Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Now, what news on the Rialto?
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Actually in the future would you please read your own article before posting or commenting on it, because it had nothing to do with hft, rather computerized trading, which hft is merely one subset of many. Computerized trading is decades older than hft, and the list of catastrophes caused by that decades old system is exactly zero.

Computers have taken over all kinds of human activity automatically, it is no surprise to find it also in trading. However, I'm very interested in hearing why you are computerphobic when it comes to market making (among the dullest and least exciting forms of trading there is) and say not something more life threatening, like government aviation. You would be GOBSMACKED at the computerized aviation going on out there. You may never fly again if you knew how much computer automation is taking place (and yet no crashes there either, hmm)

Left and right do matter, because the left is driving the anti-hft delirium for purely ideological purposes.

HFT has made trading cheaper and faster than ever, and you have done nothing whatsoever to indicate otherwise.

There has not been a flash crash, and the crash you are referring to was non-historic in nature (many more severe intraday crashes in history, before hft was even thought of), was a ONE TIME event, and I know everything about it.

You are completely and totally wrong. And I mean that with your best interests in mind with the friendliest of deliveries.
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Mr. Perfect »

BTW Zack Morris spent a LOT of time typing up explanations for you guys and none of you read it or learned from it.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5643
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Parodite »

Mr. Perfect wrote:Actually in the future would you please read your own article before posting or commenting on it, because it had nothing to do with hft, rather computerized trading, which hft is merely one subset of many. Computerized trading is decades older than hft, and the list of catastrophes caused by that decades old system is exactly zero.
The article focusses on HFT and the new risks it introduces. That HFT is a subset... duhuh.
Computers have taken over all kinds of human activity automatically, it is no surprise to find it also in trading. However, I'm very interested in hearing why you are computerphobic when it comes to market making (among the dullest and least exciting forms of trading there is) and say not something more life threatening, like government aviation. You would be GOBSMACKED at the computerized aviation going on out there. You may never fly again if you knew how much computer automation is taking place (and yet no crashes there either, hmm)
Relax. You give a very good example of an industry, aviation, where safety procedures and regulations are all over the place and for good reasons. Informations systems.. same thing. Firewalls, anti-virus, back-up systems.. what makes you think HFT doesn't need any of those?
Left and right do matter, because the left is driving the anti-hft delirium for purely ideological purposes.
Whatever.
HFT has made trading cheaper and faster than ever, and you have done nothing whatsoever to indicate otherwise.
Because there was no need since that was never the issue.
There has not been a flash crash, and the crash you are referring to was non-historic in nature (many more severe intraday crashes in history, before hft was even thought of), was a ONE TIME event, and I know everything about it.
It was a real event, as was "the Knightmare" of Knight Capital. What makes you think such events don't deserve analysis of what happened?
You are completely and totally wrong. And I mean that with your best interests in mind with the friendliest of deliveries.
Of course :D Only when Mr. Perfect speaks.. we better all be silent and absorb all the truths that leave the fountainhead of superior insight.
Deep down I'm very superficial
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Parodite wrote: The article focusses on HFT and the new risks it introduces.
No it doesn't. At all. If you find a paragraph in there please post it, because I couldn't find any.
That HFT is a subset... duhuh.
It needs to be pointed out to the author, and probably you.

Knight was not HFTing, hfters came in to take advantage of what Knight was doing (on accident) and if computers would never have been invented then someone else would have done exactly what the computers were doing. It's called "gapping" and goes back to ancient times, the oldest trading we have recorded.

