|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On February 28 2013 08:34 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2013 12:43 Sermokala wrote:
I don't think anyone is fooling themselves into thinking that the bailout and TARP was an actual idea that Bush had. It was Obamas bill and plan that he didn't want to wait until he took office so bush signed it into law on behalf of obama. Bush signed TARP, which was designed by his own Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, into law.... on behalf of candidate Obama? what are you on?
TARP was designed to be given out in two chunks, 350b, and 450b if the president went to congress and asked for it. Bush asked then president elect Obama if he wanted the second part to go out. Obama said yes, but Bush was still president so he went to congress for him.
Also note Obama voted yes on the TARP bill, so it really doesn't matter in the end.
Bush signed the bill into law because he had no idea what was happening and his economic advisers said it would be another great depression if he didn't sign it (which is what Bush has said in many many interviews).
|
On March 01 2013 07:24 Seldentar wrote:"The across-the-board cuts set to go into effect at the end of the week will hurt the economy, and they should be stopped. But if Congress insists on cutting anyone's salary, they should cut their own paychecks first..." I was sent this petition in an email and signed it. Figured I'd share it on TL. If anyone else is interested, here it is: http://pac.signon.org/sign/paycuts-for-congress-1?source=mo&id=63488-25042616-C8uwESx
They probably really would do it as a gesture, but the 27th Amendment prohibits it.
|
Senate Republicans have filibustered a Democratic bill that would pay down sequestration’s indiscriminate spending cuts for a year.
Though the vote outcome was never in doubt, the legislation’s demise assures that Congress will miss Friday’s sequestration deadline, and federal agencies will begin cutting projects and services.
The final vote was 51-49. It needed 60 votes to pass. Sens. Kay Hagan (D-NC), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), and Mark Pryor (D-AR) voted with a unified GOP conference to block the bill. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid also switched his vote from yes to no — a procedural maneuver that preserves his right to call the measure up for a vote again quickly in the future.
If the bill would have become law, it would have replaced tens of billions of dollars in spending cuts set to take place this year with 10 years’ worth of deficit reducing tax increases and targeted spending cuts. The revenue would have come largely from individuals making over $5 million a year, by imposing a minimum “Buffett Rule” tax on their earnings. The cuts would have been divided evenly between agriculture subsidies and defense spending.
Source
|
Believe it or not, but TARP was a good move. The issue was that it was done, and then politicians and policy makers patted themselves on the back for a job well done. Millions of people still had issues with their mortgages, construction nationwide screeched to a halt, and businesses would begin slashing jobs and hours like it was the macarena, but we saved the banks (and prevented the 2nd great depression). TARP as an isolated response worked well, but when you put it in context with how little was done for everybody else, it looks like shit.
On March 01 2013 07:39 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +Senate Republicans have filibustered a Democratic bill that would pay down sequestration’s indiscriminate spending cuts for a year.
Though the vote outcome was never in doubt, the legislation’s demise assures that Congress will miss Friday’s sequestration deadline, and federal agencies will begin cutting projects and services.
The final vote was 51-49. It needed 60 votes to pass. Sens. Kay Hagan (D-NC), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), and Mark Pryor (D-AR) voted with a unified GOP conference to block the bill. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid also switched his vote from yes to no — a procedural maneuver that preserves his right to call the measure up for a vote again quickly in the future.
If the bill would have become law, it would have replaced tens of billions of dollars in spending cuts set to take place this year with 10 years’ worth of deficit reducing tax increases and targeted spending cuts. The revenue would have come largely from individuals making over $5 million a year, by imposing a minimum “Buffett Rule” tax on their earnings. The cuts would have been divided evenly between agriculture subsidies and defense spending. Source
More posturing, more people going to be hurt, but politicians and pundits don't really give a damn as long as the deficit is reduced by some trivial amount this year.
|
I like this graph. I'm a bit worried about what liking it says about my brain though 
![[image loading]](http://ftalphaville.ft.com/files/2013/02/Screen-shot-2013-02-28-at-2.34.58-PM.png)
Yes, you begin there towards the middle, January 2004, and follow the boom up, and then back down as the housing market began to fade, move left towards the first signs of the coming subprime implosion, left again to the full-on Credit Crunch 2008/09/10, then up and right, slowly, to where we are reckoned to be today: on the cusp of a recovery in US housing.
