@1forum1 wrote:

There are basically only four ways to pay off government debt. 1) cut government spending 2) shift spending to areas that create jobs 3) drive economic growth at a faster rate 4) raise taxes. .

Inflation (sometimes called an indirect tax) is another way.

U.S. Treasury bond holders will get their money back in nominal terms, but it may be worth less from inflation in real terms.

Post-WW2, we had a slightly higher debt-to-GDP ratio than we do for what's projected out to 2021 by the CBO (119% vs. 115%, respectively). From 1945 to 1981, we shrunk the ratio down to about 25%. That was done by higher GDP growth, higher taxes, and higher inflation.

Higher growth may be a lot less likely nowadays, given aging demographics, record high levels of inequality, and less of a free market (since the late 1970's, post-campaign finance law reforms that legalized corporate bribery of our elected officials have led to what political scientists agree is an oligarchic state in the U.S.). That leaves:

cutting spending
higher taxes
inflation

Without getting into pure politics, I don't think we get higher taxes (yet) with gridlock. Broad inflation in the short-term may not be likely, as we're in a recession with demand destruction/deflation and no guarantees of big stimulus. Cutting government spending is also not likely, given that it is political suicide - not to mention ever increasing liabilities in Social Security and Medicare.

That leaves one thing: Fed control of interest rates - i.e., keeping them low. That's the only way we can temporarily "manage" the debt, until those other forces kick in at some later date (and even then, it will likely require low rates for a while). BUT, that robs savers of their risk-free rate at the bank (savings account, CDs, and money market funds) and in U.S. bonds. Only the 30-year Treasury is currently beating inflation (by the tiniest amount and is no guarantee to continue to do so). If you buy and hold any U.S. Treasuries right now below that level, you're losing money. Cash is losing money. This means people are forced to seek yield in either alternative asset classes (gold and bitcoin, for example) or stocks (further driving up the bubble).

From 1945 to 1980, as we shrunk the national debt, real interest rates averaged (negative) -.3% (see Harvard economist/IMF official, Carmen Reinhart's, work on this). The Fed had to suppress interest rates (below inflation levels) during that period, in order to be able to service payments. Bond holders lost their money in real terms. A repeat of this in the 2020's is why many people are getting out of U.S. Treasuries and cash (outside of an emergency fund and some extra sideline cash in case of a market crash to buy the dip). It's possible the Fed introduces nominal negative interest rates, which would lead to Treasury bond appreciation, like in Europe and Japan, but that is a low probability, given what they've said (not being a fan of them). So, be careful if you are a U.S. Treasury bond holder!

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/02/2020 06:55AM by shoptastic.

This is particularly horrible going into the COVID winter.
[www.cnbc.com]

@ wrote:

Expiring state eviction bans have led to hundreds of thousands of additional coronavirus cases, new research finds, raising alarm about what will happen when the national eviction moratorium lapses next month.

Almost 6 million Americans say they are somewhat to very likely to lose their homes in the next two months:
[www.bloomberg.com]

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/01/2020 02:17PM by shoptastic.

@shoptastic wrote:

[/b]

Almost 6 million Americans say they are somewhat to very likely to lose their homes in the next two months:
[www.bloomberg.com][/quote]

It's a shame. As someone said,"It doesn't have to be that way." I think a rather big stimulus will happen, but it looks like Mitch has no interest in doing anything for the next couple of months. To your point, that inaction for the next two months is a death sentence to many Americans. It also just also just makes things worse in terms of recovery for the country. A stimulus will happen, but later rather than sooner. And that timing makes a difference. Does anyone really care? Apparently not enough.

@shoptastic wrote:

That leaves one thing: Fed control of interest rates - i.e., keeping them low. That's the only way we can temporarily "manage" the debt, until those other forces kick in at some later date (and even then, it will likely require low rates for a while).

That is scary. That "one thing" is about all we got working right now, and it's not enough. Some other factors are going to have to kick in. There are two other things that can be controlled, spending and taxes. Neither are going away. So we have to spend better and tax better.