This simply is not an indictment of hft or automated trading or computer trading at all.
Relax. You give a very good example of an industry, aviation, where safety procedures and regulations are all over the place and for good reasons. Informations systems.. same thing. Firewalls, anti-virus, back-up systems.. what makes you think HFT doesn't need any of those?
Actually I am giving an example of automation. What in the world makes you think government computers operate more effectively than private sector computers. Why in the world would you trust government automation over private sector automation.
Whatever.
It;s the very heart of the matter. Government control, always government control. Always.
HFT has made trading cheaper and faster than ever, and you have done nothing whatsoever to indicate otherwise.
Because there was no need since that was never the issue.
It was a real event,
There was no flash crash. If you are willing to do the work, I can show you very easily that it had nothing whatsoever to do with hft.
as was "the Knightmare" of Knight Capital. What makes you think such events don't deserve analysis of what happened?
They do. Here is the analysis. Knight Capital lost the equivalent of a bad day for Warren Buffet. IOW the very worst case scenario this poor fool at Mother Jones could come up with was the equivalent of a bad morning for Warren Buffet and it had nothing to do whatsoever with hft.

End of analysis.
Of course :D Only when Mr. Perfect speaks.. we better all be silent and absorb all the truths that leave the fountainhead of superior insight.
One way to look at it.

Another would be to go back and read what Zack Morris so graciously typed, and see if you can understand any of it.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27267
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Typhoon »

Mr. Perfect wrote:Erm, how come it's ok to browbeat pjmedia/breitbart/foxnews but not a no name Mother Jones opinion writer who demonstrates no knowledge whatsoever of the subject matter.

BTW I have been reading Mother Jones since 1995, they are to the left of Michael Moore, how am I supposed to ignore that when reading their products.
If you think that the response to a pjmedia/breitbart/foxnews link is spam, then please let the mods know of the post link.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

Mr. Perfect wrote:Erm, how come it's ok to browbeat pjmedia/breitbart/foxnews but not a no name Mother Jones opinion writer who demonstrates no knowledge whatsoever of the subject matter.

BTW I have been reading Mother Jones since 1995, they are to the left of Michael Moore, how am I supposed to ignore that when reading their products.
Your comment was simply an ad hominem fallacy. You made no comment at all on the content.

At one time you were one of the most interesting members of this board. You had original ideas and were informative. Now you are the Cliff Clavin of OtNoT, sorting everything into left/right, red/blue, liberal/conservative and capitalist/socialist pigeonholes as a substitute for critical thinking.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Nonc Hilaire wrote:Your comment was simply an ad hominem fallacy. You made no comment at all on the content.
There wasn't any content. Nothing in the article had anything to do with the title.
At one time you were one of the most interesting members of this board. You had original ideas and were informative. Now you are the Cliff Clavin of OtNoT,
Thanks for the compliment.
sorting everything into left/right, red/blue, liberal/conservative and capitalist/socialist pigeonholes
That's how the world works.
as a substitute for critical thinking.
When you guys display some critical thinking of your own, particularly on this topic, I'll respond in kind.
Last edited by Mr. Perfect on Tue Aug 12, 2014 10:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Typhoon wrote:
Mr. Perfect wrote:Erm, how come it's ok to browbeat pjmedia/breitbart/foxnews but not a no name Mother Jones opinion writer who demonstrates no knowledge whatsoever of the subject matter.

BTW I have been reading Mother Jones since 1995, they are to the left of Michael Moore, how am I supposed to ignore that when reading their products.
If you think that the response to a pjmedia/breitbart/foxnews link is spam, then please let the mods know of the post link.
I don't really object to people trashing news outlets, I just think if some people get to do it then everyone should be able to do it.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27267
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Typhoon »

Bloomberg | Is China losing its magical economic powers?
To many, Beijing's success in steering around the 2008 global crisis was nothing less than supernatural. That the world's biggest trading nation, one perilously reliant on exports, fared so well seemed better explained as some paranormal event than a B-school case study. China pulled off the feat with an otherworldly onslaught of stimulus and credit, one that has continued until very recently.

That's why a recent plunge in credit expansion has many China watchers wondering if the jig is up. It may very well be.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Zack Morris
Posts: 2837
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 8:52 am
Location: Bayside High School

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Zack Morris »

Only 45 Percent of Upper Middle Class Households are Saving Money
Last week the Federal Reserve released a disturbing report (PDF) on the financial state of U.S. households. The report’s main findings, that Americans don’t save very much, weren’t that surprising. For the last few decades middle- and lower-middle-class families have been pinched by stagnant incomes and higher spending. But even the many members of the upper middle class are hardly saving. Low or no savings leaves them, and everyone else, in a risky position.