Link
|
Is a swirlogram a thing? Looks like an index against the rate of change in that index?
O.o
|
On March 01 2013 09:18 ControlMonkey wrote:
Is a swirlogram a thing? Looks like an index against the rate of change in that index?
O.o
It swirls because the rate of change is measured against the previous month, and thus is plagued by cyclical trends. You are right though.
|
On March 01 2013 09:18 ControlMonkey wrote:
Is a swirlogram a thing? Looks like an index against the rate of change in that index?
O.o
It is now :D
|
Biofuelery
“CONGRESS should act to protect Americans from the… phantom fuel fine,” declared Jim Sensenbrenner, a representative from Wisconsin, in mid-February. He was railing against an idea Congress itself came up with, in 2007, but which has not worked out as planned: a requirement that refiners blend a certain amount of cellulosic ethanol (made from non-edible feedstock such as wood or grass, rather than corn) into the gasoline (petrol) they sell, or face a fine. The hitch is that hardly any cellulosic ethanol is available, making the fine rather unfair. ...
The EPA is supposed to base the requirement for each year on the projections of cellulosic fuel output made by another tentacle of the federal government, the Energy Information Administration. This year the EIA reckons America will pump out 5m gallons—already an optimistic view—yet the EPA has set its quota at 14m gallons. Refiners are furious, as are Republicans like Mr Sensenbrenner, who regularly decry the EPA’s meddling ways.
Link
Oh government, you so silly!
|
Total student debt has nearly tripled over the past eight years, a new report from the New York Federal Reserve has found.
Total student debt stands at $966 billion as of the fourth quarter of 2012, the N.Y. Fed said in press materials, with a 70 percent increase in both the number of borrowers and the average balance per person. The overall number of borrowers past due on their student loan payments has also grown, from under 10 percent in 2004 to 17 percent in 2012.
Fewer people with student loans are buying homes, according to data in the report. Of borrowers ages 25 to 30 who are taking out new mortgages, the percentage of those with student debt has fallen by half, from nearly 9 percent in 2005 to just above 4 percent in 2012.
The fed report sees a connection, stating, "The higher burden of student loans and higher delinquencies may affect borrowers' access to other types of credit and the performance of other debt."
This is what the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau cited last week when it announced a new inquiry into ways to allow graduates with private student loans to refinance.
CFPB Student Loan Ombudsman Rohit Chopra told reporters, "Many of us have raised questions about the student debt domino effect on the economy."
"I don't like to use the word 'crisis,' because it's a 'crisis' that really can't melt down the same way that the mortgage market did," Chopra said on HuffPost Live. "In fact, a lot of the student loan issues are just going to be a drag on the economy, because young people aren't going to be able to participate like a generation ago when they're making very large payments out of their salaries every single month instead of putting it to better use."
Source
Thankfully our politicians are keeping us from the bonds of Socialism that is free paid for education, granted we live in shitty housing while working 9 to 5 on a non living wage afterwards but hey... Murica!
|
On March 01 2013 11:18 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +Total student debt has nearly tripled over the past eight years, a new report from the New York Federal Reserve has found.
Total student debt stands at $966 billion as of the fourth quarter of 2012, the N.Y. Fed said in press materials, with a 70 percent increase in both the number of borrowers and the average balance per person. The overall number of borrowers past due on their student loan payments has also grown, from under 10 percent in 2004 to 17 percent in 2012.
Fewer people with student loans are buying homes, according to data in the report. Of borrowers ages 25 to 30 who are taking out new mortgages, the percentage of those with student debt has fallen by half, from nearly 9 percent in 2005 to just above 4 percent in 2012.
The fed report sees a connection, stating, "The higher burden of student loans and higher delinquencies may affect borrowers' access to other types of credit and the performance of other debt."
