Where's the economic market folks at today?

[missouridawg]

I obviously shouldn't let twitter get me nervous, but it feels like some things happened in the international space with China and several other currencies over the weekend. Is there anything to that?

I read the rumor that China cancelled almost all of their flights and train routes on Sunday, and also asked their banks to buy stocks to prevent some panic selling events. Any of this true?

 

[aTotal360]

No clue. Rumors Xi got arrested and there's a coup. Another rumor is they are gearing up to take over Taiwan. One is for sure, don't count on them to be transparent.

 

[horshack.sixpack]

I saw some rumor about a coup in China. We needed something else to impact supply chain and market uncertainty.***

 

[jethreauxdawg]

Buy something tomorrow

 

[Hugh's Burner Phone]

I saw some rumor about a coup in China. We needed something else to impact supply chain and market uncertainty.***

Walmart is 17ed if this is true.

 

[missouridawg]

Walmart is 17ed if this is true.

Yep. I own a business that has pitched to Walmart before and we are competing with a Chinese based manufacturer who practicallly gives the **** to Walmart to sell. Walmart has a huge push on "buying domestic" over these last few years, but I think it's all marketing posturing rather than an actual business plan.

 

[BoomBoom.sixpack]

I obviously shouldn't let twitter get me nervous, but it feels like some things happened in the international space with China and several other currencies over the weekend. Is there anything to that?

I read the rumor that China cancelled almost all of their flights and train routes on Sunday, and also asked their banks to buy stocks to prevent some panic selling events. Any of this true?

Outside of China, which I have no clue about, it's become obvious that the Fed is overplaying its hand, and the UK is being crapped on by markets for trying to revive Reaganomics. I will be reallocating from international exposure to bonds and cash today.

 

[horshack.sixpack]

Be wary of how Walmart's return for any reason policy impacts you if you pursue this. No direct experience, but have heard that all that crap gets sent back to the mfg for credit, or used to.

 

[johnson86-1]

Walmart is 17ed if this is true.

Depends on what the coup is. If it's just a group of insiders scapegoating Zi and they have solid support, then it could happen without too much disruption.

Anything else, then yea, they are probably 17ed, although whoever is in charge will have a lot of incentive to keep the things making them money going. But not going to matter if all their attention and energy is needed just to take and maintain control.

 

[Drebin]

Outside of China, which I have no clue about, it's become obvious that the Fed is overplaying its hand, and the UK is being crapped on by markets for trying to revive Reaganomics. I will be reallocating from international exposure to bonds and cash today.

It's gonna continue to be bumpy until we can get republicans in power here and get the economy straightened out. Then reaganomics will make a triumphant return and it will be time to make our 401k's great again.

 

[T-TownDawgg]

The entire world economy is the biggest Ponzi scheme in history. National and corporate debt bonds are about to be the undoing of this quantitative easing experiment. Another fed rate hike or two, and the US will be spending more annually on bond interest payments than defense spending.

 

[johnson86-1]

The entire world economy is the biggest Ponzi scheme in history. National and corporate debt bonds are about to be the undoing of this quantitative easing experiment. Another fed rate hike or two, and the US will be spending more annually on bond interest payments than defense spending.

Yup. Lots of stuff that you can get away with with a growing population become catastrophic with a flat or even just more slowly growing population. Going to be interesting watching to see how long young people will accept larger, older populations voting for younger people to pay more and more to support them.

 

[CookieMonster.sixpack]

It's gonna continue to be bumpy until we can get republicans in power here and get the economy straightened out. Then reaganomics will make a triumphant return and it will be time to make our 401k's great again.

People can dislike this all they want, but it would be a shame to endure Jimmy Carter 2.0 and not get to enjoy Reagan 2.0 too.

 

[thatsbaseball]

I'm more curious how long young tax payers will be supportive of young non-taxpayers.

 

[missouridawg]

I'm more curious how long young tax payers will be supportive of young non-taxpayers.

Racist nazi*

 

[wsjmsu75]

It's gonna continue to be bumpy until we can get republicans in power here and get the economy straightened out. Then reaganomics will make a triumphant return and it will be time to make our 401k's great again.

In before the lock. My 401k and IRA had their best performance from 2009 to 2019, after the big market crash of 2008 when a Republican was in the White House. Pretty sure the Dems were "in power" longer than the GOP during that time period. Of course we have total gridlock in DC now where neither side wants to work with the other. So I'm really not sure that it matters which side is "in power" on that issue.

