I hope you're right; I have kids and they have kids.
On Jan 06 07:15 PM Six wrote:
> I think you are on the right track Tom. But I don't think the big > push from the US gov is going to reinflate the ballon this time. > Consumers are done. Look at the retail numbers for Christmas, for > once the American people shunned the idea that the only way to show > someone you care is to pump up your credit card balance. Christmas > is hallowed ground for consumerism but for the first time in a long > time the American consumer passed. Historically this will be known > as the great moderation as people choose to live a frugal lifestyle. > American society will look very different just 3 years from today.
> "I programmed a multi-million dollar IBM 7090 forty-seven years ago > (which had less computing power than my current $100 watch ..."<br/> > > To round that off, you might have added (in a slightly hyperbolic > vein) "... and weighed more than Big Ben."
You're absolutely right. will post on that difference soon.
On Jan 06 05:09 PM Smarty_Pants wrote:
> You're getting warmer. > > There's a difference between deflation (ie. lower prices) caused > by improvements in productivity, like in the computer industry, and > deflation caused by a shrinking money (or credit) supply, as we're > experiencing in today's environment. > > Most items whose prices are falling these days are doing so because > of the latter. It's not getting tens of thousands of dollars cheaper > to build a house, there's just less money to credit available to > buy it with, so the price falls. > > Deflation via productivity is a good thing. Deflation via shrinkage > in the supply of credit (ie. debt based money) is bad for those who > either hold the debt and default, or those who are creditors and > find that the collateral they receive won't bring enough money to > make them whole on the loan. > > One of the main confusing factors in the discussions regarding our > current economic crisis is that the term "deflation" is used as though > there is only one definition, when there are actually two that mean > vastly different things. >
Good point. The return on college loans is high in terms of future wages but it's not a given that college costs have to be on an up escalator any more than any other costs.
On Jan 06 05:04 PM dixie wrote:
> Let's apply this reasoning to the ever increasing cost of higher > education (and often resultant student debt). > > How will this expense to be borne with falling wages?
You can buy more gold with $1000 (US) cash today than when gold was at $1000; that's why cash is king. Gold may be better than oil or corn at the moment but it's not cash.
Sort by:
Latest | Highest ratedThe New Normal [View article]
On Jan 06 07:15 PM Six wrote:
> I think you are on the right track Tom. But I don't think the big
> push from the US gov is going to reinflate the ballon this time.
> Consumers are done. Look at the retail numbers for Christmas, for
> once the American people shunned the idea that the only way to show
> someone you care is to pump up your credit card balance. Christmas
> is hallowed ground for consumerism but for the first time in a long
> time the American consumer passed. Historically this will be known
> as the great moderation as people choose to live a frugal lifestyle.
> American society will look very different just 3 years from today.
The New Normal [View article]
On Jan 06 05:44 PM Roger Knights wrote:
> "I programmed a multi-million dollar IBM 7090 forty-seven years ago
> (which had less computing power than my current $100 watch ..."<br/>
>
> To round that off, you might have added (in a slightly hyperbolic
> vein) "... and weighed more than Big Ben."
The New Normal [View article]
On Jan 06 05:09 PM Smarty_Pants wrote:
> You're getting warmer.
>
> There's a difference between deflation (ie. lower prices) caused
> by improvements in productivity, like in the computer industry, and
> deflation caused by a shrinking money (or credit) supply, as we're
> experiencing in today's environment.
>
> Most items whose prices are falling these days are doing so because
> of the latter. It's not getting tens of thousands of dollars cheaper
> to build a house, there's just less money to credit available to
> buy it with, so the price falls.
>
> Deflation via productivity is a good thing. Deflation via shrinkage
> in the supply of credit (ie. debt based money) is bad for those who
> either hold the debt and default, or those who are creditors and
> find that the collateral they receive won't bring enough money to
> make them whole on the loan.
>
> One of the main confusing factors in the discussions regarding our
> current economic crisis is that the term "deflation" is used as though
> there is only one definition, when there are actually two that mean
> vastly different things.
>
The New Normal [View article]
On Jan 06 05:04 PM dixie wrote:
> Let's apply this reasoning to the ever increasing cost of higher
> education (and often resultant student debt).
>
> How will this expense to be borne with falling wages?
Deflation Changes the Rules [View article]
You can buy more gold with $1000 (US) cash today than when gold was at $1000; that's why cash is king. Gold may be better than oil or corn at the moment but it's not cash.