This is what the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau cited last week when it announced a new inquiry into ways to allow graduates with private student loans to refinance.
CFPB Student Loan Ombudsman Rohit Chopra told reporters, "Many of us have raised questions about the student debt domino effect on the economy."
"I don't like to use the word 'crisis,' because it's a 'crisis' that really can't melt down the same way that the mortgage market did," Chopra said on HuffPost Live. "In fact, a lot of the student loan issues are just going to be a drag on the economy, because young people aren't going to be able to participate like a generation ago when they're making very large payments out of their salaries every single month instead of putting it to better use." SourceThankfully our politicians are keeping us from the bonds of Socialism that is free paid for education, granted we live in shitty housing while working 9 to 5 on a non living wage afterwards but hey... Murica!
The student loan market should work a lot better once bankruptcy protection is restored.
Edit: Not sure why you are complaining about housing quality and income in the US. You ain't gonna do any better elsewhere on them two metrics.
|
On March 01 2013 11:50 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2013 11:18 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Total student debt has nearly tripled over the past eight years, a new report from the New York Federal Reserve has found.
Total student debt stands at $966 billion as of the fourth quarter of 2012, the N.Y. Fed said in press materials, with a 70 percent increase in both the number of borrowers and the average balance per person. The overall number of borrowers past due on their student loan payments has also grown, from under 10 percent in 2004 to 17 percent in 2012.
Fewer people with student loans are buying homes, according to data in the report. Of borrowers ages 25 to 30 who are taking out new mortgages, the percentage of those with student debt has fallen by half, from nearly 9 percent in 2005 to just above 4 percent in 2012.
The fed report sees a connection, stating, "The higher burden of student loans and higher delinquencies may affect borrowers' access to other types of credit and the performance of other debt."
This is what the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau cited last week when it announced a new inquiry into ways to allow graduates with private student loans to refinance.
CFPB Student Loan Ombudsman Rohit Chopra told reporters, "Many of us have raised questions about the student debt domino effect on the economy."
"I don't like to use the word 'crisis,' because it's a 'crisis' that really can't melt down the same way that the mortgage market did," Chopra said on HuffPost Live. "In fact, a lot of the student loan issues are just going to be a drag on the economy, because young people aren't going to be able to participate like a generation ago when they're making very large payments out of their salaries every single month instead of putting it to better use." SourceThankfully our politicians are keeping us from the bonds of Socialism that is free paid for education, granted we live in shitty housing while working 9 to 5 on a non living wage afterwards but hey... Murica! The student loan market should work a lot better once bankruptcy protection is restored.
The problem with that is if you can get out of student load debt with bankruptcy, then interest rates are going to go up so the government breaks even on those loans. You are loaning large amount of money out based on the assumption that it will get paid back with future earnings. With a house the bank can get the house back if you go bankrupt, but with a student loan there really isn't anything other than future earnings.
Ideally some of those massive open courses catch on to the point where you can take them for some form of college credit. That might actually pressure them to lower prices to more reasonable levels. My school raised prices over 30% in the 4 years I went there which is insane. Considering how much money they were spending on buildings there I don't think they knew what to do with all that money either.
|
On March 01 2013 12:14 DeltaX wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2013 11:50 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On March 01 2013 11:18 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Total student debt has nearly tripled over the past eight years, a new report from the New York Federal Reserve has found.
Total student debt stands at $966 billion as of the fourth quarter of 2012, the N.Y. Fed said in press materials, with a 70 percent increase in both the number of borrowers and the average balance per person. The overall number of borrowers past due on their student loan payments has also grown, from under 10 percent in 2004 to 17 percent in 2012.
Fewer people with student loans are buying homes, according to data in the report. Of borrowers ages 25 to 30 who are taking out new mortgages, the percentage of those with student debt has fallen by half, from nearly 9 percent in 2005 to just above 4 percent in 2012.
The fed report sees a connection, stating, "The higher burden of student loans and higher delinquencies may affect borrowers' access to other types of credit and the performance of other debt."