 

[johnson86-1]

I'm more curious how long young tax payers will be supportive of young non-taxpayers.

That's a good question too. May make a weird voting block where there is one coalition of old people and non-working young people voting to hammer the working class, with the opposite coalition being young workers and old people who don't like watching their kid(s) get screwed. THat's obviously nowhere near where it breaks down now, but as workers get hit harder and harder to support retirees and to a lesser extent, young non-working people, it's probably going to be a bigger issue.

 

[Cooterpoot]

This economy is calling for drastic measures
View attachment 25389

 

[johnson86-1]

This economy is calling for drastic measures
View attachment 25389

Put a 5 in front of that number and I'd seriously consider it. Put a 10 in front of it and I'd go ahead and call Kruk to tell him I'm joining the club.

 

[mstateglfr]

It's gonna continue to be bumpy until we can get republicans in power here and get the economy straightened out. Then reaganomics will make a triumphant return and it will be time to make our 401k's great again.

Its just so over the top and inaccurate that its clearly sarcasm, yet its serious.

 

[dudehead]

It's gonna continue to be bumpy until we can get republicans in power here and get the economy straightened out. Then reaganomics will make a triumphant return and it will be time to make our 401k's great again.

Reagonomics spawned our total accumulated US debt:

 

[WilCoDawg]

This economy is calling for drastic measures
View attachment 25389

There’s several on here that couldn’t donate to this even if they wanted to.

 

[horshack.sixpack]

I'm just here waiting on someone to tell me about Team National.***

 

[MrKotter]

No clue. Rumors Xi got arrested and there's a coup. .

That rumor is completely false.

 

[wsjmsu75]

That's a good question too. May make a weird voting block where there is one coalition of old people and non-working young people voting to hammer the working class, with the opposite coalition being young workers and old people who don't like watching their kid(s) get screwed. THat's obviously nowhere near where it breaks down now, but as workers get hit harder and harder to support retirees and to a lesser extent, young non-working people, it's probably going to be a bigger issue.

I'm an almost 70 year old retiree who helped to support millions of the younger generations, either directly or indirectly, thru my 50 years of paying Federal and State income taxes and social security taxes. And btw, I am still a few years away from getting as many benefit dollars as what I contributed. So there is a good chance that I could die before the younger generations have to support me.

 

[johnson86-1]

Reagonomics spawned our total accumulated US debt:

Indirectly. It wasn't reagonomics that caused massive spending. But the "starve the beast" approach just gave republicans an excuse to not fight spending very hard if at all.

 

[johnson86-1]

I'm an almost 70 year old retiree who helped to support millions of the younger generations, either directly or indirectly, thru my 50 years of paying Federal and State income taxes and social security taxes. And btw, I am still a few years away from getting as many benefit dollars as what I contributed. So there is a good chance that I could die before the younger generations have to support me.

Unless you raised a lot of children, you didn't do much to directly support the younger generation. You paid taxes and the taxes (and then some) were spent. Regardless, the people that your money went to mostly won't be the ones paying for your social security. And it doesn't matter how many social security taxes you paid. That money was spent when it was collected. So if you are getting social security now, workers are supporting you to that extent.

 

[wsjmsu75]

Unless you raised a lot of children, you didn't do much to directly support the younger generation. You paid taxes and the taxes (and then some) were spent. Regardless, the people that your money went to mostly won't be the ones paying for your social security. And it doesn't matter how many social security taxes you paid. That money was spent when it was collected. So if you are getting social security now, workers are supporting you to that extent.

Apparently you missed my point. A LOT of those taxes that I paid went to pay for social benefits for poor families like food stamps and cash assistance. And what is new about transferring funds from the working tax payers to retirees with benefits? As I said, I was supporting retirees for 50 years. And also like I said, for a while yet I haven't collected as much as I paid in. So the younger generation has yet to be supporting me.

 

[thatsbaseball]

I'm afraid the main "workers" we SS recipients are depending on now run the printing presses for the treasury **

 

[wdawg44]

Those taxes you paid for welfare mostly went to politicians, at least from what I have seen on a state level.

 

[wsjmsu75]

Those taxes you paid for welfare mostly went to politicians, at least from what I have seen on a state level.

Oh no doubt. Corruption and greed will be the downfall of man kind. But having worked as an IT consultant at MDHS for 25 years, I can assure you that eligible applicants were receiving all the benefits they were eligible for. Otherwise, especially in this state, there would have been a **** storm about it in the news.

