Worldwide economy crisis
#1
Posted 08 October 2008 - 09:11 AM
Of course the emerging countries will continue to grow relatively fast, but their growth will be shrink a bit as well.
Reason: persistent financial stress and the credit constraints from deleveraging, which could be deeper and more protracted than in the baseline scenario; and the U.S. housing market deterioration, which could be deeper than forecast, while European housing markets could weaken more broadly than envisaged in the baseline.
Resulting into worldwide problems.
Kind of suprised there wasn't a topic about this yet, even with the American plan being so controversial. So, I thought we could use a topic for this. Basically, are we screwed? For how long? What to do about it? And more importantly, is fundemental capitalism actually a bad system if things like this can happen?
Source: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey.../RES100808A.htm
#2
Posted 08 October 2008 - 09:49 AM
Putting on my partisan hat -
Fannie and Freddie, who started this problem, were backed by the US government (democrats), and were forced to make risky loans to minorities who were unable to pay their mortgages. Eventually, the artificial bubble bursted, and this crisis occured. Of course this crisis is more complicated than this, but I am tired of people blaming the free market, President Bush and his policies, because he fought for stronger oversight. Ultimately, the blame will be his, since this happened under his watch. He will no longer be remembered by the missteps of the Iraq war, but by this crisis. He will be remembered as the worst President of the United States of America (unfairly).
Read it up here -
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/wh...mic_crisis.html
Anyway, this crisis will cement America's superpower status for my lifetime, but will weaken the global economy. Why? The USA is the only country who can deal with this financial crisis productively, and is actually the only one who is. Russia had to close their stock market, UK is struggling to find a plan, Japan stock market is in chaos, and on and on.
But hold your hats. Things are going to get bad, but they will get better. Hopefully Obama will show the leadership the world desperately needs during the next four years. A global recession is inevitable, and maybe, just maybe, a depression, assuming Obama handles this crisis terribly.
EDIT: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081007/ap_on_...land_meltdown_1 Scary
#3
Posted 08 October 2008 - 12:05 PM
Eugine, on Oct 8 2008, 05:49 PM, said:
It's pretty certain that the American effort will be the most important and effective but that doesn't mean that other countries don't have to act. The USA's plan at the moment probably isn't enough and with the elections overshadowing the whole thing it may take a while till more policies are put in effect. China, India and the other NIC's just don't have the capital to stabalize the economy. Europe is too scattered at the moment to come up with anything. Belgium kind of hates us since we... well stole major parts of their bank and then turned it into a national government funded bank. Germany who will certainly need help, isn't too keen on asking anyone yet. France will suffer a bit, and then Spain. Well, Spain didn't have a too stable economy to start with.
And I don't know if anyone forced banks to lend out money they don't have, but the fact that they did it shows how bad the system really is. Nothern Rock for instance, lended out 8 times as much money as they actually had. They could count on other banks to circulate money between them to keep them in the green but anyone could figure out that that just isn't exactly... honest. So trust being the problem, the loss of trust and continuing loss of trust is. [the reason in post 1]
As for Iceland, Bill Gates could buy it now if he wanted to.
#4
Posted 08 October 2008 - 04:09 PM
And Even though Capitalism allows for this sort of thing to happen, it also allows for much more financial freedom. It's not so much capitalism's fault that this happened as much as it is the mismanagement of funds by the people living in a capitalistic society.
#5
Posted 08 October 2008 - 04:13 PM
And your first paragraph SS, is exactly why Europe's economy may collapse also, especially the United Kingdom. Europe is very fragmented.
Leadership will be very important.
Oh, let me put up a disclaimer: Those were John Bolton's thoughts, and not a fact.
#6
Posted 08 October 2008 - 11:24 PM
#7
Posted 08 October 2008 - 11:29 PM
Gio, on Oct 8 2008, 10:24 PM, said:
Can I be in charge of weapons and arms? Please?
And yeah economy crisis yeah. I can't really say I care as it doesn't bother me. It doesn't interfere with anything I want to do so it's not my problem.
