+1hambone1 wrote:It's not just Wall Street. It's our materialistic greed, too. Nobody forced us to live beyond our means.arctic ranger wrote:I suppose I am benefiting from wall streets greed as well
sadly a lot of the time it's because the house prices were so over inflated that a 150k home was too small and crap - I wouldn't say that's greed for the person wanting to house their family, probably more the estate agentmassiveheadpain wrote:+1hambone1 wrote:It's not just Wall Street. It's our materialistic greed, too. Nobody forced us to live beyond our means.arctic ranger wrote:I suppose I am benefiting from wall streets greed as well
I would like to think that most people have the common sense to realize that they should not have bought a 300k home when really all they could afford 150K. It was greed and delusion of many people that caused this. We like to ignore our problems until it is too late
I agree - kind of like resetting ourselves and remembering how much we actually NEEDhambone1 wrote:It will all sort itself out. People are now unable to borrow beyond their means. Mortgages will once again be linked to your income. Credit card limits will be low and also linked to your income.
If you want something, earn the money and buy it. The days of irresponsible borrowing are over. I see that as a good thing.
Pasha wrote:Do you think this World Financial Crisis will set the premises to a lot of merge and acquisition between companies?
Do we have to expect that small companies be sucked into bigger ones?
Can our beloved small companies be doomed?
Let's share our feelings.
- Best
- Pasha
Hey Forge,forge wrote:I agree - kind of like resetting ourselves and remembering how much we actually NEEDhambone1 wrote:It will all sort itself out. People are now unable to borrow beyond their means. Mortgages will once again be linked to your income. Credit card limits will be low and also linked to your income.
If you want something, earn the money and buy it. The days of irresponsible borrowing are over. I see that as a good thing.
there might be some painful times beforehand though
my partner came from a class she's doing telling me all about this old woman teacher she has who is fully freaking out about it, telling everyone in her class it's 5 times worse than the great depression, stock up on food and tents etc - I was laughing mostly at the panic, but the worrying thing about it is there are probably a lot of people around freaking out like that - and this is the biggest irony of the whole thing, this media driven fear frenzy is what will make everyone's worst fears happen because everyone seems to be too shit scared to just get on with their lives and resume trading etc
this fear is a self fulfilling prophecy
the thing is this woman's generation, just like the generation of my step father, the ones immediately before the boomers, were the kids of the people who lived through the last depression. I know my step father was permanently affected by that as a result - his father totally drilled it into him about being prepared for when it all goes wrong etc etc because he lost his car (when cars were still a big novelty for working class) and so on - so I understand that generation being anxious, because they heard about it first hand, not only the depression but war/rations etcelxicano wrote: Hey Forge,
The bottom line is that we haven't reached the bottom line.
I'm not saying anyone should freak out and panic, but it wouldn't hurt to stock up if you don't have options should you lose your job and governments are unable to cover costs through unemployment benefits (depending on country).
The worst part of this is that no one can accurately predict the outcome since there are so many factor as this is a global economy.
Many predictions were based on the US alone facing this problem and many models for faster recovery were based on foreign consumerism (of course speaking from US perspective here). The idea was that this would sustain our economy while it "rights" itself and then it would allow the US to regain its place as the largest importer, which in turn sustains other economies. It was meant to be a win-win situation in the long run because everyone one supported everyone.
Again... I still don't see need to panic, but I'm sure the teacher was exaggerating to show the importance of this situation since younger people (and I still include myself here) historically are not prepared for these situations.
you just want to hope if it does get that bad that you have Obama in because a Democrat might actually do something to help the poor, not sure how another republican admin would help there considering they seemed to help it happen and steal the silverware on the way out - Dubbaya refers to 'the elite' as his base.....etc...But unlike then, the federal government is a huge part of the economy (20 percent versus 3 percent in 1929) and its spending -- for Social Security, defense, roads -- provides greater stabilization. Unlike then, government officials have moved quickly, if clumsily, to contain the crisis.