Just 45 percent of upper-middle-class households (income from $75,000 to $99,999) saved anything in 2012, according to the Fed study. That means the other 55 percent didn’t save for a house, retirement, or education. About 16 percent spent more than they earned and went further into debt. The report highlights the consequences of these hand-to-mouth habits: Only half of these households had enough savings to finance three months of living expenses if they lost their job or couldn’t work. A $400 emergency would force about 20 percent of them into months of debt.
I grew up in a western state in a relatively typical average sized American city. Median incomes weren't very high -- six figure salaries were certainly not common. But everyone had to have big houses, new cars, the latest gadgets, ski equipment, golf clubs, etc. Vacations, especially abroad, were comparatively rare. Most of my classmates had never really traveled abroad. I guess shiny objects trumped memories and experiences. If my home town is as typical an American city as I think it is, then the typical American lives a life of crude, vacuous consumerism.

I'm amazed at people that spend so frivolously beyond their means. I'm glad that something about my childhood experience has made me relatively frugal. I tend to think of myself as uniquely fortunate because for the time being, I earn far more than I'm worth, so it's relatively easy for me to save. I used to figure that all middle or upper middle class people saved something. But then I read articles like this and wonder. What the hell is going on?
Simple Minded

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Simple Minded »

Zack Morris wrote: I used to figure that all middle or upper middle class people saved something. But then I read articles like this and wonder.What the hell is going on?
IIRC, even as far back as 15 years ago, it was primarily the middle and upper middle class who were filing for bankruptcy.

The trend, social mood, zeitgeist..... call it what you will has changed.

Since about the early to mid 1980s American herd followers, have been notoriously poor savers. Those who were old enough to remember the hard times of the 1920s thru 1940s, or even the 1960s were more likely to be exceptions. To many of them, the 80s and 90s looked like insanity.

People who are overly optimistic are not savers, they are borrowers. Then people started spending/borrowing like drunken sailors which created demand, so the bank complied to satisfy the thirst. Again, zeitgeist, social mood, herding.

A tend of five years length will convince some that "this time is different." By year 20, almost everyone is on board..... "Wow! This time really is different!" and when everyone is on board, the trend has to change, simply because there is no one left to buy into it.

Who needs to save when we have reached a "permanent plateau of prosperity?"

The go-go drunken sailor spending binge of the 80s, 90s, and 00s is in the process of ending. It will take a few more years to get rolling, and a bunch more debtors will have to get burned, but avoiding debt, paying down debt, and saving will again become "common sense" and even chic!

Be patient. What you learned in your youth will serve you well. Give your parents a big hug!
User avatar
Zack Morris
Posts: 2837
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 8:52 am
Location: Bayside High School

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Zack Morris »

Simple Minded wrote: Since about the early to mid 1980s American herd followers, have been notoriously poor savers. Those who were old enough to remember the hard times of the 1920s thru 1940s, or even the 1960s were more likely to be exceptions. To many of them, the 80s and 90s looked like insanity.
That's very interesting. It makes sense that those who had seen hard times were likely to be thrifty savers. But why did they fail at passing those values down to their children? This illustrates perfectly the pitfalls of ascribing to "culture" the failures and successes of different groups. It's deceptively complicated.
Be patient. What you learned in your youth will serve you well. Give your parents a big hug!
Indeed. Although my parents were very bad at saving. It's not that they spent excessively or were frivolous with their purchases. They were just bad with money. Also, my mother did not work. I suppose my mom talked about the importance of putting money aside but never to the degree that I do now. I think they are pleasantly surprised at my spending habits. I think my thriftiness has come about more from observing what they had to go through, as well as the understanding that I will likely have to support them in the future. During 6 years of graduate school, I hardly saved anything at all (I probably could have had I cut back on the alcohol and bars :)), but I never overspent my $2000/mo. research assistant salary and was able to live comfortably on it. Part of what drives my savings habit now is a desire to make up for all that lost time when others were earning real salaries.
Simple Minded

