the loose lending standards due to gov't guarantees and 0% interest, they are bailed out with printed and borrowed cash, so they stay around. But the economy is in the shitter, because this creates a gigantic mis-allocation of credit and cash and more inflation than ever. So then gov't comes out with 'stimulus to kick start the economy', but that's pointless, because economy is in the shitter, it wasn't allowed to restructure.
1
@Rundstedt1 You think you are 'qualified' to comment on history and economy, while you believe that gov't should be spending money when economy needs a market enforced bust, this is a long ago debunked Keynesian bunch of BS. You are not qualified to even touch that keyboard.
1
@Bresker18 I like your questions. To your first question: imagine what happens when hyper inflation hits and interest rates go high double digits and China stops supplying the products and people without means can't get food and energy, never mind the SS checks they still will be getting, what will they buy with them? Imagine the situation then Second: No actually. The purchasing power of the dollar will go up as inflation will stop immediately once gov't stops printing and spending tbc
1
@Tunnelfish2 Prior to 1913, USA had a real surplus and only excise/sales taxes, 50% of taxes came from alcohol sales. There should be no such concept as "fair" in economics at all. It has nothing to do with "fair", that's a political term, agenda for politicians to win elections. The tax code must be equally applied to you whether you are 'poor' or 'rich', but gov't shouldn't be taxing things that are needed for basic survival.
1
@Rundstedt1 As to 'virtually any economist' - no no, those people, who serve the power of gov't elite and tell them what they want to hear, so they just can grow the gov't further, they are not economists. you can call them whatever, they are modern day shamans and witch doctors, but they are not economists. They are serving the elite, telling the elite all it wants to hear. The political elite. To say that REDUCTION IN COST OF PRODUCTION CAUSED GREAT DEPRESSION? !!!!!! oooh, that was good
1
@the0megan Nah, I'll let you do it, whatever it is, that you are thinking of.
1
@Bresker18 Once gov't is forced to make the decision to stop spending and thus it can stop taxing so much, then the capital can be saved again, and jobs can be restored, as the value of the dollar will start rising against commodities, not falling 10% per year as it does now. The purchasing power would go up, just like it went up during the Great Depression, when the bust burst and fighting deflation became the preoccupation of gov't, who PUSHED PRICES UP. Pushing prices up is good?
1
@Rundstedt1 Speculators don't appear out of thing air either. Either they are working with their own money (retail), or they are institutional, and institutional speculators most often work not with investment money, but with money they get from the government. So gov't giveth and gov't taketh, right? Because on one hand gov't prints the money (unconstitutional, BTW.), and they give the money out at 0% or near 0% interest, on the other the gov't doesn't want people to BUY shit with that fiat?
1
@androidk18 Then the Glass Steagal is repealed, because the banks are so powerful, due to FDIC and lack of MARKET regulation, which would keep them from doing risky investment because customers would pay attention where they put money into. At the same time gov't spending and taxes cause massive capital outflow, the dollar is unpegged from gold, so it can be printed (that was the REAL default, US defaulted on promise to pay gold for dollar.)
1
@Rundstedt1 Full employment via a war effort - great fucking thing, except it produces nothing of any use to the economy and leaves the people with less wealth once it's done and then obviously, the people can't work for war all the time, so they must become productive again Spending on war should be cut ASAP in all circumstances, and gov't spending is terrible for the economy in the long run, regardless of the short term consequences. The faster the spending is cut, the shorter the problem
1
@Rundstedt1 This entire ruse of top 1% owning 40% of wealth, etc., it's a red herring. It does NOT MATTER what the top 1% own. What matters is what the majority of population PRODUCE. The only real measurement of economy is wealth production - production capacity and material output. The value of money goes UP as efficiencies allow prices to come down, which is great for everybody who is not rich, but it's just awful for the power hungry political elite, who have huge appetites.