I think Mitch is ready and willing to bail out individual Americans with stimulus money, but the House stimulus that also includes bail-outs to certain states is not going to fly. If Ms. Pelosi really wanted to help the American people, she would remove anything that doesn't directly benefit American individuals and small businesses caught in the covid crisis and get it passed. She could come back later and fight to get money for the states who have seen rioting and other additional items ... if possible. The problem is that she is holding the stimulus for hostage trying to get a lot of extra stuff while the American people suffer. She did this with the first stimulus and Republicans gave in. They will not give in this time. Put the blame where it belongs. Sad that they can't come together for the good of the country and do what we elected them to do - work for us.

@roflwofl wrote:

I think Mitch is ready and willing to bail out individual Americans with stimulus money, but the House stimulus that also includes bail-outs to certain states is not going to fly. .

There is no such thing as "bail-outs to certain states" in any stimulus. That verbage is used by the Unindicted Co-conspirtator Individual -1 and Mitch to distort. Every state in the union has taken a financial hit. Revenue subsided. States and cities have operating cost which includes a plethora of basic infrastructure maintenance. Additionally, the expenditures include the resources for schools, police, corrections, highways and roads, hospitals, and other public health including medicaid. Because revenue has substantially reduced, state and local government need funding to continue to operate properly. If they don't have enough, then all the aforementioned entities will be cut to a level that can be paid for. That means more jobs lost and more spiraling effect on local, state, and ultimately national economy. More importantly, it hurts real people, especially those on the front lines. To your point, the state and local city component of the bill does directly benefit the American people. To not address that, is to push those people off the cliff into unemployment and all of the surrounding circumstances that entails. Again, this impacts every state and its citizenry.

By the way, California, Pelosi's state that you seem to infer as one the "bail-outs to certain states," has the 6th largest economy in the world. Meaning, if California was a sovereign nation, it would have the world's 6th largest economy. States like California and New York, have been primary contributors to the national coffers. On the other hand, the states like Kentucky, Mitch's state, are always in need of money from the national coffers and have not contributed to it in his lifetime. So, who is bailing out who?

"Put the blame where it belongs." That's what has been happening for months. Every finger is pointed at the other. I will point mine at Mitch. How about putting EVERY proposal up for a vote Mitch? Start with the first one that has been on your desk for 8 months.

@1forum1 wrote:

It's a shame. As someone said,"It doesn't have to be that way." I think a rather big stimulus will happen,.

I thought that going into this year's election, but as I explained earlier, I think the leverage is gone now for big stimulus. IF Congress is split, then I don't see it happening most likely.

Historically, once the wealthy/elites/corporations, etc. get what they want, you don't see them pushing for stimulus and bailouts for the smaller guy. They stand to gain more by letting them fail (see my posts earlier on this). Look at 2008 as a primary example. Bail out reckless gambling Wall Street and let Main Street fail.

As another poster said (and myself affirming), when the stock market was crashing in March (down 35%), when over-leveraged hedge funds were going to collapse, and when large indebeted U.S. corporations were about to go bust:

The Fed launched $750 billion in quantitative easing and approved limitless amounts thereafter ("QE Infinity" ). That ALL went to bail out the stock market (through asset swaps with banks/primary dealers to take bad assets off their books and give them cash, which they obviously plow into the stock market for a quick return as always with QE). Congress immediately passed CARES. And, then, the Fed (breaking the Constitution) bailed out the corporate bond market in collaboration with Treasury via a SPV (special purpose vehicle). Why are we illegally bailing out bankrupt, debt-ridden corporations that have junk-rated debt with future tax paying dollars? This is probably the biggest scandal average Americans don't even know about.

PPP, supposed to help "small businesses" (of 500 employees or less *eye-roll*), only saw a tiny fraction (I believe it was around 6%) of those who applied get any help. You could say all this is coincidence - maybe it is. But, it's always the type of coincidence that benefits the wealthy/elite/corporations as Main Street and average Americans suffer. Some might say it's rigged.

With the "K-shaped" recovery having taken place and the stock market breaking all-time highs, high income earning jobs back at pre-pandemic levels, and large corporations given a second life (for now), it's crickets as help for Main Street.

Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 12/02/2020 06:54PM by shoptastic.