#8
Posted 08 October 2008 - 11:36 PM
Nosferatu, on Oct 9 2008, 12:29 AM, said:
And yeah economy crisis yeah. I can't really say I care as it doesn't bother me. It doesn't interfere with anything I want to do so it's not my problem.
if you let me raid the stash of hand grenades every once and a while I shall not object.
#9
Posted 09 October 2008 - 12:48 AM
#10
Posted 09 October 2008 - 01:41 AM
Nosferatu, on Oct 8 2008, 10:29 PM, said:
And yeah economy crisis yeah. I can't really say I care as it doesn't bother me. It doesn't interfere with anything I want to do so it's not my problem.
I want 5% of all weapons. That is all I ask.
But I call President!
#11
Posted 09 October 2008 - 08:14 AM
The euro's been dropping lately again, which is actually quite good. Oil prices need to level out though.
... O and I get to be diabolical supervillain in this new world order you're all creating.
#12
Posted 09 October 2008 - 11:13 AM
Also, the French President actually said this crisis will create a new world order. Dark days are ahead probably...
#14
Posted 09 October 2008 - 12:20 PM
Suck on that America/rest of Canada.
#18
Posted 09 October 2008 - 01:16 PM
Quit that.
Let's not and say I did, kay. ;)
#19
Posted 09 October 2008 - 02:02 PM
Sea of Time, on Oct 9 2008, 02:20 PM, said:
Suck on that America/rest of Canada.
Hopefully your province do not find in a month time their savings disappeared, or atleast the savings were physical currency eg. gold.
#21
Posted 10 October 2008 - 01:50 AM
Really, there is a chance that the economy could go down the pooper, but it just doesn't seem very likely for some reason. In my opinion, the governments should make contracts with the banks that are going under in which the government will buy them out, but the banks have to buy themselves back completely within two or three years. That way, the banks stay afloat, and the governments won't have control over the banks for forever.
Legolastom, on Oct 9 2008, 11:23 AM, said:
DARN STRAIGHT, SON.
*invades and nukes the enitre middle east*
.....*steals Britain's tea and crumpets*
#22
Posted 10 October 2008 - 08:05 AM
Eugine, on Oct 9 2008, 03:02 PM, said:
Hopefully your province do not find in a month time their savings disappeared, or atleast the savings were physical currency eg. gold.
I just checked my mutual fund, and I have lost 50% of it. :D
#23
Posted 10 October 2008 - 10:21 AM
Gio, on Oct 10 2008, 10:05 AM, said:
I personally think free market capitalism is dead because of this crisis, but I may be wrong. Everything is suddenly nationalised...
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...id=aP5mpMUORBWM
#24
Posted 12 October 2008 - 08:20 AM
#25
Posted 12 October 2008 - 08:48 AM
Anywho, Morgan Stanley is kind of dead, so that's another blow. Oil prices are still dropping and the EU, Asia and American top have all been brainstorming this weekend. Let's hope they came up with something smart.
#26
Posted 13 October 2008 - 03:40 PM
#27
Posted 13 October 2008 - 04:09 PM
#30
Posted 14 October 2008 - 04:40 AM
Caael, on Oct 13 2008, 10:40 PM, said:
the government bought majority stakes in 3 major banks, which aparently saves our economy. Its such a good idea all the Europeans are copying us. The FTSE actually went up yesterday, so it must be doing something right x_x
#31
Posted 14 October 2008 - 07:53 AM
Laharl, on Oct 14 2008, 12:40 PM, said:
The Dutch did it last week. :P
But then again, they did out of desperation of a bank falling. Then thought it would be unfare to other banks so they bought stakes from other banks as well. Plus they put a 200 billion safety net up. I hope the funds keep rising till the end of the week.
I want to laugh and point at the IMF if it really ends here.
[edit] Everything rose today except for one Bank, that can take the hit. Still an 78% drop in one day is quite a hit. They'll probably be retracting that fund this week from the indices. Replace it with a stable bank or oil company.
But of course, they won't continue to go up. Chip concerns and such will feel the blow a bit later so when they present their balances. They'll probably take a few hits. Nothing major if it stabilises now. But that will take a small recovery compared to what the banks need to gain.
The banks that are on the edge need to be cleaned up, the system needs to be evaluated when the dust settles and money has to come rolling back to the governments when all is well.