This is what the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau cited last week when it announced a new inquiry into ways to allow graduates with private student loans to refinance.
CFPB Student Loan Ombudsman Rohit Chopra told reporters, "Many of us have raised questions about the student debt domino effect on the economy."
"I don't like to use the word 'crisis,' because it's a 'crisis' that really can't melt down the same way that the mortgage market did," Chopra said on HuffPost Live. "In fact, a lot of the student loan issues are just going to be a drag on the economy, because young people aren't going to be able to participate like a generation ago when they're making very large payments out of their salaries every single month instead of putting it to better use." SourceThankfully our politicians are keeping us from the bonds of Socialism that is free paid for education, granted we live in shitty housing while working 9 to 5 on a non living wage afterwards but hey... Murica! The student loan market should work a lot better once bankruptcy protection is restored. The problem with that is if you can get out of student load debt with bankruptcy, then interest rates are going to go up so the government breaks even on those loans. You are loaning large amount of money out based on the assumption that it will get paid back with future earnings. With a house the bank can get the house back if you go bankrupt, but with a student loan there really isn't anything other than future earnings. Ideally some of those massive open courses catch on to the point where you can take them for some form of college credit. That might actually pressure them to lower prices to more reasonable levels. My school raised prices over 30% in the 4 years I went there which is insane. Considering how much money they were spending on buildings there I don't think they knew what to do with all that money either.
True that higher rates would be a downside but I see an anything goes loan policy as a big part of the overall problem.
|
It's not like bankruptcy doesn't cost you other things in possession as well. Filing for bankruptcy protects a handful of items you own, but the rest can be repo'd to pay back outstanding debts. We have systems for this for sole proprietors and partnerships, where the lines of credit and loans aren't able to be paid back with assets of the business in the case of bankruptcy, so they go after the owner's property. There is the possibility that people with nothing after they graduate will file for bankruptcy and banks or the US government will be SOL, but maybe that will change the discourse from, "Spoiled brats shouldn't get a degree in basketweaving," to, "How can we find a way to put these guys with college educations to work so they'll pay us back?"
|
Does higher education really need to cost money? I don't get it. Why should "these guys" have to pay anyone back for anything? It didn't USE to cost money...
|
On March 01 2013 12:56 sam!zdat wrote:
Does higher education really need to cost money? I don't get it. Why should "these guys" have to pay anyone back for anything? It didn't USE to cost money...
Professors like dem paychecks too much :p
|
Professors liked their paychecks before the days of user's fees, too...
edit: I know Harvey at some point talks about the introduction of user fees into the CUNY system, I believe after the NYC bankruptcy crisis... and I know user fees were instituted in the Swiss system sometime in the seventies (source: my thesis advisor). It's a pretty recent thing, to my knowledge
edit: I think with mass-distributed video lectures, you could have a pretty efficient community college system with just video lectures and TAs, who wouldn't cost you very much. I can think of at least one overeducated and underemployed american who would have loved the opportunity to make a small amount of money teaching a course of this type... 
edit: but idk. Does anybody have a convincing story about why tuition fees have been increasing so much? isn't it just lack of willingness to fund schools on the part of government? I don't see why we can't just have socialized education.
|
College fees don't worry me that much. But pre-school should be free.
|
On March 01 2013 13:04 ControlMonkey wrote:
College fees don't worry me that much. But pre-school should be free.
That's pretty thoughtful. I don't feel like searching and linking stuff, but I've heard that development at a very young age is really helpful toward future success in school and beyond.
|
of course, when politicians/economists say "education," they really just mean "STEM"... I think that's a bigger problem than anything else
edit: this is just it. The whole notion of "student debt" gives the impression that "education" is an investment into future earning potential. That's not what education is, that's what training is. Education is what you need in order to be a good citizen of a democratic society and a well-developed human being. It's not something you have that lets you make more money in the future. So the entire notion of education as an investment is ass-backwards. that's why it needs to be free - because otherwise only rich people can have it, and that defeats the entire notion of a democratic society, at which point we really should just stop pretending.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