A covid glossary might be helpful. It should lead to some answers. What is truly attributable to covid, and what involves other factors? Proportionately, how much covid money should be directed to each situation and how much other revenue should flow to some situations?

For example, is additional fed funding for Planned Parenthood/yeah, this means abortions really a covid situation? This is one example of possible covid-era pork that was not specifically identified earlier. [And, along these lines, how many conceptions are occurring in defiance of distancing orders? But that is for some other thread...or an actuarial round table... or something...]

@Shop-et-al wrote:

A covid glossary might be helpful. ...

Nah, we just need the stock market to drop a modest 25% or a few large corporations to go insolvent and Congress will act ASAP like always.

The rich lose a few pennies: ACT IMMEDIATELY! IT'S A NATIONAL CRISIS OF EPIC PROPORTIONS!!!
Main Street suffers (evictions/foreclosed homes/10%+ joblessness/COVID dangers & death in the winter): Fiscal responsibility!! Personal responsibility!!! And, what will happen to our grandchildren and the national debt?

Same hypocritical refrains all the time. Seen it too many times. I shall break down where all the stimulus money went in my next post if I have time. You all may be outraged (I've alluded to some of it already above).

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/03/2020 05:38AM by shoptastic.

.[/quote] Shoptasticwrote
. I shall break down where all the stimulus money went in my next post if I have time. You all may be outraged (I've alluded to some of it already above).[/quote]

I'm laughing. I can hardly wait to see your break down. That will be interesting. I do know that the Trump Organization and Kushner Companies got millions, and as someone might say, "Very quickly." I also know that some televangelist, for example Paula White, and other megachurches connected to the Unindicted Co-conspirator Individal 1, like the one that Herman Cain attended to see a Unindicted Co-conspirator Individual 1 rally, received hundreds of thousands and into the millions in stimulus, very quickly. Anyway, hope you have type to break it all down for us on your next post.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/03/2020 08:17AM by 1forum1.

@1forum1 wrote:

I'm laughing. I can hardly wait to see your break down. That will be interesting. I do know that the Trump Organization and Kushner Companies got millions, and as someone might say, "Very quickly." I also know that some televangelist, for example Paula White, and other megachurches connected to the Unindicted Co-conspirator Individal 1, like the one that Herman Cain attended to see a Unindicted Co-conspirator Individual 1 rally, received hundreds of thousands and into the millions in stimulus, very quickly. Anyway, hope you have type to break it all down for us on your next post.

To quote properly, you have to take the "/" out of the first quote command, 1forum1. The "/" is used to signal the END of a quote.

Yes, Kushner got some weird benefits (I have a reference for that). However, I don't have every single scammy stimulus grab out there, so you may have also heard of ones I haven't. Feel free to post them. lol. I'm talking broad stimulus claims + Fed/Treasury sponsored bailouts. The $6-7 trillion is what I'll be breaking down broadly. I heard some dood bought a Ferrari or something after falsely applying for stimulus.

I have heard people frantically starting up new small businesses in hopes of getting fraudulent stimulus money too (for Round 2). Shopetal is correct in that regard - there IS a lot of fraud. But, that shouldn't stop us from still acting to prevent very serious suffering.

Upper wage earners are back to pre-COVID norms (so is their stock market wealth, which is now higher than before), while the lower end of the spectrum is struggling.

Meanwhile, more than 20 million Americans are still claiming some sort of unemployment insurance:

Just as we've broken 100,000 COVID hospitalizations, 200,000 daily cases, and 2885 daily deaths. All record highs.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/03/2020 09:16PM by shoptastic.

Speak of the Devil in PPP (just in news): [www.seattletimes.com]

@ wrote:

WASHINGTON – More than half of the money from the Treasury Department’s coronavirus emergency fund for small businesses went to just 5% of the recipients, according to data on more than 5 million loans released by the government Tuesday evening in response to a Freedom of Information Act request and lawsuit.

Officials from the Treasury Department and the Small Business Administration have argued that the program primarily benefited smaller business because a vast majority of the loans ― more than 87% ― were for less than $150,000, as of August. But the new data show that more than half of the $522 billion in the same time frame had gone to bigger businesses, and only 28% of the money was distributed in amounts of under $150,000.

