This is all you need to know about McCain..

#77
#77
The keyword being "request". There's a mile of difference between submitting an actual budget and making a proposal. It's up to Congress to pass a budget bill. Hence the reason that it's a little silly IMO to be completely doom and gloom based on who is elected President. We are electing a chief executive in a three branch government; not a King.
 
#78
#78
GAVol said:
The keyword being "request". There's a mile of difference between submitting an actual budget and making a proposal. It's up to Congress to pass a budget bill. Hence the reason that it's a little silly IMO to be completely doom and gloom based on who is elected President. We are electing a chief executive in a three branch government; not a King.
Click to expand...


or hopefully not a queen
 
#80
#80
BigPapaVol said:
but surely you're not trying to pretend that the president's version is anywhere near as high as the bloated garbage that congress sends back.
Click to expand...

Surely not trying to pretend that the President is submitting a balanced budget and Congress is responsible for the deficit.
 
#82
#82
BigPapaVol said:
but surely you're not trying to pretend that the president's version is anywhere near as high as the bloated garbage that congress sends back.
Click to expand...

that's why gas prices have spiraled out of control, it's a democratic controlled congress, with nancy in charge
 
#90
#90
ok a 30% increase in a year, may not be spiraling but it's a hefty increase
I bet your ad rates haven't climed 30% in a year
diesel_web_chart_combined_us.gif
 
#92
#92
oklavol said:
until they decide to cash in their T-bills. Then the dollar will become equivalent to the peso....
Click to expand...

well first off they would have zero incentive to dump their treasuries because of the power we have over their economy and also because it would cost them billions in losses. and it should be noted that china has bought 30% less treasuries this year (and apparently actually stopped completely buying them for a couple of months) and treasury rates are below inflation and near 30 year lows so clearly the demand is still there. the treasury is the most liquid paper in the world. even china doesn't have the ability to control it's price.
 
#93
#93
droski said:
well first off they would have zero incentive to dump their treasuries because of the power we have over their economy and also because it would cost them billions in losses. and it should be noted that china has bought 30% less treasuries this year (and apparently actually stopped completely buying them for a couple of months) and treasury rates are below inflation and near 30 year lows so clearly the demand is still there. the treasury is the most liquid paper in the world. even china doesn't have the ability to control it's price.
Click to expand...

What makes you think we have any power over the Chinese economy? Maybe 10 years ago. Today, no.
 
#94
#94
UT IE 95 said:
What makes you think we have any power over the Chinese economy? Maybe 10 years ago. Today, no.
Click to expand...

Well, if nothing else we are in fact the top market for Chinese exports. A bad US economy is bad for China.
 
#95
#95
UT IE 95 said:
What makes you think we have any power over the Chinese economy? Maybe 10 years ago. Today, no.
Click to expand...

50% of their economy runs on US exports. that isn't power? all the govt would have to do is put a tarrif on chinese goods and we would destroy their economy. This theory that a recession in america wouldn't affect china and india despite their reliance on our economy is really baseless.
 
#96
#96
droski said:
50% of their economy runs on US exports. that isn't power? all the govt would have to do is put a tarrif on chinese goods and we would destroy their economy. This theory that a recession in america wouldn't affect china and india despite their reliance on our economy is really baseless.
Click to expand...

So if China is so reliant on the US for their economy, why do we have an over $200 billion trade deficit with China? Are lawmakers intentionally putting us at a disadvantage?

China currently has the world's second largest economy and most people in Washington realize they will become the largest in less than a decade.

If we imposed trade restrictions or tariffs on goods from China, we could slow their growth down, but we would completely nuke our own econmy in the process.
 
#97
#97
UT IE 95 said:
So if China is so reliant on the US for their economy, why do we have an over $200 billion trade deficit with China? Are lawmakers intentionally putting us at a disadvantage?

China currently has the world's second largest economy and most people in Washington realize they will become the largest in less than a decade.

If we imposed trade restrictions or tariffs on goods from China, we could slow their growth down, but we would completely nuke our own econmy in the process.
Click to expand...
(1) The trade deficit simply says that we are a net importer from China. It certainly says that they need our economy as an outlet for their goods. Their nation is the world's largest supplier of ultra cheap labor. As the largest consumer in the world, the US economy is of paramount importance to all huge exporters.

(2) China might very well have the largest economy in the next decade, but I doubt it. It won't be the wealthiest or the most efficient. Add to that the fact that they're going to remain communists, so innovation generally comes from without.

(3) Tariffs on Chinese goods would not implode our economy. We would pay more for some of our goods and would feel a pinch in the disposable income category. However, such a change would absolutely maul the Chinese economy since it would wipe out their only pricing advantage - enormous pools of nearly free labor.
 
#98
#98
couldn't have said it better myself bigpapavol. and let's not forget that japan was supposed to be the world largest economy by now according to experts in the 80s. how did that work out?
 
#99
#99
Good points by both of you. On a global level, I'm more skeptical on our economical outlook and I am very concerned that China is positioning itself perfectly for the US to need them more than they need us. That would be a bad thing. (see crude oil reliance as reference point)
 
#100
#100
UT IE 95 said:
Good points by both of you. On a global level, I'm more skeptical on our economical outlook and I am very concerned that China is positioning itself perfectly for the US to need them more than they need us. That would be a bad thing. (see crude oil reliance as reference point)
Click to expand...
China is a very long way from reversing the situation. They will some day, but not until their absolutely broke population can absorb a tremendous portion of the goods they are producing.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top