jump to last post 1-3 of 3 discussions (5 posts)

Nascent Debate at Fed to End QE Policy

  1. Ralph Deeds profile image65
    Ralph Deedsposted 5 years ago

    It would be bad news for the economy and for the stock market if the Fed were to end its low interest policy prematurely.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/28/busin … my.html?hp

  2. tirelesstraveler profile image82
    tirelesstravelerposted 5 years ago

    Somebody is drinking red cool aid.  The jobless rate is 7% because they don't include under employed and stopped looking.
    Who has money to be in the stock market?  If the interest rate goes up at least my I.R.A. would be making more than .9%.  It isn't large enough for me to have it invested diversely. 
    If the interest rates go up so will the service costs on the national debt which will indeed hurt everyone.

  3. William F. Torpey profile image79
    William F. Torpeyposted 5 years ago

    Capitalism doesn't work. It's a Ponzi scheme. It's inevitable that the corporations will eventually end up with all the money in existence. Nobody else will have a nickel, including the government. The economy is, of course, in a bind -- so there's little choice at this juncture: The Feds have to put more Monopoly money into the system or the crash will be horrendous. We need to modify capitalism so that the poor and middle class are paid based on their true contribution to society, not as little as possible by the corporations so they can keep increasing their quarterly profits. As long as all corporate and government officials make substantially higher incomes than the average American there will be inflation and worse. The "system" needs work.

    1. wilderness profile image99
      wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      "true contribution to society"

      What would you consider the true contribution to society of:

      1.  Bill Gates, providing Windows for the entire world?

      2.  Football star, providing a huge audience for advertising?

      3.  The burger flipper at Mickey D's, providing your cheap, unhealthy meal.

      4.  The man sitting at home on unemployment for a year because he doesn't want a "demeaning" job.

      5.  The disabled, unabled to work at all.

      6.  The third generation welfare mama, making a life out of gaming the welfare system

      As you give their worth, keep in mind the discussion is worth and monetary value, not morals, pity or generosity.  You state we should pay by contribution; explain, please, what that real contribution is from these people in your opinion?

      1. William F. Torpey profile image79
        William F. Torpeyposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        You're looking at the forest, wilderness, but you can't see the trees. Bill Gates not only benefitted from all those who came before him (including guys like Thomas Edison and all those who developed early computers before Gates was even born.)  You can look down at all those ordinary people who flip hamburgers, suffer physical ailments or have trouble finding jobs in our highly inefficient economic system, but your corporate friends couldn't make absurdly high compensation without them. Personally, I wouldn't want to live in a society where ordinary citizens are forced to live under th poverty line or endure homelessness. How much greed do we need to endure?