Not surprised with fraud and foreclosure king, Steven Mnuchin, helping run the PPP program.

As mom and pop and even mid-sized businesses go under, larger corporations can gobble up market share in the post-pandemic era. Most people who applied didn't even get help, so those numbers are just for those getting it.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/03/2020 09:34PM by shoptastic.

We surged. Recoveries substantially outpace deaths here. We did not have statewide curfew or lock down commands. Our largest economic challenges are unrelated to covid; this is a boom and bust state that is trying to augment basic industries and revenues while preserving the existence and essence of the vast lands and spaces. This is not so easy... and some people seem to think they should barge in and put up their whatever's without regard for old and natural beauty, peacefulness in open space, and other values that are part and parcel of the sparsely populated state where people must spend hours traveling from attraction to attraction. If they don't like the space, they should stay out of our state!

Meanwhile, I did not apply for any benefits. I am neither richer nor poorer because of covid. I am not statistically significant, but I am an actual person who wonders about things such as why do some people have dramatic experiences while others carry on with minimal disruption?

@Shop-et-al wrote:

Meanwhile, I did not apply for any benefits. I am neither richer nor poorer because of covid. I am not statistically significant, but I am an actual person who wonders about things such as why do some people have dramatic experiences while others carry on with minimal disruption?

I think if you place yourself in the shoes of a restaurant owner or bar tender, then it's easy to see why COVID has been so disruptive. Whether it's mandated shutdowns or just people naturally not frequenting those places as much anymore, it's been hard to survive. Restaurants often have razor thin margins and they need to do business in high volume to make a profit. They have fixed rental costs usually and their food has to be used up immediately to prevent it from going bad.

Now, suddenly, you have 50% (or more) less customers. What to do? You can't raise prices enough to make up that loss. You don't know how many guests will come, so you can only cut back on your food supplies so much. Without volume, you cannot be profitable and pay store rent. You'll be done for within months. I posted an article somewhere on the forum showing how many days of cash various businesses had on hand. Restaurants ranked at the lowest end (don't recall the exact # of days, but I think they had just a few weeks cash on hand).

So, yeah, that's an example of hard hurt people. For some, it could have been a life-long dream to open up their own restaurant too. I know a 50's/yo woman recently opened up a new salad themed restaurant near me that I went to a lot. They were shopped too. Then COVID hit. I haven't driven by her place lately, but when I did early on it was empty.

[www.bloomberg.com]
The bad news: The bipartisan stimulus deal on the table is rejected by McConnell who favors his smaller deal.

@Shop-et-al wrote:

According to Yahoo Finance, new jobs have been created. Their numbers fall short of the projected figures for the time frame.

1. Woot! There are new jobs.
2. Was the projected number spot on, too low, or too ambitious (even without the covid-19 factor)?
3. The economy can still support some new jobs.

I re-routed your post from my other thread, Shopetal. Non-farm payroll, which is released the first Friday of every month, is calculated by taking the sum of job losses plus job gains from the previous month. That it is a positive number is good news (a negative number means we lost more jobs last month than we gained). That it came in at half of what was expected is bad news. [www.cnbc.com]

November was: 245,500 actual vs. 440,000 expected
October was: 610,000 (big decline last month from this)

The thing it keep in mind is that jobs "grown"/gained can be sort of misleading. Often, they are just jobs we lost from furloughed workers earlier during the pandemic, who are slowly returning to their old jobs as business picks up again and employers can bring them back profitably. Still, there are some legitimately "new" jobs too.

Potentially very bad is that the real unemployment number is possibly much higher than the 6.7% reported last week:

It may be 9% or so, because people dropped out of the labor force. That has been circulating on fintwit recently. So, all-in-all, it's not so good with high unemployment + expected winter COVID slowdown in economy + November jobs hiring slowing, especially as COVID-related benefits are set to expire Dec. 31st.

But always remember this: some of those people will find resourcefulness, strength, and resilience. They just don't know it yet. They have not been challenged enough until this year. But they will do well. So when those folks know for themselves and otherwise are identified as doing well (even if this does not resemble the life they thought they should be accustomed to), what happens to the estimated numbers of devastation and ruin?


