Fiscal Cliff Prediction Thread

Same here. Republican rhetoric right now is staying the course and convincing the rubes electorate that it'll be fine. If they are not stopped, our choice is defaulting or giving the nutjobs their way. Giving them their way means they'll do it again next year and the year after. The Democrat's choice is either live through a default once or be held hostage indefinitely.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/10/07/debt_chicken_government_shutdown

...economist Thomas Schelling observed that in a game of chicken, one driver could gain an advantage from throwing the steering wheel out the window. It appears that Republicans have come up with an even more extreme version of that gambit -- insisting loudly that they are immune to car crashes.

 

I'm optimistic that the big banks (especially Chase) will help the government during the impasse, you know after the very friendly treatment given to them during the financial crisis and the recent scandals. Right Jimmy?

Jimmy?

Jimmy!!!!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/10/jpmorgan-chase-government-debt-sells_n_4080996.html

 

I don't know if this is the right thread to post this in, but this moveon.org I shared on my FB page is creating some interesting conversation...

 

moveon saw fit to actually cite CATO? Will wonders never cease?

 

It depends on a lot of assumptions but I don't think is far from reality. SNAP is a very small and effective program probably costing us under 100 billion a year. Corporate subsidies for oil and banks can amount to several times that, depending if you count actual subsidies or less reveneu. I assume that the figures are then compared with the average tax bill for an American family.

 

WHOM are they trying to kid. Not who. WHOM.

@American Brummie

 

I gues everybodys' got ta be known for something, so this might as well be what Im known for.

 

More importantly, why is the $36 figure only significant at the 0.05 level whereas the $870 figure is significant at the 0.01 level?

 

Probably is due to the size of the sample relative to the size of the populations.

 

Spoken like a true social scientist. We don't have great data, add more cases!

 

Who is ready for one more round of Debt-Ceiling-Chicken?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/22/us-debt-ceiling_n_4646696.html?ref=topbar

Good luck to our (R) congressmen telling voters that they can't get their tax refund on time...

 

That is why I rather pay than to get money back.


But if anything I am sure they would blame Obama and their base would agree with them.

 

This. Most years I have to pay a little bit or get a ridiculous amount back. But this year we have one more dependent and my wife only got like half her pay for 3 months so we expect a good amount back.

How stupid of me to think that it could be different.

 

We dare you to play chicken!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...2/03/house-gop-finalizes-debt-limit-playbook/

 

R&R was totally flawed...

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/...scredits-reinhart-rogoff-debt-study-austerity

Over the ten and 15 year periods, higher debt is associated with just about the same economic growth. There’s no threshold at all.

The authors also looked at the economic growth for counties with increasing and decreasing debt. They found that among countries with similar debt levels, growth is stronger over the next 15 years among those with decreasing debt.

This is an important new finding: The debt level of a country is not important. What matters is the trajectory of that debt.

/quote