I've never been on Twitter. I guess I'm missing something important. Maybe I'll have to give it a look.rewcox wrote:Keep you eyes on Twitter, you'll be one of the first to know.Matchmaker wrote:If I had to make a guess, I would say that Trump will be the President during 7 years of prosperity for America and Israel (the temple gets built) and then we'll see 7 years of war, famine, pestilence, disease, civil unrest, natural disasters, return of the tribes, and building of the New Jerusalem, followed by the Second Coming.
Of course, it could all collapse into chaos tomorrow. Nobody knows!
When is the next economic crisis?
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2266
Re: When is the next economic crisis?
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9077
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
Re: When is the next economic crisis?
Prosperity may have begun this quarter should 3% growth continue through next quarter i.e. 2 consecutive quarters of 3% growth similar to the definition of a recession being two quarters decline in GDP.Matchmaker wrote: ↑January 30th, 2017, 3:16 am If I had to make a guess, I would say that Trump will be the President during 7 years of prosperity for America and Israel (the temple gets built) and then we'll see 7 years of war, famine, pestilence, disease, civil unrest, natural disasters, return of the tribes, and building of the New Jerusalem, followed by the Second Coming.
Of course, it could all collapse into chaos tomorrow. Nobody knows!
Atlanta Fed raises U.S. second quarter GDP growth view to 3.2 percent
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... =ousivMolt
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1795
Re: When is the next economic crisis?
I believe your answer is the closest to correct.Matchmaker wrote: ↑January 30th, 2017, 3:16 am If I had to make a guess, I would say that Trump will be the President during 7 years of prosperity for America and Israel (the temple gets built) and then we'll see 7 years of war, famine, pestilence, disease, civil unrest, natural disasters, return of the tribes, and building of the New Jerusalem, followed by the Second Coming.
Of course, it could all collapse into chaos tomorrow. Nobody knows!
Dates to watch for economic shockwaves: (grabbed these from my other post and realized I had labeled some things wrong. Sorry. Corrected here. Also added important date points.)
2007-2008 Oldest of boomers reach early retirement; demographically predicted economic downturn; economically predicted reduction of birth rates.
2008-2017 birth rates continue to drop; August 2016 CDC begins to release fertility rates quartly instead of annually because of steep declines since 2007.
2024 "Generation Not Born" (babies not born in 2008) would be entering employment (unskilled labor-after school jobs). They cannot, they were not born.
2027 oldest of boomer generation hits early retirement
2030 "Generation Not Born" would be skilled labor-post undergraduate college. They cannot, they were not born.
2031 Oldest of baby boomers hits early retirement.
2030-2040 Estimated world population peak. (This may shift because of the popularity of states passing assisted suicide laws. I fear that "encouraging" the older generation to move on and save resources for the younger is on the horizon. Horrifying, but a real possibility considering the trends.) I also believe that the next date I posted is probably unimportant for the reason I just listed.
2049 Oldest of baby boomers hit full life expectancy of 85 years old.
-
- captain of 100
- Posts: 164
-
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1795
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2266
Re: When is the next economic crisis?
War also helps get a country out of a recession or depression, as seen during the period from WW1 to WW2.
-
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
Re: When is the next economic crisis?
A whole lot of economists say that's not true:Matchmaker wrote: ↑June 16th, 2017, 2:07 amWar also helps get a country out of a recession or depression, as seen during the period from WW1 to WW2.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-1 ... od-economy
One choice quote from the article:
"This is a no-brainer, if you think about it. We’ve been in Afghanistan for almost twice as long as World War II. We’ve been in Iraq for years longer than WWII. We’ve been involved in 7 or 8 wars in the last decade. And yet [the economy is still unstable]. If wars really helped the economy, don’t you think things would have improved by now? Indeed,the Iraq war alone could end up costing more than World War II. And given the other wars we’ve been involved in this decade, I believe that the total price tag for the so-called “War on Terror” will definitely support that of the “Greatest War”."
-
- captain of 100
- Posts: 800
Re: When is the next economic crisis?
It'd helped in WWII right after the great depression, but our situation now is nowhere comparable. Now they only enrich arms manufacturers and members of the Deep State.Silver wrote: ↑June 16th, 2017, 5:33 amA whole lot of economists say that's not true:Matchmaker wrote: ↑June 16th, 2017, 2:07 amWar also helps get a country out of a recession or depression, as seen during the period from WW1 to WW2.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-1 ... od-economy
One choice quote from the article:
"This is a no-brainer, if you think about it. We’ve been in Afghanistan for almost twice as long as World War II. We’ve been in Iraq for years longer than WWII. We’ve been involved in 7 or 8 wars in the last decade. And yet [the economy is still unstable]. If wars really helped the economy, don’t you think things would have improved by now? Indeed,the Iraq war alone could end up costing more than World War II. And given the other wars we’ve been involved in this decade, I believe that the total price tag for the so-called “War on Terror” will definitely support that of the “Greatest War”."