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Simple Minded »

Zack Morris wrote: That's very interesting. It makes sense that those who had seen hard times were likely to be thrifty savers. But why did they fail at passing those values down to their children? This illustrates perfectly the pitfalls of ascribing to "culture" the failures and successes of different groups. It's deceptively complicated.
complicated indeed. No one is the same person they were 10 years ago. Non self-destructive individuals will learn as much from their parent's bad examples as from their parent's good examples. Hell, that's what the teens and the 20's are all about......

Trend, social mood, zeitgeist, norms, or ..... culture...... again call it what you will, humans are always in flux. There is management, but rarely permanent solutions. Today's solutions often cause tomorrow's problems.

Those who preach "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs" almost always have different opinions, depending upon whether they (or others) perceive themselves as having "abilities" or "needs." Milk drinkers and milk cows have different opinions on a lot of stuff.

It seems very cyclical, saving will be perceived as much more "cool" again in the future, than it has been in the last 30 years. In my short life, it has only been "cool" to borrow money during the boom years (the drunken sailor phase). "Everyone" (of a certain age) knew that boom years of the 80's, 90's, and 00's were an aberration.

Kinda like whether "the Coming Ice Age" or "AGW" is going end human existence........ or whether Dems are the problem and Repubs are the solutions.... or vice versa.

People..... ;)
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

The Fed has found the problem. Too many people are "hoarding money". The idea of savings seems to have vanished. Now it is "hoarding money", like the lady with a million cats or the guy with a century of old newspapers in his living room.

http://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-econom ... n-the-u-s/
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
Simple Minded

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Simple Minded »

Nonc Hilaire wrote:The Fed has found the problem. Too many people are "hoarding money". The idea of savings seems to have vanished. Now it is "hoarding money", like the lady with a million cats or the guy with a century of old newspapers in his living room.

http://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-econom ... n-the-u-s/
Excellent example of the changing zeitgeist. Generation N blames the drunken sailor spenders who do not save for society's economic woes. Generation N+1 or N+2 will blame the savers who do not spend for society's economic woes.

Pain, such as hangovers are self-corrective feedback, until someone starts handing out too many pain killers and the lesson is lost.

Poetry in motion.
Hoosiernorm
Posts: 2206
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 7:59 pm

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Hoosiernorm »

Bob Deitrick: ”President Reagan has long been considered the best modern economic President. So we compared his performance dealing with the oil-induced recession of the 1980s with that of President Obama and his performance during this ‘Great Recession.’

“As this unemployment chart shows, President Obama’s job creation kept unemployment from peaking at as high a level as President Reagan, and promoted people into the workforce faster than President Reagan.

“President Obama has achieved a 6.1% unemployment rate in his sixth year, fully one year faster than President Reagan did. At this point in his presidency, President Reagan was still struggling with 7.1% unemployment, and he did not reach into the mid-low 6% range for another full year. So, despite today’s number, the Obama administration has still done considerably better at job creating and reducing unemployment than did the Reagan administration.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung ... investing/

Image
Been busy doing stuff
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Mr. Perfect »

In comparison to Reagan look at the actual job growth numbers, total number who have left the workforce and records being set for long term unemployed coupled with severe reductions in income for working class people in addition to learning what U6 unemployment is and you will see why obama actually does not smile but is considered now to be the worst President in American history by Americans and why he went from near record support with 60% of congress to near record disapproval and giving back majorities in governorships, state legislatures, the House and Senate to the stated enemy, the Repubican Party...

In just 6 short years.