We need to remind ourselves that economic slumps -- though wrenching and disillusioning for millions -- rarely become national tragedies. Since the late 1940s, the United States has suffered 10 recessions. On average, they've lasted 10 months and involved peak monthly unemployment of 7.6 percent; the worst (those of 1973-75 and 1981-82) both lasted 16 months and had peak unemployment of 9.0 percent and 10.8 percent, respectively. We are almost certainly in a recession now; but joblessness, 6.1 percent in September, would have to rise spectacularly to match post-World War II highs.
The stock market tells a similar story. There have been 10 previous postwar bear markets, defined as declines of at least 20 percent in the Standard & Poor's 500 index. The average decline was 31.5 percent; those of 1973-74 and 2000-02 were nearly 50 percent. By contrast, the S&P's low point so far (Monday, Sept. 29) was 29 percent below the peak reached in October 2007.
The Great Depression that followed the stock market's collapse in October 1929 was a different beast. By the low point in July 1932, stocks had dropped almost 90 percent from their peak. The accompanying devastation -- bankruptcies, foreclosures, bread lines -- lasted a decade. Even in 1940, unemployment was almost 15 percent. Unlike postwar recessions, the Depression submitted neither to self-correcting market mechanisms or government policies.
Forge, I agree with you 100%forge wrote:the thing is this woman's generation, just like the generation of my step father, the ones immediately before the boomers, were the kids of the people who lived through the last depression. I know my step father was permanently affected by that as a result - his father totally drilled it into him about being prepared for when it all goes wrong etc etc because he lost his car (when cars were still a big novelty for working class) and so on - so I understand that generation being anxious, because they heard about it first hand, not only the depression but war/rations etcelxicano wrote: Hey Forge,
The bottom line is that we haven't reached the bottom line.
I'm not saying anyone should freak out and panic, but it wouldn't hurt to stock up if you don't have options should you lose your job and governments are unable to cover costs through unemployment benefits (depending on country).
The worst part of this is that no one can accurately predict the outcome since there are so many factor as this is a global economy.
Many predictions were based on the US alone facing this problem and many models for faster recovery were based on foreign consumerism (of course speaking from US perspective here). The idea was that this would sustain our economy while it "rights" itself and then it would allow the US to regain its place as the largest importer, which in turn sustains other economies. It was meant to be a win-win situation in the long run because everyone one supported everyone.
Again... I still don't see need to panic, but I'm sure the teacher was exaggerating to show the importance of this situation since younger people (and I still include myself here) historically are not prepared for these situations.
but things are very different today - i posted a link from I think 'real clear politics' - maybe in this thread - that went over all the differences between now and 1929 and there is far more in place now to deal with it than there was - EDIT : here it is: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... _1929.html
you just want to hope if it does get that bad that you have Obama in because a Democrat might actually do something to help the poor, not sure how another republican admin would help there considering they seemed to help it happen and steal the silverware on the way out - Dubbaya refers to 'the elite' as his base.....etc...But unlike then, the federal government is a huge part of the economy (20 percent versus 3 percent in 1929) and its spending -- for Social Security, defense, roads -- provides greater stabilization. Unlike then, government officials have moved quickly, if clumsily, to contain the crisis.
We need to remind ourselves that economic slumps -- though wrenching and disillusioning for millions -- rarely become national tragedies. Since the late 1940s, the United States has suffered 10 recessions. On average, they've lasted 10 months and involved peak monthly unemployment of 7.6 percent; the worst (those of 1973-75 and 1981-82) both lasted 16 months and had peak unemployment of 9.0 percent and 10.8 percent, respectively. We are almost certainly in a recession now; but joblessness, 6.1 percent in September, would have to rise spectacularly to match post-World War II highs.
The stock market tells a similar story......
As for where I am, Australia has a large budget surplus and it's a commodity based economy, so we're in a pretty good position, I don't think we're going to get that bad
and really I don't think it will get that bad in the US either - if the damn media stops scaring the shit out of everyone
the world is vastly different than it was in 1929