1
@Tunnelfish2 The best thing that could happen to USA right now is to stop raising the debt ceiling and having to be forced into this decision: do you pay the creditors their INTEREST or do you continue sending checks to the SS and Medicare and War recipients? Don't be mistaken, USA has defaulted long ago, it defaulted on the promise to pay gold for the dollars, THAT was the actual real default, since then the dollar was worth exactly 0 and its ability to pay was only based on perception
1
@Rundstedt1 First things first: those banks were bailed out. Those investment funds were bailed out. They got billions upon billions in bail out money and then in more 'stimulus', which created more consumer level borrowing for those very hedge fund managers to get their hands on The tax cuts are NOTHING compared to the REVENUE that they needed to generate to get those insane bonuses, but the insane bonuses came DIRECTLY from government money and bail outs and new stimulus plans. Joke is you
1
@Rundstedt1 The wars destroy capital, they don't create it. Wars mis-allocate capital and working force, they don't allocate anything efficiently. Wars cause destruction and destruction of capital destroys wealth, you are proposing that wars improved the economic situation and you are the one saying that I am wrong? Well, jeez, wonderful stuff, your logic is unbeatable - wars a good because everybody is 100% employed. Well fuck, USSR had 100% employment too, so? Economy was SHIT.
1
Private businesses will not hire as long as the gov't is destroying capital investment by printing and borrowing and setting interest to 0 and by regulating businesses, which helps monopolies that are established and pay their dues to the politicians, but it does nothing to make anybody want to spend capital in USA to buy tools, rent space and hire people to PRODUCE anything. American problem is not even high wages (that's a problem that can be fixed by market), but it's regulations and taxes
1
@androidk18 With inflation and huge gov't, growing due to inflation and debt and huge taxes, the capital outflows, the gov't grows more, as it gives voters more reasons to grow more, to support them via printed and taxed money, because when capital leaves jobs disappear, so people are left without jobs to the mercy of the gov't. Then the banks with FDIC and no market regulation, and with FHA and Freddie/Fannie and 0% interest and printing create a new asset bubble, which bursts.
1
@Bresker18 You see, money is not the wealth. Production capacity is the wealth. Production capacity is not what gov't can create, it's something gov't can destroy. It destroys production capacity with gov't planning and gov't promises of 'fairness' and with gov't printing and borrowing and mis-allocating whatever credit they got to gov't projects. Same thing happened in USA during Great Depression, they had all the bail outs and stimulus and gov't projects.
1
@Bresker18 What do you think people REALLY are upset about, about not having gov't checks, or about not being able to buy food with money or with anything, once the supply stops? I was born in USSR, long ago, the deficits were enormous, the country couldn't feed itself, it wasn't for the lack of money, everybody was getting their token salary - token 120 rubbles/month (that was just a little over average salary), but jobs were guaranteed, but they didn't produce anything - infrastructure jobs
1
@Rundstedt1 I am done with you, you are not 'hopeless' in the sense that somebody is, when they can't understand simple things, you are mindless - that's worse, and this conversation loses meaning on those terms.
1
@androidk18 The only way to kick start the economy is to stop gov't spending and all the stimulus and stop the bail outs and start selling the assets, which gov't now owns on the open market, so all those bad loans and mortgages can be sold off at the market prices (which are really low), and the prices for homes MUST FALL THROUGH THE FLOOR and inflation must be stopped, gov't must stop printing money to support high house prices in nominal terms, because this destroys savings.
1
Stimulus does NOT 'kick-start' the economy. Stimulus makes the economy weaker and worse, as it makes the imbalances deeper, the imbalances that existed before the bust, and the imbalances that the gov't tries to fix with stimulus, with more money? That only creates more imbalances. How you ask? If a company needed to go bust, it needed to be allowed to go bust, market said it needed to go bust. Throwing money at that company will keep it afloat, but won't fix its uselessness.
1
@androidk18 Stimulus is just more spending. Gov't spending depends on borrowing and printing. Stimulus creates jobs somewhere, some service sector jobs, so it hires some people. BUT stimulus destroys the ability of economy to recover. It makes the recovery a much more prolonged process, and only possible after a real bust. With more stimulus, the bust must be more severe. This means more companies must fail, more debt will have to be restructured (LOST). Stimulus CREATES MORE PROBLEMS.
1
As to Obama talking about 'streamlining patent process' - he is talking about trying to get rent paid for the patents by all the companies in the world to the largest patent holders in USA, but those are patent trolls, but again, what good will that do for the overall economy to have MORE patents? Nothing. What's needed is to abolish the patent system altogether, to stop recognizing anybody's patents. All patents must immediately be announced null and void, this will actually help.
1
@androidk18 No, I am not. Great Depression was started by US Fed, who printed USD buy UK Pound, and then the asset bubble that was inflated with the Fed's actions burst and gov't did all sorts of bail outs and stimulus plans, tried to hold prices of grains and other foods up, they were scared of deflation, which was the fix for the problem. The 2% of the bank deposits were wiped out, but the deflation caused massive price falls, much more than 2%, which offset the 2% loss
1
@Rundstedt1 BS. 1921 depression ended by 1923 and US Fed started pumping up UK pound by mid twenties, causing massive inflation and asset bubble, that time in agriculture. In 1929 the bubble burst, gov't started bail out and stimulus program IMMEDIATELY, trying to prop up the agriculture prices and bailing out stock exchanges and banks, just like they did in 2008, propping up banks and house prices.
1
@Rundstedt1 Somehow the speculators are not a problem in the market until there is a glut of currency, supplied by whatever gov't authority runs the printing presses at the time. Sure, speculators can add volatility, but they can just as well add stability, as they are on both sides of the equation. If somebody is buying, it means somebody is selling, without both sides, there is no price movement. This blame game by gov't is very old news, you should really get over it.
1
@Tunnelfish2 What US should do is stop with taking on more debt, it should stop paying for pretty much everything, it should abolish the income taxes and then have excise/sale taxes only applied to certain items and use that money to continuously pay their debts back. They should sell their assets on the open market, this includes the worthless mortgage loans and other credits that the Fed has bought up and transfered to the Treasury, so now the tax payers are on the hook for these as well.
1
Jobs that are being created should not be created. They are not jobs in manufacturing, they are more of the same - jobs aimed at spending borrowed money. All those infrastructure projects do nothing to fix the economy, they worsen it by spending more borrowed money and by not providing any production capacity to be able to pay debts back. The jobs will not return until gov't stops mis-allocating resources from private to public sectors and continues to inflate money and tax and regulate
1
@Rundstedt1 Hedge fund managers got their billions from gov't. Yes they did. Most of the hedge funds and investment banks and regular banks needed to go belly up. Where do you think all of their insane 'profitability' comes from, just a short period of time after EVERYBODY knew that they had TOXIC shit on their books? GOVERNMENT bought up their toxic waste, which it helped them create in the first place by 0% interest, and push for lack of lending standards and FDIC, FHA, Freddie/Fannie.
1
@Rundstedt1 No, the bubble that burst in 1921 was caused by monetary inflation. Before 1913 there wasn't even government spending to talk about, and if you are of an opinion that wars are good for the economy, then how come people don't actually want to live through them and have to suffer all sorts of deficits and cut backs during the wars, just so some people can fill up some cases with explosives, and others can empty them out. If wars and destruction are good for economy - lets have more?
1
@Tunnelfish2 The best thing to do for Greece or US or anybody faced with the market bust is to restructure the debts, to promise to return not the 100% on the dollar, but some lesser amount, but then to return it in real money taken out of taxes. But any restructuring of debt MUST come about with a HUGE cut to the spending, so that the taxes can be LOWERED and not raised. You see, as you go bust, you need to replenish your savings, and that means you need to consume less and save more.
1
@realCevra Spending cuts in 1921 lead to a total recover, full employment by 1923. And before 1913 gov't wasn't involved in economy at all, and once it became involved, the normal boom/bust cycles became extreme and all encompassing, because so much more resources could be mis-allocated due to the gov't power and the printing press.
1
@Rundstedt1 Worker productivity does NOT depend on the worker's ability to move his hands faster or to run longer. It completely depends on the tools that are given to the worker, thus a person with an excavator moves more earth than a person with a stick or a shovel. Tools depend on the available capital, and gov't destroys capital by inflation, because it destroys savings by money printing. As to half-million incomes, etc. WHO GIVES A SHIT? They are not detrimental to society.
1
@Bresker18 Nobody remembers the depression of 1921. Do you remember? There was a bust, caused by money inflation that started in 1913, eventually there was a huge bust and at that time the gov't actually cut spending by 70% and the depression ended in about 2 years. Sure, those were TERRIBLE 2 years, but the debts were restructured, companies that needed to fail failed, new companies were created with the credit that was freed up from gov't spending. This is history, it's not new stuff.
1
So all those gov't "economists" are charlatans and they know nothing about the economy, they don't understand how inflation they create with their insane Keynesian ideas destroy capital savings and cause capital flight. They don't want to acknowledge that the only way to improve the situation is to FIRE most of the gov't and stop spending and stop sending out SS and Medicare and War checks. All of that must stop and all subsidies to all businesses and all income taxes and regulations.
1
The trade agreements between US and Asia will be better? Make me laugh. China has trade deficit with Germany but US has trade deficit with China. So, what does that mean? That means that there is no problem created by China in terms of trade, there is a problem of USA not PRODUCING anything useful to China. That's the problem. But hey, USA has trade deficit even with Canada, forget China.