Your numbers do not account for whatever people are figuring out how to do for themselves. This is an unbalanced view. Now, please find the figures for the effects of strength, resilience, resourcefulness, and plain old doing without... and then report back to us.

@Shop-et-al
I don't disagree that people can grow through adversity. I know from reading your posts that you genuinely work hard, take personal responsibility for yourself, and see the value and positives of free market capitalism in improving people's lives. That should be applauded and I agree with you on those things.

I don't know that we differ, but I simply additionally believe:
a.) We should still have a social safety net for people (one that is bare bones enough to still incentivize and reward work, but also not entirely absent so as to let innocent people just die or fall so deep into a hole in society as to have no hope). Such a social safety net should also include aid in times of natural/medical disasters and crises like the one we face now. Do you believe in any type of aid to the poor and/or out-of-luck?
b.) Our free market society and economy are significantly corrupted by money in politics. This means many, who are trying their best already, are constantly getting a rotten deal.

I've tried to document examples of b.) throughout this thread, where we've constantly favored and bailed out the rich/elite/corporations over Main Street. Do you agree we have to stop this unequal practice?

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/10/2020 08:41AM by shoptastic.

Lower-wage workers' employment is still down ~20% relative to pre-pandemic levels.

And yet,,, my lower income opportunities are up. All i have to do is humble my little self and go to work. How many other people could be employed [even at a lesser pace than they were before] if they humbled themselves and went to work?

@shoptastic wrote:

Lower-wage workers' employment is still down ~20% relative to pre-pandemic levels.

@Shop-et-al wrote:

And yet,,, my lower income opportunities are up. All i have to do is humble my little self and go to work. How many other people could be employed [even at a lesser pace than they were before] if they humbled themselves and went to work?

Yeah, that's a blessing for your situation. I continue to pray that you'll be safe during this time! January and February are usually the coldest times.

As for your question, I think it's hard to know/judge - as opportunities are location-dependent. In the bankruptcy thread, I posted states with the most small business closures, for example, and they are major tourism/service sector economy states like Hawaii and California. With mass exodus from major cities into suburbs and less populated areas, due to COVID, you have another divide: urban vs. suburban/rural. Urban jobs may be crushed while less populated areas (with the migration) get more people, money, and jobs. ...stuff like that...it's hard to know/judge, due to individual choices and local economy dynamics.

Where I hail from, this is the situation: The people who paid cash and saved something survived the frequent layoffs and strikes. Now that work and industries are changing, the same principal applies. Some people are much better prepared than others for the financial effects of pandemic.

.

Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 06/22/2022 12:39AM by shoptastic.

Meanwhile, the decision makers are still trying to hammer out the final legislation...

@Shop-et-al wrote:

Meanwhile, the decision makers are still trying to hammer out the final legislation...

Yeah, when it's Main Street's fortunes involved, they can wait as long as they want (time matters for small businesses without financial support and a coming slowing economic COVID winter). When it's big businesses and wealthy interests at risk, it's "Get it done NOW!"

In the restaurants space, alone, 110,000 businesses have already permanently closed. If you go up a few posts to the PPP article I posted and look at recipients of those grants, you see places like Boston Market, Cava Grille, and Uno Pizzeria getting these free money grants. By expanding the definition of small business to 500 employees or less, they allowed some pretty huge companies with access to private lending, corporate credit, and even the ability to issue stock to swoop in and get free PPP loans designed to help mom and pop. As I posted in other threads, many big institutions had lobbyists put them at the top of the list and even local banks processing PPP loans favored bigger/wealthier clients (giving them "concierge" service as the article put it).

So, a program designed for Main Street was much more underfunded (only ~$500 billion) and ran out of money immediately compared to the larger bailouts (QE continues to this day) AND it allowed for what most people would consider medium to large businesses to get in on the free money and be put at the top of the list if they had connections or status over Jane's Jewelry shop or Charlie's hot dog cafe down the street.

The damage is already done.