#32
Posted 18 October 2008 - 02:16 AM
One of the most stable bankfunds is starting to take hits now here in Holland. So they'll probably be applying for a billion or two that the ECB is borrowing.
Something else that someone brought to my attention is the trillion dollar dept USA already has. If they keep injecting money into their economy their depts will grow, the money injections are mainly borrowed cash. If the mutual lending money to another country trust stops, then the USA has a problem and keep inevidably keep spiralling down. Resulting into losses all over the world that make what's happening now look like a good day on the market floor.
#33
Posted 18 October 2008 - 04:37 PM
#34
Posted 14 November 2008 - 02:51 PM
Funny enough, there are more than 20 countries coming. Since officially the EU is invited as one economy. But since half of Europe is in the top 20 anyway, they got invited twice. Now 21-30 can come as well.
So, this is Bush's last great thing to do.
#35
Posted 16 November 2008 - 08:24 PM
Great to see the rising global economies, such as Brazil and Saudi Arabia, on the world stage.
On that note, I am absolutely taken aback at how much in favor of socialism Sarkozy is, isn't he supposed to be from France's conservative party?
#36
Posted 16 November 2008 - 11:04 PM
The definition of conservatism is to conserve/prevent change. Some either want to keep things the way they are, or revert back to the way things were previously. Conservatives over there are not the same as conservatives over here.
That said, French conservatives are much nicer to the US than the French liberals.
#37
Posted 17 November 2008 - 12:37 PM
I'm referring to a comment Sarkozy made that "the era of laissez-faire capitalism is over", which seems fairly bold for someone who was supposed to be more right-winged relative to France's Socialist party.
That said, this is a nicely summarized article of the G20 summit.
http://www.economist.com/finance/displaySt...e=features_box2
#38
Posted 17 November 2008 - 07:04 PM
Golden Legacy, on Nov 17 2008, 10:37 AM, said:
Meaning?
"laissez-faire" literall means "let do". What it's meant to mean, is "let the people do as they plaese."
He basically said that the era of "letting the people do as they please" in a capitalistic society has ended.
And France has always been socialist. Don't tell me you thought otherwise.
#39
Posted 17 November 2008 - 07:42 PM
And yes, obviously France is socialist, and I am 100% aware of what laissez-faire means. I was saying that for the supposed conservative party of France, for Sarkozy who promised reform of the economy towards the right, it's especially unusual rhetoric. I'm assuming that Sarkozy is trying to blunt the appeal of the actual Socialist party in France by stealing some of their thunder.
Although, yes, conservative by France's definition might just mean "not as socialist".
Here's another perspective of the G20 summit - this one cites it as an epic failure.
http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2008...ack-of-resolve/
#40
Posted 17 November 2008 - 09:29 PM
Best thing from this meeting?
http://news.bbc.co.u...ess/7728929.stm
Thankfully they are poised to reject protectionism. President-elect Obama was a staunch protectionist during his campaign. Renegotiating NAFTA, not signing free trade agreements, imposing tariffs, etc. Atleast he has a reason to backoff from his naive proposals now: The entire world is against it.
He even embraced the free market in his 60 Minutes interview. He may well be a pragmatist.
But then, they want to create a "college", which means another layer of government redtape. I do not like that.
And honestly, center-right for Europe is probably center-left in USA. Center-left is probably extremely leftwing. I don't understand this... Europe is officially in a recession before USA, yet people want to copy their system. Europe had insane regulation, yet their financial markets were hit hard by this crisis...
#41
Posted 17 November 2008 - 09:35 PM
And Europe may have been over-regulated, but that doesn't mean some limited regulation is bad in theory. After all, recessions are about an economic contraction, which can emerge as the result of many different factors; too much regulation that stifles growth, too little regulation (i.e. bad credit), competition in the global market, etc.
#42
Posted 17 November 2008 - 09:47 PM
And maybe he is not a protectionist, but he sure had some heated rhetoric during his campaign which suggested he was one. His views were way more left leaning than what you typed there.
And everyone is for sensible regulation. Gotta make sure people do not game the free market.
#43
Posted 17 November 2008 - 09:50 PM
And yes, every person is for sensible regulation. The question is, why there hasn't been any.