A pox on the baby boomers! DJ sub 7000.

[Babs]

It seems each time Obama talks about the economy and what he wants to do, the DJ drops. Today it's at it's lowest since '97.

Perhaps Obama should just shut the hell up and we might see a bit of a bump in the right direction.

This is like a Greek tragedy that has been unfolding for the last twenty years. Forces were set in motion long ago. Anything we do to try to prevent our collective fate will only hasten its arrival.

There are forces at work that are larger than our government. Unfortunately, I'm not certain our government is willing to concede that fact.

[RobinFinderson]

For one thing, I have to tell you there were much better titles for this thread. In light of current discussions elsewhere, I would have gone with "free falling."

For another, I'm really really REALLY tired of retirement-nearing individuals complaining that they're being "wiped out" by the downturn. If you're sixty, you had no business in the market anyway.

Nice. In case people aren't watching, the markets decided to really hemorrhage in the last few minutes of the session. Free fall is right.

[il Padrino Ute]

I understand the antipathy for Boomers. I really have no dog in the fight because I was born in 1958, right at the end of it, and don't share most of their passions. Unlike most Boomers, I also have small children.

But they gave us some wonderful things, mostly having to do with technology, like the lap top, the Internet, DVD's, CD's, etc.

I'm in your camp as well. I am technically considered a Baby Boomer as I was born in the last year of that generation, 1964. And like you, I don't have the same mindset of those born in the late 40s and early-mid 50s.

[SeattleUte]

This is like a Greek tragedy that has been unfolding for the last twenty years. Forces were set in motion long ago. Anything we do to try to prevent our collective fate will only hasten its arrival.

There are forces at work that are larger than our government. Unfortunately, I'm not certain our government is willing to concede that fact.

This is why voting for somene because you're unhappy with the incumbant over the economy is the worst basis possible for a vote. You have to vote based on principle, not the illusion that the president can fix the economy. The only thing he can really control is foreign policy.

[il Padrino Ute]

This is like a Greek tragedy that has been unfolding for the last twenty years. Forces were set in motion long ago. Anything we do to try to prevent our collective fate will only hasten its arrival.

There are forces at work that are larger than our government. Unfortunately, I'm not certain our government is willing to concede that fact.

I can agree with this. I'm not blaming Obama for the entire mess - he just happens to be the President now and things are getting worse each time he yammers on about his alleged plan for recovery.

Our government would have to almost take itself out of the equation in order for things to get better. And neither side wants to relinquish the power once they get it. It's really not a Repub or Dem thing.

[Babs]

...not the illusion that the president can fix the economy. The only thing he can really control is foreign policy.

In this case I think people were voting based on both.

[RobinFinderson]

This is why voting for somene because you're unhappy with the incumbant over the economy is the worst basis possible for a vote. You have to vote based on principle, not the illusion that the president can fix the economy. The only thing he can really control is foreign policy.

I think I really disagree with you here. Principles don't bend, and these times call for serious flexibility. I think that Obama was elected because he was the smartest man running, and the country realized it was going to need its most flexible, intelligent person in the days ahead.

[beelzebabette]

For another, I'm really really REALLY tired of retirement-nearing individuals complaining that they're being "wiped out" by the downturn. If you're sixty, you had no business in the market anyway.

Ding. The term retirement-nearing individuals isn't really accurate, however. If they hadn't started a move toward shorter-horizon investments, most of these people aren't actually going to be retiring anytime soon.

[Babs]

Ding. The term retirement-nearing individuals isn't really accurate, however. If they hadn't started a move toward shorter-horizon investments, most of these people are actually going to be retiring anytime soon.

Not on their own dime, anyway.

[SeattleUte]

I think I really disagree with you here. Principles don't bend, and these times call for serious flexibility. I think that Obama was elected because he was the smartest man running, and the country realized it was going to need its most flexible, intelligent person in the days ahead.

This could be a principled basis for voting for him. But he's only going to be able to tinker at the edges or set in motion (based on principles) policy initiatives that may only nudge the tide of events and make a difference a long time from now.

What I'm talking about is, say, how much faith do you put in entrepreneurship, concentration of capital, and rewarding risk as factors that have made America great? Do you agree with those economists who say that America tends to have shorter recessions and longer and stronger prosperity because of companies' ability to trim fat, lay off,etc.? If you think that all that is mythology and we need to emphasize a welfare state and redistribute wealth, even if that does mean a slower turn around of the economy, you voted well with Obama.

I'm not judging the values in this post. In fact, I think economic libertarians are receiving a severe test of faith as they did in the 1930's.

But these are things that should be considered in casting a vote. A falacouis thought proces is, "Gee the economy sucks; let's get a coach in here who can win some economic ball games."

[RobinFinderson]

I realize that I might be going a bit off the deep end here, which is why I'm hoping to get some perspective from our more economically minded posters, but is there a realistic chance that we could see the total global collapse of currency?

[SeattleUte]

I realize that I might be going a bit off the deep end here, which is why I'm hoping to get some perspective from our more economically minded posters, but is there a realistic chance that we could see the total global collapse of currency?

What do you mean by that exactly? That we revert to a barter economy like Europe before Rome or the Hebrews and the bedouins before they were civilized?

I think the real question is, have we been living a lie or is the market (stocks and real estate) oversold?

[cowboy]

I realize that I might be going a bit off the deep end here, which is why I'm hoping to get some perspective from our more economically minded posters, but is there a realistic chance that we could see the total global collapse of currency?

Possible? Yes. Likely? I don't think so. This thread is mixing and matching two separate risks: deflation and inflation. The collapse of a currency is caused by an over extended government that can't meet its obligations, and it is accompanied with hyper inflation.

The risk of the day is not inflation, rather it's deflation caused by the imploding financial system and the subsequent chain delevering that has taken place. This has taken trillions of dollars from the world economy, and the US can't print money fast enough to keep it from happening.

The markets aren't worried about inflation, and the collapse of the dollar is not concern at the moment. On the contrary, the dollar has become a safe haven for investors around the world. The dollar is trading at near term highs, as are treasurys, indicating that the world still has plenty of confidence in the currency.

[Babs]

I realize that I might be going a bit off the deep end here, which is why I'm hoping to get some perspective from our more economically minded posters, but is there a realistic chance that we could see the total global collapse of currency?

We've started out for God-knows-where, but I guess we'll know when we get there.

[RobinFinderson]

What do you mean by that exactly? That we revert to a barter economy like Europe before Rome or the Hebrews and the bedouins before they were civilized?

I think the real question is, have we been living a lie or is the market (stocks and real estate) oversold?

Sure, something like that. Say China loses confidence in U.S. treasury bonds and cashes a significant portion of its holdings. Then say the U.S. can't cover the call, and resorts to printing cash and paying its debts in currency that is worth significantly less. That could conceivably cause a ripple/domino effect that would bring about more margin calls, more printed money, and dollar inflation unlike anything the world has ever seen. Europe and Asia are no safer bets. People lose all confidence in the value of currency and stop using it. All of a sudden a bushel of wheat is worth more than its weight in gold (what use is gold?).