1
All those roads and bridges and railways and infrastructure 'jobs' will not do anything to improve the actual economy. They will surely pay those particular people that particular money - it's a subsidy to those people, sure, but if the Chinese stop giving US the PRODUCTS that US consumes, because China will no longer want to hold US dollars and bonds, then WHAT? What then? Because the wealth is not printed pieces of green paper, it's products.
1
@Rundstedt1 God, not this nonsense again, about 'laissez faire agenda pushed by Republicans' Who the fuck in power EVER wants 'laissez faire'? Give me a break. Nobody who gets into power ever wants to give that power away, that's why any lip service they pay to free market is just that, and it's a nice little way to hide their failures by blaming the free market for their own inadequacy and spending, while distorting the free market by gov't inflation, spending, taxes, regualtions, monopolies
1
@Rundstedt1 Oh, please, speculation is always, ALWAYS the scapegoat, just like Jews are also the people, who are always conveniently blamed. I wouldn't be surprised if you went there at some point in this discussion, to be completely honest with you. Speculators do not CREATE bubbles, they come to the bubbles, because gov't inflates them. Speculators are also on BOTH sides of the equation, they are buying and they are selling. Very often they cause prices to fall, not rise, they are market
1
@sanctiX It's not different at all. The exact same problem caused by the exact same institutions in exact same ways. There is no difference between any bust, that must happen due to mis-allocation of resources. How do you get to the bust, what bubbles you inflate is really irrelevant. The bubble of 1929 was in equity, the one in 2008 was in housing, the one in 2000-2001 was in Internet stocks, and the one that will burst in months, maybe a year, is US T-bills.
1
@sanctiX Saying that this is different is like saying: The laws of physics before 1903 were different, but then the Write brothers got their patent for controlling an airplane and so people could start flying. No, the laws are the same before and after. The resulting crashes can be bigger after, because people didn't use to fly so high, but the cause of the crash before and after is no different - mass and acceleration.
1
@Rundstedt1 You haven't 'shown' anything. Real wages in US economy were going up past 1923, but gov't insistence on bailing out UK pound created the inflation, which gave people the signals to move money out of dollar and into equities, creating a serious bubble in agriculture. And again, productivity increases not due to a worker working more, but due to a worker having better tools. Tools are bought with capital, which comes out of savings of the 'rich'.
1
@Rundstedt1 Oh, god. The real problem with the economy is not more rich people - it's more POOR people. And people don't become poor, because somebody else becomes rich. In fact in absence of gov't in economy, like US had in 19 century, the wealthier people were ones, who were creating more and making the society wealthier, and providing jobs in the process of making themselves richer. Having more wealth in the system is wonderful. Gov't creates poverty, not wealth.
1
@Rundstedt1 No, speculators do not cause bubbles. Speculators can move prices somewhat, but they cannot move prices without huge glut of demand - fiat. Fiat that is pumped into the system in the first place is the force that moves prices up, speculators or NO speculators. What do you think I do with my cash? I don't have cash. I buy and hold commodities and mining stocks. Am I a speculator? But I buy and hold, so I push prices up by not selling.
1
@Polydynamix Really, if it's of no interest, then don't read it. I am not here arguing with anybody, I am writing my comments the way I want, and you can totally skip them and read others. AFAIC the problem with youtube comment system is the character limit and lack of threads, which can be hidden and displayed, but not how many comments can be left by viewers.
1
@realCevra Why, do you go to wikipedia for everything, or just you political view de jour? Great depression was government creation, just like the bubble that burst in 2008 was gov't creation, just like the bubble that will burst shortly in T-Bills is a government creation.
1
@Rundstedt1 As to bubbles, and the way the cause so called 'glut' of production - well that's exactly what speculation and trading actually curtails. As SOME speculators believe that there is more LEGITIMATE demand, SOME believe that there is no legitimate demand, and there is only inflation. So many speculators end up pushing prices down, as they get into short positions. Your ignorance on this topic is clear.
1
@Rundstedt1 In fact, having people who are becoming richer is wonderful for society as long as this is not caused by gov't handing out money (as they do now all the time.) As long as the person becomes rich by creating a company, which creates wealth - products and services, and hires people, this person is doing WAY above normal in terms of his economic output. It doesn't matter what you believe is fair or not, what is good is having rich with lots of income to invest.
1