Donald Trump

"

DalaiLama wrote:

"

Pwnzors87 wrote:

Is it that what they teach in finance´s, got to be a joke right and doesnt quiet answer the question,

Debts or loans are by definition borrowing one person's current money, with the intent to pay it back in the future. In this case, the central banks/governments might be borrowing money from other nations, or they might be borrowing from themselves. In the latter case, this is money they don't have, so it is in a sense imaginary.

The thinking goes like this: If the debt is $20, but I make $2000, the debt is only 1% of my income. If the interest on the debt is 5%, then as long as my income grows by more than 5%, the debt ratio will go down, even though the dollar amount goes up.

So, I might owe $21.05 in 2017, but if my income/economy grows by 6%, then I'll make $2,120 in 2017. In which case, I would owe 0.99% of my annual income/economy to pay off the debt.
That only worked as long as governments weren't adding additional debt faster than the economy grew.

"

DalaiLama wrote:

So, in essence, you are very correct to be concerned about where the banks and governments are getting this money from. It's a big reason why governments need to consider trying to balance their budgets. There was/is a line of thinking that the actual dollar amount of the debt didn't matter as much as what the debt was as a percentage of the GDP (total annual economy of goods and services).

The thinking goes like this: If the debt is $20, but I make $2000, the debt is only 1% of my income. If the interest on the debt is 5%, then as long as my income grows by more than 5%, the debt ratio will go down, even though the dollar amount goes up.

So, I might owe $21.05 in 2017, but if my income/economy grows by 6%, then I'll make $2,120 in 2017. In which case, I would owe 0.99% of my annual income/economy to pay off the debt.
That only worked as long as governments weren't adding additional debt faster than the economy grew.

In the graphic I posted, the change between the three blocks shows how well or how poorly some nations have done using that strategy and with their spending.

If governments can reign in their free spending habits, in most cases, the private sector can eventually make up for a lot of it. I can't speak to other nations private vs government efficiency rates, but the rule of thumb for the US economy is that for every dollar the government taxes, 7 additional dollars could have been made by leaving that money alone. When the government spends that taxed dollar, it usually doesn't generate anywhere near the same number of "turns". Bah, I don't recall the average government turn rate off the top of my head at the moment - I want to say its around 2.5-3 turns, but I could be mistaken.

This has to do with the money getting spent by one company, respent by the next company and so on, until it is reabsorbed. The government is borrowing the money, so right off the bat, they have to pay interest on it and are at a spending efficiency disadvantage. From there on out, usually the contracts they award and the manner in which they award them are not always to efficient companies, and the delay between acquiring the money and spending it also cause a loss, so a larger chunk gets lost at each step.

"

VictorDoom wrote:

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

VictorDoom wrote:

vote trump, its been like 70 years since we all had a proper war, about damn time.

If people want war they should vote Shillary tbh.

In any case, war will be good, a good proper, long, war is what humanity needs now, it is in human nature to kill each other. Its good for the environment, for us as a species since we are too many, and for society in general, young men have war in their hearts, these last generations are turning into pampered pussies because none of them had to take any shit in the army or fight.

I vote for war.

"

Pwnzors87 wrote:

I will take my seat, sir ;D
I knew that Money can be backed by your Society, but i have no proper knowledge of finance.
Still we have to admit, that the number´s are pretty retardet,because it can suddenly turn evry country rich.
That why i dont get why the Donald is mocking China, for bringing down there currency, if it´s technicly there right to do so. I quess, it has to do about how much they did it.

"

Pwnzors87 wrote:

That method of paying it back (growing income), is also Inflation/scam, because it constantly devalue´s what i already own, assuming there are no stable prize´s, right? So those 6% should be used on my Money aswell.

"

NeroNoah wrote:

What you said is mostly true, but I have to nitpick about the private sector thing. That's true most of the time, but then you have situations like the liquidity trap after the 2008 crisis (essentially, the paradox of thrift), so private hands won't end doing the investments. In that situation, an active government, debts be damned, it's necessary.

Also, there is that kind of spending you can argue is only government's function and a boon to society if done right (research, defense, safety net, and so on).

Debt emitted by a very stable country is a form of safe asset too, and safe asset's are an economical need.

"

NeroNoah wrote:

TL;DR: debts matter, balancing the budget matters, but not having a deficit in specific situations can make things worse. Debt is big and scary, but don't panic.

"

dickhole_mcghee wrote:

"

Disrupted wrote:

...

I think the left needs to realize the monster it has created and how its gradually poisoning society. when people cant even joke without risking losing their job and whatnot (oh yes, Ill never forget how SJWs made a nobel prize laureate lose his job due to an harmless joke) you know there's something real wrong going on.
News like this shouldnt be real (happened just the other day):
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/09/nazi-pug-man-arrested-after-teaching-girlfriends-dog-to-perform/
^I understand how it can offend people, but to arrest someone for that? nice going britbongistan, guess there werent enough kids spreading butter with a dull knife to be arrested that day (and hell yeah, the dog doing the salute its a complete riot, even better that its name is Buddha)

...

The thing that disturbs me most about the dog video is this quote in the article:

"

Ephraim Borowski, director of the Scottish Council of Jewish Communities added: "To regard the meticulously planned and industrialised murder of six million people solely on the grounds of their ethnicity as a joke is outrageous, and for someone who does so to claim not to be racist, beggars belief."

It's like, Hitler was responsible for waaay more murder than 6 million Jewish people, but, uh, fuck them, they're not Jewish.

From wikipedia, even though the article also seems to gloss over the fact:

"

Other victims of Nazi crimes included ethnic Poles, Soviet citizens and Soviet POWs, other Slavs, Romanis, communists, homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses and the mentally and physically disabled.

"

kolyaboo wrote:

I don't know what he is talking about. The US has been having military adventures since 2001.