One thing that has never been clear is reasonableness. What is a reasonable amount of time to wait for a change? For how long should each owner, manager, and employee wait for stimulus money, the return of customers, or a resurrection of interest in their work environs? Shouldn't everyone feel and be free to make a change, even if that means to pick up work they would do in other circumstances, if this is what is needed to make money flow in their worlds?

@Shop-et-al wrote:

One thing that has never been clear is reasonableness. What is a reasonable amount of time to wait for a change? For how long should each owner, manager, and employee wait for stimulus money, the return of customers, or a resurrection of interest in their work environs? Shouldn't everyone feel and be free to make a change, even if that means to pick up work they would do in other circumstances, if this is what is needed to make money flow in their worlds?

. . .The waiting and uncertainty have been partially related to Congress "teasing" stimulus over and over again. . .Definitely would hate to be a restaurant owner sitting there and wondering if it's getting done or not and have to make a binary choice: close down for good or stay open and hope for an economic rebound.

No easy answers, I'm afraid. My position is: I'll believe it when I see it. Everyday Bloomberg and CNBC have stories about stimulus and for six months nothing has gotten done. It might get signed TOMORROW, but I'm now just like...show me, then I'll believe you.

That being said, a $900 billion deal does look ...hopeful?: -------------->
[www.cnbc.com]

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/16/2020 08:15PM by shoptastic.

.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/22/2022 12:39AM by shoptastic.

How many people chose the weekly fed money over jobs that they would prefer not to take? Someone, somewhere, probably knows how to calculate this. But what does it mean?

... That the $600 one-time payment is preferable to ongoing weekly payments?
... That the fed will not make the mistake of over-paying if it is possible to match payment to actual lack?
,,, That I have just a little too much free time today and watched news instead of working on personal projects?


... ?

@Shop-et-al wrote:

How many people chose the weekly fed money over jobs that they would prefer not to take?

Early on, probably not many. We had 30 million unemployed and 5 million job openings. But, I also think this misses the forest for the trees. Of course, lazy people and cheats exist. But, that doesn't mean we should punish the genuinely needy, because a few of these folks out there are gaming the system.

And, if one really wants to focus on robbery, I'd look at QE's contribution to wealth inequality and the corporate bond market bailouts. That's a bigger story than a poor person staying on enhanced unemployment for a few months. It's like being a detective at a bank robbery crime scene, where all clues point to millions stolen by a manager and focusing all of one's attention on the pencils and paperclips a bank teller steals on occasion from the supply room.

Even a huge stimulus package isn't so wonderful for the poor long-term (or lower middle-class). There will be inflation ahead and the poor often pay the worst. They don't have assets to fight it. When the Federal Reserve has to suppress interest rates below inflation to pay back the debt, the poor, who don't have assets (real estate, stocks, gold, etc.) and at best keep a little bit of money in the bank, will be robbed of their purchasing power. Because they don't have much money, the little they have cannot be wisely put into the stock market oftentimes, as they may need it on a moment's notice (car breaks down, refrigerator dies, etc.). If the market is down for a short while, that could mean a loss for them. That means it must go into a bank account, where savings, CDs, MMFs, etc. yield less than 1%. Add to that consumer price inflation and the poor could be in dire straights in the years ahead without radical political change in this country. In the 1940's, alone, people holding Treasuries lost 30% of their worth (those holding cash lost more) from inflation and intentional suppressed interest rates. The 1940's look likely to repeat themselves in the 2020's.

So, I don't envy someone who is poor and unemployed and shall be getting temporary stimulus. The years ahead could be brutal.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/18/2020 02:40AM by shoptastic.

Congressional leaders agree on $900 billion deal. Vote possible on Monday:
[www.bloomberg.com]
[www.cnbc.com]

@ wrote:

Congress reached a deal Sunday on a $900 billion coronavirus relief package, a long-delayed effort to boost an American health-care system and economy buckling under the weight of the pandemic.

Congressional leaders announced the agreement on a coronavirus aid and full-year government spending bill after days of start-and-stop efforts to finish a deal. They have not yet released text of the more than $2 trillion legislation, which they hope to pass in the next day.

“At long last, we have the bipartisan breakthrough the country has needed,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said on the Senate floor Sunday.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/21/2020 12:17AM by shoptastic.