-
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
Re: When is the next economic crisis?
No, it didn't. It helped the MIC, not the common man. WW2's lasting legacy is the treason of FDR & George Marshall along with the creation of the OSS/CIA.I'LLMAKEYAFAMOUS wrote: ↑June 16th, 2017, 5:38 amIt'd helped in WWII right after the great depression, but our situation now is nowhere comparable. Now they only enrich arms manufacturers and members of the Deep State.Silver wrote: ↑June 16th, 2017, 5:33 amA whole lot of economists say that's not true:Matchmaker wrote: ↑June 16th, 2017, 2:07 amWar also helps get a country out of a recession or depression, as seen during the period from WW1 to WW2.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-1 ... od-economy
One choice quote from the article:
"This is a no-brainer, if you think about it. We’ve been in Afghanistan for almost twice as long as World War II. We’ve been in Iraq for years longer than WWII. We’ve been involved in 7 or 8 wars in the last decade. And yet [the economy is still unstable]. If wars really helped the economy, don’t you think things would have improved by now? Indeed,the Iraq war alone could end up costing more than World War II. And given the other wars we’ve been involved in this decade, I believe that the total price tag for the so-called “War on Terror” will definitely support that of the “Greatest War”."
I recommend a quick Google search of rationing during WW2. Rationing is never an indicator of a robust economy.
-
- captain of 100
- Posts: 800
Re: When is the next economic crisis?
From reading the different opinions on whether or not WWII helped the economy, it seems to come down to in what way did it help. Rationing had far more to do with the war effort than as an indicator of the health of the economy as a whole.Silver wrote: ↑June 16th, 2017, 5:43 amNo, it didn't. It helped the MIC, not the common man. WW2's lasting legacy is the treason of FDR & George Marshall along with the creation of the OSS/CIA.I'LLMAKEYAFAMOUS wrote: ↑June 16th, 2017, 5:38 amIt'd helped in WWII right after the great depression, but our situation now is nowhere comparable. Now they only enrich arms manufacturers and members of the Deep State.Silver wrote: ↑June 16th, 2017, 5:33 amA whole lot of economists say that's not true:Matchmaker wrote: ↑June 16th, 2017, 2:07 am
War also helps get a country out of a recession or depression, as seen during the period from WW1 to WW2.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-1 ... od-economy
One choice quote from the article:
"This is a no-brainer, if you think about it. We’ve been in Afghanistan for almost twice as long as World War II. We’ve been in Iraq for years longer than WWII. We’ve been involved in 7 or 8 wars in the last decade. And yet [the economy is still unstable]. If wars really helped the economy, don’t you think things would have improved by now? Indeed,the Iraq war alone could end up costing more than World War II. And given the other wars we’ve been involved in this decade, I believe that the total price tag for the so-called “War on Terror” will definitely support that of the “Greatest War”."
I recommend a quick Google search of rationing during WW2. Rationing is never an indicator of a robust economy.
The biggest factor was the effect the war had on unemployment. It's indisputable that unemployment decreased due to the war. People will say that the economy only boomed when the war ended and rationing and regulation were ended, but had unemployment remained where it was at the start of the war, what's the likelihood that boom would have been able to take place?
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1795
Re: When is the next economic crisis?
War bringing prosperity is like daylight savings making the sun shine longer. It's an illusion.
The sun shines as long as it shines, get out of bed or don't .
Perhaps people were employed because of the production of weapons needed during war, but those same people getting a paycheck, we're paying the taxes to finance the war. So really: money in my pocket today, larger debt or inflation for the country. What of real value was produced?
Also, from a purely economic view, dead people reduce human capital. We are all worse off financially from war,even when we have more borrowed dollars in our pockets.
The sun shines as long as it shines, get out of bed or don't .
Perhaps people were employed because of the production of weapons needed during war, but those same people getting a paycheck, we're paying the taxes to finance the war. So really: money in my pocket today, larger debt or inflation for the country. What of real value was produced?
Also, from a purely economic view, dead people reduce human capital. We are all worse off financially from war,even when we have more borrowed dollars in our pockets.