bank·rupt /ˈbæŋkrʌpt, -rəpt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[bangk-ruhpt, -ruhpt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. Law. a person who upon his or her own petition or that of his or her creditors is adjudged insolvent by a court and whose property is administered for and divided among his or her creditors under a bankruptcy law.
2. any insolvent debtor; a person unable to satisfy any just claims made upon him or her.
3. a person who is lacking in a particular thing or quality: a moral bankrupt.
if you don't know what you're talking about, assert your way to victory.
I'm not asserting anything. I'm just saying that cutting back on how much of your existing entitlements you are going to pay doesn't sound like a feasible solution for anyone but someone who can force the other side to take that deal.
It's like me saying, "no, I'm not bankrupt, I'll just have to cut back on how much of my credit card debt I repay." I don't think that work for me.
I'm not saying the U.S. is 100% going bankrupt. I am asking what the smart people on this board think of the analysis in the paper.
Don't let that get in the way of insulting me for no reason, though.
It's like me saying, "no, I'm not bankrupt, I'll just have to cut back on how much of my credit card debt I repay." I don't think that work for me.
Not quite. It would be more like reneging on your promise to your kids to pay for their college. The $52 trillion shortfall isn't money that the US has already spent and is paying back. Its money that has been promised in benefits (SS, medicare) . The US can't afford to pay that much out in benefits, so they'll likely cut benefits and raise taxes to adjust.
Wouldn't it be more like forcefully taking money from your younger kid's summer job paycheck in high-school while promising to use it to pay for college, THEN reneging on that promise because you spent it on their older sibling?
Wouldn't it be more like forcefully taking money from your younger kid's summer job paycheck in high-school while promising to use it to pay for college, THEN reneging on that promise because you spent it on their older sibling?
Yes, that sounds pretty accurate. Note how the parent isn't bankrupt in this situation.
Lets not take the thread too far off topic. If you want to debate voting we can start another thread in politics. My position is this: My vote won't matter either way. No Presidential election has ever been won by one vote. So why shouldn't I vote for the person I think has the best policy platform? Given the choice between voting for one of two bad choices, I'd rather just sit home.
Fair enough I don't like to go OT either but why make your post in the first place? I suppose it is a pet peeve of mine for first someone to make an off topic post, argue with me, admit thier post (and vote) will never matter in the first place then invite me to a forum with primarily nuts in it to have a discussion, no thanks.
Fair enough I don't like to go OT either but why make your post in the first place? I suppose it is a pet peeve of mine for first someone to make an off topic post, argue with me, admit thier post (and vote) will never matter in the first place then invite me to a forum with primarily nuts in it to have a discussion, no thanks.
Jimbo
Yeah, I thought about that too. Sorry I did that to you. What do you think about that video?
I dunno when doom forecasting became cool, but if the US tanks, the world economy is gonna tank and we're back to a dark ages of sorts.
Again its one of the things that is useless to plan for. What're you going to do? Stockpile gold? What if people decide they're gonna back obligations with gold beads?
What if aliens come and remove the stock exchanges?
Why is it that when the markets head south, these articles are everywhere. Every recession there are doomsayers and every boom there are those that think it will last forever. These articles are the reasons for exaggerated stock movements. They show exactly why we were at 14k on the DOW 6 months ago and now we are at 12k.
As bad as things are, well survive. Maybe the DOW hits 10k. But in 5 years well be making new highs and this will just be another part of the cycle.
Anyone that believes the US will ultimately be insolvent or this mortgage crisis will bring down the global economy can get short here because if these things were true stocks have about 50-60% to fall.
I dunno when doom forecasting became cool, but if the US tanks, the world economy is gonna tank and we're back to a dark ages of sorts.
That may be true now. How long will it last?
The U.S. percentage of the world economy is decreasing.
Japan was the second largest economy in the world when it crashed. Was the world sent to the dark ages? No. Would I want to have been living/invested in Japan when it happened? No.
Call it whatever you want. I wouldn't want to be the younger kid. Sadly, if the paper is correct, most current americans are the younger kid.