 

[johnson86-1]

Apparently you missed my point. A LOT of those taxes that I paid went to pay for social benefits for poor families like food stamps and cash assistance.

That's fine, but that's supporting poor families, not the younger generation.

And what is new about transferring funds from the working payers to retirees with benefits? As I said, I was supporting retirees for 50 years..

There's nothing new about it, but you said you had been supporting younger generations, not retirees. AGreed you've been supporting retirees (and also contributing to the general fund since a lot of that time social security would have been running a surplus (at least in the same sense that somebody that puts $5k in a savings account while running up $10k of debt is running a surplus).

And also like I said, for a while yet I haven't collected as much as I paid in. So the younger generation has yet to be supporting me.

And I was pointing out that what you paid in taxes in the past doesn't change whether workers are paying to support you now. If you are receiving social security, that means current workers are paying to support you. That's how the program works.

 

[Cantdoitsal]

Your Graph proves your statement is wrong. And BTW, not a dime gets spent until a bill comes from the HOR which was controlled by the D's during his entire tenure in the WH. Denying the Economic Boom of Reaganomics is childish.

 

[dudehead]

Your Graph proves your statement is wrong. And BTW, not a dime gets spent until a bill comes from the HOR which was controlled by the D's during his entire tenure in the WH. Denying the Economic Boom of Reaganomics is childish.

I'm not denying the economic expansion that occurred under Reagan but just that it was not paid for on an ongoing basis. Friedman thought that starving the beast would reduce the size of our government and convinced the Rs that it would assure small, limited government. The opposite occurred when both Rs and Ds realized they could just keep borrowing to finance expansion, tax cuts, military forays all over the world, a chicken in every pot, etc.

the bottom line is that my generation didn't pay its bills. We are just passing the ticket to our children and grandchildren to pay. If digital currency or something else causes the dollar to no longer be the world's reserve currency, then a hard, hard rain is gonna come.

 

[BoomBoom.sixpack]

Apparently you missed my point. A LOT of those taxes that I paid went to pay for social benefits for poor families like food stamps and cash assistance. And what is new about transferring funds from the working tax payers to retirees with benefits? As I said, I was supporting retirees for 50 years. And also like I said, for a while yet I haven't collected as much as I paid in. So the younger generation has yet to be supporting me.

Well let's say the bill to support your own generation was $10k (the generation before you having paid for itself). And you paid $5k and wrote an IOU for your kids to pay $5k. Now your kids are paying $10k for themselves plus $5k for you (or really $10k plus another $5k IOU, or however you want to frame this part).

Then you run around in retirement claiming you paid $5k so you did your part Yada Yada Yada.

Get it yet? You paid less taxes than you would have if your generation wasn't passing the bill off to the next one.

 

[BoomBoom.sixpack]

It's gonna continue to be bumpy until we can get republicans in power here and get the economy straightened out. Then reaganomics will make a triumphant return and it will be time to make our 401k's great again.

Yes, because what we need is more cash in hand for billionaires and mega corps. By God the stock market is starving! Tax cuts will fix it! Paid for with deficits, of course!

 

[Cantdoitsal]

How was it not paid for when revenues to our Treausury doubled during his 8 year tenure? (28% if inflation is incorporated into the numbers). The differnce between Reagan's policies from Carter's is astonic and the reslults are obvious.

 

[Barkman Turner Overdrive]

I'm more curious how long young tax payers will be supportive of young non-taxpayers.

I am afraid these young “taxpayers” have been brain washed to believe everything from housing to health care to childcare should be “free.”

 

[BoomBoom.sixpack]

How was it not paid for when revenues to our Treausury doubled during his 8 year tenure? (28% if inflation is incorporated into the numbers). The differnce between Reagan's policies from Carter's is astonic and the reslults are obvious.

If only it were that easy to parse results from Presidential terms. We could just point to the Clinton and Obama years and be done with the argument!

But in reality, Reagan cut taxes rich people pay in '81, revenues cratered, and he raised taxes regular people pay (SS) in '83, then revenues went up.

Imo, a supply side cut was probably not a bad thing at the time. Doesn't mean we would profit from one now. We ain't hurting for capital. Different problems require different solutions, different tools.

And let's not rewrite history. Reaganonimics said the tax cuts would pay for everything. It specifically said Congress didn't need to cut spending. So let's not blame Congress for playing along.

 

[karlchilders.sixpack]

Still, I just sold what little I had in WMT

About 6:45pm.

Never Trust Nobody!