As always, thanks for the softballs.
Censorship isn't necessary
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Hoosiernorm wrote:the oil-induced recession of the 1980s
It went off the rails here and never got back on. Of course there was no oil induced recession in the 1980's.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Zack Morris
Posts: 2837
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 8:52 am
Location: Bayside High School

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Zack Morris »

In the 1980's, China hadn't really come on line yet (let alone the rest of the developing and communist worlds) and the big economic competitor seemed to be Japan. During the 1990's, a huge glut of supply began to flood the market and we are still feeling the effects today. The world is remarkably different today than it was in the 80's, let alone the 70's, 60's, and 50's. The US could certainly do a lot better than it is right now but the easy days are over. It's hard to imagine what additional services and products Americans could produce and sell to each other (and export abroad) that would return us to the level of prosperity of the 1980's.
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Zack Morris wrote:It's hard to imagine what additional services and products Americans could produce and sell to each other (and export abroad) that would return us to the level of prosperity of the 1980's.
That's why Democrts are headed for the ash heap. All those trillions in STPN, no results, no imagination.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27267
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Typhoon »

Zack Morris wrote:In the 1980's, China hadn't really come on line yet (let alone the rest of the developing and communist worlds) and the big economic competitor seemed to be Japan. During the 1990's, a huge glut of supply began to flood the market and we are still feeling the effects today. The world is remarkably different today than it was in the 80's, let alone the 70's, 60's, and 50's. The US could certainly do a lot better than it is right now but the easy days are over. It's hard to imagine what additional services and products Americans could produce and sell to each other (and export abroad) that would return us to the level of prosperity of the 1980's.
In the 50's and 60's the US had the postwar market almost entirely to itself.

In the 70's, Japan and Germany started to make major inroads into this quasi-monopoly.

In the 80's, much of the Reagan era prosperity was driven by deficit creating spending on non-consumable military good and services.

The world certainly has changed.
Who would have predicted that the largest USA IPO to-date will probably be that of a mainland Chinese internet company.

If the US ever loses it's lead in hardware (CPUs and GPUs) and software (operating systems, etc.) then it's only going to get tougher.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27267
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Gloom, Doom, or Boom? Finance and Economics

Post by Typhoon »

Mr. Perfect wrote:
Zack Morris wrote:It's hard to imagine what additional services and products Americans could produce and sell to each other (and export abroad) that would return us to the level of prosperity of the 1980's.
That's why Democrts are headed for the ash heap. All those trillions in STPN, no results, no imagination.
Not a fan of STPN, first authorized in the waning day of the Bush II admin, however, it's easy to be a critic.

What imaginative solutions do the Republicrats have in mind?
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
monster_gardener
Posts: 5334
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:36 am
Location: Trolla. Land of upside down trees and tomatos........

Don't trust Info from a Liar & his Lying Administration.....

Post by monster_gardener »

Hoosiernorm wrote:Bob Deitrick: ”President Reagan has long been considered the best modern economic President. So we compared his performance dealing with the oil-induced recession of the 1980s with that of President Obama and his performance during this ‘Great Recession.’

“As this unemployment chart shows, President Obama’s job creation kept unemployment from peaking at as high a level as President Reagan, and promoted people into the workforce faster than President Reagan.

“President Obama has achieved a 6.1% unemployment rate in his sixth year, fully one year faster than President Reagan did. At this point in his presidency, President Reagan was still struggling with 7.1% unemployment, and he did not reach into the mid-low 6% range for another full year. So, despite today’s number, the Obama administration has still done considerably better at job creating and reducing unemployment than did the Reagan administration.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung ... investing/

Image
Thank You Very Much for your post, HoosierNorm.

When dealing with a LIAR as shameless as obama who famously lied about obamaCare and now again LIES that ISIL/the Caliphate is not Islamic :lol: :roll:, one should doubt any statistics that his administration produces even more than normally should be done especially in a run up to an election where his party may lose.....

Remembering that this Lying Administration tends to issue cheery economic statistics which are later revised after the Main Stream Media has given obama the LYING POS POTUS a temporary boost with them... :roll:
Last edited by monster_gardener on Fri Sep 12, 2014 3:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
For the love of G_d, consider you & I may be mistaken.
Orion Must Rise: Killer Space Rocks Coming Our way
The Best Laid Plans of Men, Monkeys & Pigs Oft Go Awry
Woe to those who long for the Day of the Lord, for It is Darkness, Not Light
User avatar
monster_gardener
Posts: 5334
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:36 am
Location: Trolla. Land of upside down trees and tomatos........

Penny Plan......One Cent Solution....

Post by monster_gardener »

Typhoon wrote:
Mr. Perfect wrote:
Zack Morris wrote:It's hard to imagine what additional services and products Americans could produce and sell to each other (and export abroad) that would return us to the level of prosperity of the 1980's.
That's why Democrts are headed for the ash heap. All those trillions in STPN, no results, no imagination.
Not a fan of STPN, first authorized in the waning day of the Bush II admin, however, it's easy to be a critic.

What imaginative solutions do the Republicrats have in mind?
THANK YOU VERY MUCH for your post and Maintaining the Forum,

What imaginative solutions do the Republicrats have in mind?
Here's one.......

http://www.onecentsolution.org/the-one-cent-solution/
What is the One Cent Solution?
The Three Keys
1. A Plan that Works

The One Cent Solution is beautifully simple: If the government cuts one cent out of every dollar of its total spending (excluding interest payments) each year for five years, and then caps overall federal spending at 18 percent of national income from then on, we can:

Reduce federal spending by $7.5 trillion over 10 years.
Balance the budget by 2019.

Moreover, instead of using inflated budget “baselines” to claim nonexistent spending “cuts” a common practice in Washington, the One Cent Solution calls for real cuts. Under the One Cent plan, the sum of all discretionary and entitlement spending will have to go down from one year to the next, by one percent or more.
2. Legislative Strategy

The One Percent Spending Reduction Act of 2011 embodies the principles of the One Cent Solution. Also known as the “Penny Plan” on Capitol Hill, this legislation was introduced by Congressman Connie Mack (R-FL) and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY) and is currently supported by 71 Members of the House and 13 Members of the Senate. Visit our current legislation page to view the list.

The “Penny Plan” legislation would cap overall spending to fit within the One Cent Solution targets. The legislation then calls on Congress to evaluate all areas of the federal government to make certain that future spending fits under the caps.

Under the One Cent Solution or “Penny Plan”, not all programs must be cut by one percent. Congress may determine that some programs are too critical to cut, but that would require that other programs be reduced more so that the total amount cut is equal to one cent for every dollar each year for six years.

For example, let’s say the federal budget only had three programs, each with an annual budget of $1.00. How might Congress meet the One Cent mandate?

Congress cuts Program A by one cent every year for six years. That means the annual budget for Program A is $0.99 in year one and then $0.98, $0.97, $0.96, $0.95 and finally $0.94.
Program B is found to be essential and efficient — Congress chooses not to cut Program B.
Program C is outdated and needs to be restructured — Congress cuts two cents each year for six years from Program C.

In this example, Congress is able to make program-by-program decisions to bring spending within the One Cent Solution caps. If Congress fails to make those tough decisions, then automatic, across-the-board cuts would be imposed to make sure the caps were enforced. The One Cent Solution is a “belt and suspenders” approach to making certain spending is brought under control and the budget is balanced.
3. Public Support

The One Cent Solution provides Americans with a clear path from massive deficits to a balanced budget. Every family in America can reduce its overall spending by one percent per year, and they know the federal government can too. Do that for six years in a row and the federal budget is balanced.

Public support is essential to the plan’s success. As citizens, we must own this problem. Without public involvement, Congress will fail to act. It is simply not right for us to pass on this debt to our children and grandchildren. Tough decisions are ahead. The key to balancing the budget and reducing the national debt is you
Still remembering DemocRATs denouncing alleged 'cuts' in Federal programs that were merely reductions in the amount of increase for the programs... :roll:
For the love of G_d, consider you & I may be mistaken.
Orion Must Rise: Killer Space Rocks Coming Our way
The Best Laid Plans of Men, Monkeys & Pigs Oft Go Awry
Woe to those who long for the Day of the Lord, for It is Darkness, Not Light
Post Reply