Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26

Thread: Crisis cost up to $14 trillion, Dallas Fed says

  1. #1
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,263

    Crisis cost up to $14 trillion, Dallas Fed says

    The financial crisis cost the U.S. economy $6 trillion to $14 trillion—and possibly twice that—along with untold costs from "special treatment" that too-big-to-fail banks received, according to an explosive new analysis from the Dallas Federal Reserve.
    Nearing the five-year anniversary of the Lehman Brothers' bankruptcy that shocked the global economy, the central bank analysis takes a stark look at the costs left behind by the crisis and the ensuing bailout.
    The rest of the article can be found here.

    This is a testament to just how severe the economic crisis actually is/was. Not since the 1930's have we faced such grave financial and economic conditions, and therefore it is irresponsible for a specific subset of the political stratosphere to demand the federal government reduce spending during a time of crisis. Fiscal policy needs to be dictated on the basis of economic conditions and not the political party of the President of the United States.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  2. #2
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:24 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,606

    Re: Crisis cost up to $14 trillion, Dallas Fed says

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator View Post
    and therefore it is irresponsible for a specific subset of the political stratosphere to demand the federal government reduce spending during a time of crisis. Fiscal policy needs to be dictated on the basis of economic conditions and not the political party of the President of the United States.
    I assume, then, that the "specific subset" to whom you are addressing this does not include those who want to reduce spending having nothing to do with the political party of the President of the United States?
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  3. #3
    Sage
    Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-06-13 @ 02:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    17,002

    Re: Crisis cost up to $14 trillion, Dallas Fed says

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator View Post
    The rest of the article can be found here.

    This is a testament to just how severe the economic crisis actually is/was. Not since the 1930's have we faced such grave financial and economic conditions, and therefore it is irresponsible for a specific subset of the political stratosphere to demand the federal government reduce spending during a time of crisis. Fiscal policy needs to be dictated on the basis of economic conditions and not the political party of the President of the United States.

    So it basically has cost us the same amount as the war on poverty which is about the same amount as our stated debt? The scope of the crisis does not dictate whether we should or should not spend as a nation. The obsession with spending is why government spending often ends up with no multiplier effect--it is wasteful.

  4. #4
    Sage


    Thoreau72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    20,313

    Re: Crisis cost up to $14 trillion, Dallas Fed says

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator View Post
    The rest of the article can be found here.

    This is a testament to just how severe the economic crisis actually is/was. Not since the 1930's have we faced such grave financial and economic conditions, and therefore it is irresponsible for a specific subset of the political stratosphere to demand the federal government reduce spending during a time of crisis. Fiscal policy needs to be dictated on the basis of economic conditions and not the political party of the President of the United States.
    I think I'm going to go shopping!

  5. #5
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,263

    Re: Crisis cost up to $14 trillion, Dallas Fed says

    Quote Originally Posted by Fisher View Post
    So it basically has cost us the same amount as the war on poverty which is about the same amount as our stated debt?
    There is a difference between an expenditure and the opportunity cost of a crisis. You should have at least read the link in the OP before commenting.

    The obsession with spending is why government spending often ends up with no multiplier effect--it is wasteful.
    Waste is not a government specific problem. It is generally accepted that the government is more wasteful than the private sector due to differences in motivation (profit vs governance). However, when the private sector is in severe disarray, only the public sector can fill the shortfall left by a decline in private investment and domestic consumption.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  6. #6
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,263

    Re: Crisis cost up to $14 trillion, Dallas Fed says

    Quote Originally Posted by Henry David View Post
    I think I'm going to go shopping!
    Good for you!
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  7. #7
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,263

    Re: Crisis cost up to $14 trillion, Dallas Fed says

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    I assume, then, that the "specific subset" to whom you are addressing this does not include those who want to reduce spending having nothing to do with the political party of the President of the United States?
    Reducing spending during a general deleveraging of the private sector is re-tar-ded. Remember the 1930's?
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  8. #8
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:24 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,606

    Re: Crisis cost up to $14 trillion, Dallas Fed says

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator View Post
    Reducing spending during a general deleveraging of the private sector is re-tar-ded. Remember the 1930's?
    That's not what I asked about.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  9. #9
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,263

    Re: Crisis cost up to $14 trillion, Dallas Fed says

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    That's not what I asked about.
    Your question was predicated on poor macroeconomic logic. Those who want to reduce spending for the sake of reducing spending, given our current economic condition, are.....
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  10. #10
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:24 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,606

    Re: Crisis cost up to $14 trillion, Dallas Fed says

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator View Post
    Your question was predicated on poor macroeconomic logic. Those who want to reduce spending for the sake of reducing spending, given our current economic condition, are.....
    No, it wasn't. It was predicated on your implication that the only reason someone would want to reduce spending is because of the political party of the President. But you knew that.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •