# austerity?



## Guest (Aug 29, 2012)

If the goverment has to impose austerity what does that mean to you?


Do you think there is a way to prepare for it?


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

"Austerity" was named the word of the year by Merriam-Webster in 2010.

I looked this up to make sure I understood the term in regards to economics:

In economics, austerity refers to a policy of deficit-cutting by lowering spending often via a reduction in the amount of benefits and public services provided. Austerity policies are often used by governments to try to reduce their deficit spending and are sometimes coupled with increases in taxes to demonstrate long-term fiscal solvency to creditors.

Supporters of austerity predict that under expansionary fiscal contraction (EFC), a major reduction in government spending can change future expectations about taxes and government spending, encouraging private consumption and resulting in overall economic expansion.

Critics argue that, in periods of recession and high unemployment, austerity policies are counter-productive, because: a) reduced government spending can increase unemployment, which increases safety net spending while reducing tax revenue; b) reduced government spending reduces GDP, which means the debt to GDP ratio examined by creditors and rating agencies does not improve; and c) short-term government spending financed by deficits supports economic growth when consumers and businesses are unwilling or unable to do so.


Been there done that - for 10 years. The problem with government austerity is that you never know what the outcome of a single austerity measure will be. They all sound good but in my experience they are like dominoes. The one falling may not be you but that one is going to hit another and another and eventually they will all affect you. And of course the easy measures are always taken first and they hit the middle class hardest. Do they work? Oh yes. But it is painful and takes years to get back to where you were if ever.

Can you prepare for this? Yes but it is something that everyone should have been doing all along but few have done or are doing. You can make yourself as self sufficient as possible, ensure that you are debt free and have lots of savings to back you up but if you are directly part of an austerity measure you won't know how long you will be affected. And of course choosing the right line of work helps. There are some things that people just can't do without.


----------



## katheh (Jul 21, 2012)

Considering how much government money goes into the private/corporate sector in either contracts, deferred/forgiven tax kickbacks, or outright corporate welfare, I think they could austere out almost all social spending and still not make much of a dent in the problem. We already have a crumbling infrastructure, you can't stop spending money you aren't spending.

I'm sure if austerity is implemented, we will see it first in the form of cuts to social programs, however, only a change in the government support of private businesses and corporations will make a real difference.

To prepare, we have a large city garden, I make our bread, etc. We are stockpiling foods and other products. I stocked up on winter coats at Goodwill. We are getting rid of my car (17yo also has a car, if needed I will use his if DH has the family car at work, mostly I use my bike).


----------



## edcopp (Oct 9, 2004)

I may need tu use some of my Y2K preps.


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

There is a reason why "cold turkey" is such a successful cure for dependency.


----------



## mekasmom (Jan 19, 2010)

veggiecanner said:


> If the goverment has to impose austerity what does that mean to you?
> 
> 
> Do you think there is a way to prepare for it?


Let's be realistic. Austerity will only dictate rules to people of lower and middle incomes. The ultra wealthy will get even richer. The extremely poor will starve while the middle class looses numbers to sickness with no access to medical care.
Prayer is the only way to prepare for this type of dictatorship and tyranny you are foreseeing.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> I think they could austere out almost all *social spending* and still not make much of a dent in the problem


Over half the budget is considered "social spending".

Funds to industries support *jobs*


----------



## logbuilder (Jan 31, 2006)

I would offer that the greatest impact to us as citizens will be to changes at the local level. Cities, counties and states have big debts that they will need to come to terms with. They will increase taxes, lower services and default on debt. That will impact us sooner than federal measures and in more personal ways.

For me, one of my most important preps is having something stashed away to pay future taxes. I NEVER want my property to be taken for lack of paying taxes. Also, look at the potential services you would expect from your local govt. Assume all of them stop. Prepare for that.


----------



## machinist (Aug 3, 2010)

County services affect us mostly in the form of road maintenance and funding the county landfill. We have managed to get off the county water system, have no kids in school, and so far (knock on wood), haven't needed any of the charity services. We don't even use the county parks. 

Cuts in Federal social spending would hit us hard, since we benefit from Social Security, Medicare, Federal highway programs, Ag programs benefit our neighbors (and my potential customers). There are undoubtedly many more I haven't thought of. 

But even if we were not hit directly by spending cuts, the previously mentioned knock-on effects would get us. The general standard of living will drop. I say WILL drop, because whether austerity is adopted as a formal policy by govt. or not, it will come in the form of inflation due to dollar devaluation, again, either by US policy, or, forced on the US by falling foreign exchange rates causing import prices to rise. 

Our approach to prepare for this is to reduce our cost of living by living below our means, avoiding debt at all costs, investing in self reliance, keeping a viable potential business waiting to be implemented (re-opening my repair shop when needed), maintaining our health/alternative medical strategies, and hedging inflation where possible.


----------



## mpillow (Jan 24, 2003)

will the SS check come? will the disabilty check come? will the fed. pension come? will the state pension come? will many private companies that you may have retired from fold and no longer send you your retirement money....or will they seize 401k/ira assets?
Less teaching jobs or none....

Or will prices inflate and eat up what you do get....or both...

It certainly won't be good...


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2012)

mpillow said:


> will the SS check come? will the disabilty check come? will the fed. pension come? will the state pension come? will many private companies that you may have retired from fold and no longer send you your retirement money....or will they seize 401k/ira assets?
> Less teaching jobs or none....
> 
> Or will prices inflate and eat up what you do get....or both...
> ...


I remember the austerity that they had in the 70's. It wasn't that bad. But things were tight. 
It sure would have helped if i had had a garden.

i didn't start this thread to complain about cut backs. More i wanted to know things on how to get through the situation.


----------



## time (Jan 30, 2011)

veggiecanner said:


> I remember the austerity that they had in the 70's. It wasn't that bad. But things were tight.
> It sure would have helped if i had had a garden.
> 
> i didn't start this thread to complain about cut backs. More i wanted to know things on how to get through the situation.


I believe you are living in a form of austerity now, depending on your state of course.

Idaho has already made some cuts. Granted, we were in a strong position to begin with as compared to others. But austerity measure have been taken. 

Prepare for austerity as you would prepare for any recession/depression. Everyone should be prepared for financial collapse anyway, as best as they are able, whether it comes or not. If austerity is needed to the scale that it will cause recession, then recession was coming anyway.

The D's and R's will fight over what needs cuts.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

Job creators? The only jobs they create are outsourced jobs. Wonder where all the jobs have gone? Yours is in China or Brazil or India. And both parties dare not put in tariffs on these cheap goods to make American made goods able to compete because they are terrified of losing the big bucks support from business. The Repubs had 8 years to do this and Obama has had 4. Both sold out the American worker. 

If $2 an hour is middle income in China while it is $20 in the US then companies will fight tooth and nail to prevent an equalizing tariff so that they can make the huge profit from the low production cost - and they sure don't sell to American consumers at a profit price that accurately reflects the cost of production. I am sorry but I am so stunned at the blinkers that I now laugh at all the fear about Government taking over everyone's life when it is corporations that have already done so - including complete control of politicians on both sides. Know your real enemy.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

veggiecanner said:


> I remember the austerity that they had in the 70's. It wasn't that bad. But things were tight.
> It sure would have helped if i had had a garden.
> 
> i didn't start this thread to complain about cut backs. More i wanted to know things on how to get through the situation.


I remember the recessions and austerity of the early 70s and then again of the early 80s and they were harsh - but not as harsh as the huge deficit and the world economic situation will make it this time around. A garden is of course a necessity but if you can't pay your mortgage or taxes because you are unemployed, under employed, lost most of your clients or customers (because they too have had their incomes cut or dissolved) or had your pension cut then the next owner gets the garden. 

Cutting social services to the poor, middle class and retirees is the easy way - and the cowards way - out because to go after the rich is political suicide. Greece is under austerity measures and seniors have lost 40% of their income. Blanket cutting social services will just add to the suffering of those who have worked and are entitled to their benefits. On the other hand restructuring enforcement will catch those who are not elligible or who use the system. And of course prosecuting all the employers who hire illegals which fills jobs that citizens could hold and forces down wages and benefits would be a great start. But never going to happen. Too much power in the hands of corporations to dictate public policy. 

To get through the kind of austerity that would be needed to reduce the deficit (which means a decade at least) then you have to stop ALL spending other than the bare necessities, have no debts, no mortgage, lots of cash savings or gold, lots of food supplies and the ability to produce most of your food, water and energy source (or pay for it) and of course to have a secure kind of job or be self employed in a field that people will still need. You also have to have good luck because if you or a family member gets sickâ¦

Austerity measures do work but historically the poor and middle class are the ones who have to sacrifice. That is a simple reality.


----------



## belladulcinea (Jun 21, 2006)

We married in 1972 then between 1973 and 1974 watched as milk, gas, meat etc. double in price, not a few cents at time like now but jump from .35 to .60-.75 a gallon for milk and gas. We cut back to one car. We made 3.00 an hour in 1974, dh got a raise when he changed jobs and I went back to work. We gardened really big and actually bought our first small home in 1974. When we got really squeezed for cash we worked every job we were offered. Between us we had 4 w2s and 8 1099s, plus we took on hedge trimming, mowing and dh went back to playing in the band. We were able to pay down our mortgage and pay off the car.

We have too much debt at the moment so every spare dime goes to paying it off. I had to quit my job 3 years ago, I'm too old for 3,4,5 year olds! I'm picking up some part time work here and there, but mainly I am cutting everything we can on the home front. 

Is this what you were looking for?


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2012)

For being on a forum that is for independent people I am sure getting some different answers than i thought i would.
It seems to me the poor have benifited alot. More than they should have already. So now they may have to buck up and become unpoor.


----------



## mekasmom (Jan 19, 2010)

veggiecanner said:


> It seems to me the poor have benifited alot. More than they should have already. So now they may have to buck up and become unpoor.


If severe austerity kicks in the poor will have no safety net. Many will go hungry, have no medical care at all, there will be death. The only people who will make it through relatively unscathed is the very wealthy. Don't be angry at the poor. They have little now. They will have almost nothing if austerity cuts kick in on them. Look at SS. That would be cut drastically. Older people would have almost no monthly income, very little medical care, and no extra "services". Compassion is a good thing. It's much better than jealousy and anger. There but for the grace of God go I, or we, or any one of us.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

veggiecanner said:


> For being on a forum that is for independent people I am sure getting some different answers than i thought i would.
> It seems to me the poor have benifited alot. More than they should have already. So now they may have to buck up and become unpoor.


Yes the the poor will have to buck up (suffer) but the burden will continue to fall on the middle class (suffer more with more to lose). This has already happened and continues to happen. People are running faster than ever trying to stay even in the same place. Most people are earning the same as 12 years ago or a little more or a lot less but expenses have and are skyrocketing. Now when you introduce austerity there will be more job losses and less income to spend. Where I live we just lost (May and June) another 500 jobs due to austerity measures. It is a small place of 30,000. On average these people spent $3500 every month in the community (we have a higher income level than the US) which is a loss of $1,750,000 a month. So we are going to lose 21 million $ this year. Housing prices have already dropped as people try to sell to move away and services, stores, hotels and restaurants are laying off people. So more unemployed. For every full time person who loses their job 20 others have their income affected either through reduction or redundancy.


----------



## silverseeds (Apr 28, 2012)

As far as Im concerned austerity is 100% a given. the longer we wait as a society to make those deep cuts, the deeper the cuts will be in the future. Its simple math if you break down our budget issues. We cant grow out of this, just to fund current obligations as of 2 years ago, we would have needed to raise and additional 14% of the nations GDP per year indefinitely, when the entire federal budget is 14.9% of GDP. So basically between cuts and raised taxes wed have to make up almost as much as what our entire budget is currently. 

Some will claim we cant make cuts now, it will hurt to bad. Yet the debts grow i the meantime faster then we could expect to grow IF we ever got out of our recession. So we just slip further out to sea. So I expect people to wait until its much more obvious we cant continue the charade, heck we could cut the military 100% and still be deeply into an unsustainable path. 

So... to me austerity is a given. Just a matter of time. So how to prepare? Imo own as much of your life as you are able. It will be different for everyone circumstances, but for me that means growing as much of my food as possible. Having few debts. Having some cash and silver in hand should I need to leave. Money for future taxes so I can retain my land and ability to eat should an income not be available. etc If you can pay off your home save up your extra cash, so you could pay for as long as possible until you can find an income again. 

I also think things like putting in fruit and nut and berry bushes far in excess of what you can use (presuming you have space of course) is a wise idea. they take awhile to grow in, but they could be a valuable source of income one day. Pick varieties for that role and types that dont need to be sprayed or any of that nonsense. 

this is my thinking anyway.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

mekasmom said:


> If severe austerity kicks in the poor will have no safety net. Many will go hungry, have no medical care at all, there will be death. The only people who will make it through relatively unscathed is the very wealthy. Don't be angry at the poor. They have little now. They will have almost nothing if austerity cuts kick in on them. Look at SS. That would be cut drastically. Older people would have almost no monthly income, very little medical care, and no extra "services". Compassion is a good thing. It's much better than jealousy and anger. There but for the grace of God go I, or we, or any one of us.


I mentioned this to a friend when we were talking about cuts - "if anymore gets cut from your Mom's pension she will have to live with you or you will have to give her enough money to make up the amount she has lost." He got very angry because this would be a disaster for him financially and with his wife since she and Mom don't get on at all. So the result of austerity in pensions means either help personally and show your real independence against the system and support of austerity measures to cut the deficit or let the old suffer. Ditto for the young. My neighbour said she will run away from home if her two sons end up back at home single and with family. And these people love their family but have done the math.


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2012)

emdeengee said:


> Yes the the poor will have to buck up (suffer) but the burden will continue to fall on the middle class (suffer more with more to lose). This has already happened and continues to happen. People are running faster than ever trying to stay even in the same place. Most people are earning the same as 12 years ago or a little more or a lot less but expenses have and are skyrocketing. Now when you introduce austerity there will be more job losses and less income to spend. Where I live we just lost (May and June) another 500 jobs due to austerity measures. It is a small place of 30,000. On average these people spent $3500 every month in the community (we have a higher income level than the US) which is a loss of $1,750,000 a month. So we are going to lose 21 million $ this year. Housing prices have already dropped as people try to sell to move away and services, stores, hotels and restaurants are laying off people. So more unemployed. For every full time person who loses their job 20 others have their income affected either through reduction or redundancy.


"Buck up" to me means try harder to take care of them selves.
If they did that the middle class wouldn't be suffering.
And before you get all upset. I would like you to understand. i am in no way near middle class. MY dh and i live way below that. 
If this country hadn't been living way above it's means to start with we wouldn't have to have austerity.


----------



## Sourdough (Dec 28, 2011)

veggiecanner said:


> It seems to me the poor have benifited alot. More than they should have already. So now they may have to buck up and become unpoor.


More likely riots, higher crime in "YOUR" neighborhood, marshal law, military dictatorship.


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2012)

Sourdough said:


> More likely riots, higher crime in "YOUR" neighborhood, marshal law, military dictatorship.


I don't remember that happening in the 70's. There were protests in the big city's but not because of the austerity.


----------



## Sourdough (Dec 28, 2011)

veggiecanner said:


> I don't remember that happening in the 70's. There were protests in the big city's but not because of the austerity.


look at Egypt and PIIGS.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

veggiecanner said:


> "Buck up" to me means try harder to take care of them selves.
> If they did that the middle class wouldn't be suffering.
> And before you get all upset. I would like you to understand. i am in no way near middle class. MY dh and i live way below that.
> If this country hadn't been living way above it's means to start with we wouldn't have to have austerity.


The middle class is not suffering because of the poor. The poor have just been getting poorer as has the middle class. Middles are suffering because millions of middle income jobs have been exported and their incomes have dropped and there is no work to replace what has been lost and meanwhile everything is getting more expensive. 

Not all poor are lazy and leaches and don't try to take care of themselves and their families. By your own testimony YOU aren't. Many poor have worked all their lives and continue to do so and many of the poorest are disabled with very limit ability to buck up. As the middle shrinks it falls into the poor zone swelling the number of "poor" people. The majority of newcomers on food stamps used to be middle class. So a lot of the poor who you want to buck up were middle class and are bucking up but just can't get ahead. 

And yes the spending has been outrageous but two wars in two countries for over 10 years with no way to pay for them has added to the deficit. If that money had been used to advance education and training and build infrastructure a lot of the poor and most of the middle class would not have gone down hill. And of course the corruption amongst people of all levels is just appalling but only more enforcement will change that. And if the export/import balance had ever been honestly addressed there would not be thousands of US manufacturers out of business creating vast numbers of unemployed and thus "poor".


----------



## Ann-NWIowa (Sep 28, 2002)

I'd be happy if the austerity cuts began with government at the top. Get rid of high paid .gov employees who do nothing or very little or something totally useless. Probably could cut 50% off the top before it would affect anyone other than the individuals cut. 

We all know times are going to get harder. Take a look at Greece for ideas of how it will go. 

I also remember the 70's and early 80's with inflation, job cuts, shortages. It wasn't fun but we survived. Of course, we were younger and more flexible then and not dependent on Social Security and Medicare as we are now.

Some random things I remember were the inflation. Shortages of gas. As people jumped back into gardening, there was a shortage of canning lids and jars and a waiting list to buy a deep freeze. Interest rates were high which was good if you had a savings account but not so good if you needed credit.


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2012)

"Some random things I remember were the inflation. Shortages of gas. As people jumped back into gardening, there was a shortage of canning lids and jars and a waiting list to buy a deep freeze. Interest rates were high which was good if you had a savings account but not so good if you needed credit. "


Good information to know.
So having a way to dehydrate, would be good.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

I remember price and wage control in the 70s. That worked to keep inflation down during the recession. I worked in a big department store at the time and it was very odd doing the pricing. You had to retail price according to the wholesale price and proper stock rotation was even more important. LOL! You could have a bath towel that cost $2.49 and at the bottom of the pile the same towel was $2.69. You could not increase the old price. Of course customers knew this so there was never any "old" stock lying around and there were often some very sour looks when one customer paid 20 cents more than the other. But it sure kept things balanced during such hard times.


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2012)

emdeengee said:


> The middle class is not suffering because of the poor. The poor have just been getting poorer as has the middle class. Middles are suffering because millions of middle income jobs have been exported and their incomes have dropped and there is no work to replace what has been lost and meanwhile everything is getting more expensive.
> 
> Not all poor are lazy and leaches and don't try to take care of themselves and their families. By your own testimony YOU aren't. Many poor have worked all their lives and continue to do so and many of the poorest are disabled with very limit ability to buck up. As the middle shrinks it falls into the poor zone swelling the number of "poor" people. The majority of newcomers on food stamps used to be middle class. So a lot of the poor who you want to buck up were middle class and are bucking up but just can't get ahead.
> 
> And yes the spending has been outrageous but two wars in two countries for over 10 years with no way to pay for them has added to the deficit. If that money had been used to advance education and training and build infrastructure a lot of the poor and most of the middle class would not have gone down hill. And of course the corruption amongst people of all levels is just appalling but only more enforcement will change that. And if the export/import balance had ever been honestly addressed there would not be thousands of US manufacturers out of business creating vast numbers of unemployed and thus "poor".


Many unemplyoyed here can still work. And they do. 
Working for some one else isn't always the way to go.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

Ann-NWIowa said:


> I'd be happy if the austerity cuts began with government at the top. Get rid of high paid .gov employees who do nothing or very little or something totally useless. Probably could cut 50% off the top before it would affect anyone other than the individuals cut.
> 
> We all know times are going to get harder. Take a look at Greece for ideas of how it will go.
> 
> ...


Most government agencies are top heavy and could stand culling at the top but more employees that actually do the work. I also think that companies need to control the bonuses given to the top which have become ludicrous and reward the bottom work force with higher wages and benefits which would strengthen the middle class which is on life support right now. More money in the employees' pockets to spend and invest. That is the way it used to be and as a result the US was strong. No empire has ever survived the depletion of he middle class.


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2012)

emdeengee said:


> Most government agencies are top heavy and could stand culling at the top but more employees that actually do the work. I also think that companies need to control the bonuses given to the top which have become ludicrous and reward the bottom work force with higher wages and benefits which would strengthen the middle class which is on life support right now. More money in the employees' pockets to spend and invest. That is the way it used to be and as a result the US was strong. No empire has ever survived the depletion of he middle class.


Many goverment agencys need closed period.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

veggiecanner said:


> Many unemplyoyed here can still work. And they do.
> Working for some one else isn't always the way to go.


Yes self employment is a way to work but you have to have people with a need and income to buy your products or services. When I moved here my service was in great demand. Now there are too many people who lost jobs in both the private sector and government trying to set up home businesses for this service. I was well established and continued to employ others and lost only those clients who went under themselves but the new businesses just could not find customers. When I retired I made sure to pass my clients off to not just one self employed person but to three who I knew could do a good job. But they are still underemployed.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

veggiecanner said:


> Many goverment agencys need closed period.


Obviously.


----------



## mekasmom (Jan 19, 2010)

veggiecanner said:


> If this country hadn't been living way above it's means to start with we wouldn't have to have austerity.


That is very true. Our own greed has caused these problems.
But I still feel we need a safety net to protect the weak, old, and lower classes. I think that simply protecting the ultra wealthy is wrong.


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2012)

mekasmom said:


> That is very true. Our own greed has caused these problems.
> But I still feel we need a safety net to protect the weak, old, and lower classes. I think that simply protecting the ultra wealthy is wrong.


The weak and old yes. Many stay in the lower classes because of the welfare programs.


----------



## time (Jan 30, 2011)

emdeengee said:


> The middle class is not suffering because of the poor. The poor have just been getting poorer as has the middle class. Middles are suffering because millions of middle income jobs have been exported and their incomes have dropped and there is no work to replace what has been lost and meanwhile everything is getting more expensive.
> 
> Not all poor are lazy and leaches and don't try to take care of themselves and their families. By your own testimony YOU aren't. Many poor have worked all their lives and continue to do so and many of the poorest are disabled with very limit ability to buck up. As the middle shrinks it falls into the poor zone swelling the number of "poor" people. The majority of newcomers on food stamps used to be middle class. So a lot of the poor who you want to buck up were middle class and are bucking up but just can't get ahead.
> 
> And yes the spending has been outrageous but two wars in two countries for over 10 years with no way to pay for them has added to the deficit. If that money had been used to advance education and training and build infrastructure a lot of the poor and most of the middle class would not have gone down hill. And of course the corruption amongst people of all levels is just appalling but only more enforcement will change that. And if the export/import balance had ever been honestly addressed there would not be thousands of US manufacturers out of business creating vast numbers of unemployed and thus "poor".


Unfortunately, most of your assumptions are wrong.

Austerity affects the rich as it does the poor. Nobody escapes. The rich have long loved welfare and other government programs for the poor and middle class. It gives them government money to spend. Where does that money go? It goes to the rich that sell stuff and provide services to the poor. The rich love the government handouts, or they would not have allowed them in the first place. Welfare makes the rich richer. It's easy money. It's money the government creates. It ends up in the rich folks pocket.

The problem with the economy is that for many years, both the rich and the poor have been suckling. The mammary is drying up.

Watch the markets. The rich(investors) have a ball when when the gov injects money into the system. Why is that? Because they are vacuum cleaners. Even if every penny went to the poor directly, the rich know it is going to end up in their pocket.

Welfare and other free money programs, spending programs such as the epa and everything else, are causing the problem. EVERYONE is sucking from the same cow.


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2012)

emdeengee said:


> Yes self employment is a way to work but you have to have people with a need and income to buy your products or services. When I moved here my service was in great demand. Now there are too many people who lost jobs in both the private sector and government trying to set up home businesses for this service. I was well established and continued to employ others and lost only those clients who went under themselves but the new businesses just could not find customers. When I retired I made sure to pass my clients off to not just one self employed person but to three who I knew could do a good job. But they are still underemployed.


You have to be a jack of all trades. Be willing to try new things.
There is always a service or product that people need. You said so your self.


----------



## time (Jan 30, 2011)

mekasmom said:


> That is very true. Our own greed has caused these problems.
> But I still feel we need a safety net to protect the weak, old, and lower classes. I think that simply protecting the ultra wealthy is wrong.


There are safety nets. People don't want to have to *be* the safety net.

Read emdeengee's comment.



> I mentioned this to a friend when we were talking about cuts - "if anymore gets cut from your Mom's pension she will have to live with you or you will have to give her enough money to make up the amount she has lost." *He got very angry because this would be a disaster for him financially and with his wife since she and Mom don't get on at all. *So the result of austerity in pensions means either help personally and show your real independence against the system and support of austerity measures to cut the deficit or let the old suffer. Ditto for the young. *My neighbour said she will run away from home if her two sons end up back at home single and with family.* And these people love their family but have done the math.


People want the government to take care of their old mother's and their children that should be independant. They don't want the responcibility for their own kin. Really, there isn't much more to say. People don't want a "safety net". They want the government to take care of their kin so they don't have to. Period.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

veggiecanner said:


> You have to be a jack of all trades. Be willing to try new things.
> There is always a service or product that people need. You said so your self.


Yes you can try new things but you are in competition with those to whom this is not new. Every mechanic I have ever known works at their day job but then does lots of work from home. Same with electricians. You may be a good amateur but can you compete with a pro who needs to earn extra? Even before I started my own business I had more clients than I could fit in in the evenings and on weekends. One of the reasons I decided to go it alone. 

And not everyone can be a jack of all trades simply because of location. I could board horses - but not where I live now. And anyways with austerity there will be less horses to board as happened in 2008-2010 with the recession. I could raise chickens again but now that the city has allowed chickens in back gardens every one and his cat has them and is selling the extra. And this is actually hurting the two local farms that do this for a living. Competition, competition, competition. I still buy from the local farmers because I have supported them for years and I know for sure these are organic free range eggs.

I can grow a sustaining garden but not one for profit - not where I live now. And as for crafts. There are a few people who are real artisans and artists who will always make money but how many knitted pot holders does the world need? 

The problem when everyone needs to find more money is that there is a lot of competition. And a surplus means less for everyone. My local grocery store just had an ad for 2 jobs. The manager is my neighbour. He had more than 230 applications. Just 5 years ago he could not find anyone to work.


----------



## machinist (Aug 3, 2010)

Quote: " You may be a good amateur but can you compete with a pro who needs to earn extra?"

Yes. Because I don't have to make any set amount of money at it, I WILL do a better, more careful job of the work because it is for ME--I'm not trying to beat the time I bid for the job. I have made it my business to become a pro at most of the things I do. And what I do for me is not taxable. If I work and earn money, I have to pay income tax, and so does anyone I hire to do work for me. That adds 50% to the bill, when sales taxes are added on, which gives the DIY guy the advantage. 

That isn't always the answer, since in some cases, it is cheaper for me to buy grain from a guy who raises hundreds of acres of it, rather than produce the same amount in the back yard. And, I get the grain before it goes to the elevator where they dump the bug poison on it. Sometimes the farmer needs a bit of welding done, so we work it out. It always works out that the person who knows the most about all aspects of make VS buy, is the one who comes out the best.


The greed was on the part of politicians who overspent to buy votes with pork programs. And, the bankers who took advantage of every situation, often illegally, but are never prosecuted for that. 

Thus, we have the unsustainable national debt, and consumers who are in debt up to their eyeballs. 

How do we get through this? For those of us at retirement age, it means working until we die and yet existing for the rest of our lives at a much lower standard of living. Here's how we think about it.

-Only spend on what is absolutely necessary. No $200 special phones, but $10 Tracphone. No "socializing" use of it, either, but only necessity.

-Wife cuts my hair. I haven't been to a barber shop in 22 years. She also does our taxes. She is a pro at both things. 

-Alternative remedies for health problems. No $13 cream for athlete's foot, but soak my feet in diluted vinegar, wash, then dust my socks with 50/50 cornstarch and boric acid powder (sold as ant poison, at ,$3 a pound). 

-Buy USED for everything possible, and fix whatever needs it. This is how I equipped an entire machine and welding shop, built our outbuildings, and am now working on alternative energy. I built our woodstove, will build solar window box heaters, added on a sunroom that contains the wood heating stove, is a place to start garden seedlings, has a gas stove for canning to keep the heat out of the house, and houses solar batteries. 

-Make/produce everything you can. For us that means vegetables, fruits, herbs, eggs, some grain, and we do the processing to all of it. We grind flour and chicken feed (much cheaper), bake our bread, can our food and make our own convenience foods, like canned soups. We have a cistern and supply our own water, and the septic system covers that part, so we have no water nor sewage bills. I have the shop and make garden tools, hand tools, do our repair and maintenance work, and build machinery as needed. A solar dehydrator is on my list to build now, after I get the solar PV completed. I trade for firewood so there is no heating bill. When the solar system is finished, there will be no electric bill. 

-We shop at Goodwill stores, Salvation Army, flea markets, farm auctions, the metal junkyard, and yard sales. 

-The only clothing we buy new is socks and underwear, and the occassional T-shirt. 

-Our home was furnished by my grandad, a furniture maker, over 40 years ago, and with some items that I made. We bought a few incidentals used. 

-Our cars are both small pickup trucks. They last longer, cost less to buy, insure, and license, because they are old. They are reliable and cheap on gas because I keep them in good shape. Trucks are easier to repair because of the body style making easier access and parts are often cheaper too. 

-I bought cheap tire repair and balancing equipment at Harbor Freight and cover those needs. Have a good set of automotive tools, accumulated cheaply from auctions, junkyards and flea markets. 

-Wife has a sewing machine and makes some clothing, curtains, does some upholstery as needed, and does clothing repairs and alterations. 

-I learned to do electrical work at home, plumbing repairs, lay brick and blocks, do carpentry, and interior trim work, so that is all done ourselves. My wife is really good at finishing drywall, too. 

-My wife cooks from scratch, and keeps us healthy with balanced meals. 

There is a lot more, learned over our 66 years, but that's a good start.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

time said:


> There are safety nets. People don't want to have to *be* the safety net.
> 
> Read emdeengee's comment.
> 
> ...


That is just not true according to my experience. People love their parents and grown up kids but math does not lie. If you yourself have cut expenses to the bone and your income has dropped how can you give your Mom extra money when her pension is cut or disappears? You can't so she who worked hard all her life and is destroyed by her lack of independence lives with you which puts more of a financial strain on you even if she can contribute - especially if there are health issues. 

Same for boomerang klids. If they loose their jobs and cannot find enough work to pay even basic expenses (and for many basic means student loans) as is the case in many regions because they are competing with the unemployed who have years of education and experience and NEED to take what is a starting salary then you pay. And if you are struggling even with their contributions then things get very tough. And not all families get along. Not all families survive this sort of stress intact.


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2012)

emdeengee said:


> That is just not true according to my experience. People love their parents and grown up kids but math does not lie. If you yourself have cut expenses to the bone and your income has dropped how can you give your Mom extra money when her pension is cut or disappears? You can't so she who worked hard all her life and is destroyed by her lack of independence lives with you which puts more of a financial strain on you even if she can contribute - especially if there are health issues.
> 
> Same for boomerang klids. If they loose their jobs and cannot find enough work to pay even basic expenses (and for many basic means student loans) as is the case in many regions because they are competing with the unemployed who have years of education and experience and NEED to take what is a starting salary then you pay. And if you are struggling even with their contributions then things get very tough. And not all families get along. Not all families survive this sort of stress intact.


The problem is *all* the welfare is causing the inflation. It has to stop.
It's either stop it now, or crash.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

time said:


> Unfortunately, most of your assumptions are wrong.
> 
> Austerity affects the rich as it does the poor. Nobody escapes. The rich have long loved welfare and other government programs for the poor and middle class. It gives them government money to spend. Where does that money go? It goes to the rich that sell stuff and provide services to the poor. The rich love the government handouts, or they would not have allowed them in the first place. Welfare makes the rich richer. It's easy money. It's money the government creates. It ends up in the rich folks pocket.
> 
> ...


Your 'circle of life' does not start at the beginning. The money that the government pays out in benefits to the poor which then goes into the hands of the middle class (don't forget all those small business owners!) and the rich comes from the taxes paid by the middle class and the rich. The difference is the rich make extra to keep and exchange but the middle class runs in place or falls behind because they are reusing their own money. And when it is airy fairy money just printed out of spider silk the middle class will bear the debt.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Let's make sure we are all talking about the same austerity.

Are we talking about "North American" austerity {Canada and USA}
Just USA austerity
or just Canadian austerity.

I know some hate it when I point out, there are different conditions in different countries (Canada/USA or even if our British or other country friends) chime into a conversation.

It pays to know the laws and conditions that a poster is coming from so you can judge their statements to the conditions and laws that are applicable to YOU.

Outlooks vary due to locations on the North American map and within sections of Canada and sections of America.

Pay attention to where the commenting person comes from to get a better reading of their posted view points. It can and does make a difference in understanding them and their points of view.


----------



## Sourdough (Dec 28, 2011)

veggiecanner said:


> It's either stop it now, or crash.


It will not stop, most likely not even slow down. The solution will come in the form of a 20% to 30% population reduction. About 70 to 90 MILLION dead Americans.


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2012)

Sourdough said:


> It will not stop, most likely not even slow down. The solution will come in the form of a 20% to 30% population reduction. About 70 to 90 MILLION dead Americans.


How do you know this? We've had austerity in this country. People made it through ok.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

veggiecanner said:


> The problem is *all* the welfare is causing the inflation. It has to stop.
> It's either stop it now, or crash.


I disagree with "all" however I am in full support of stronger regulation of welfare benefits (not pensions and unemployment which people have paid for for themselves!) and ending all subsidy programs to business. If you believe in the capitalist economic system then sink or swim on your won. 

Welfare did not cause the current destruction all on its own so its share of punitive measures should only reflect its part. The US is rich enough to provide necessary social services and safety nets to all its citizens in need. There are parts of the welfare system which are abused but they can be regulated. There is enormous waste in government and the military and the politicians are in the hands of big business and big money so nothing that would regulate and protect the average person will ever get passed. Deal with that mess first. Concentrate on the real abusers of the system.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

AngieM2 said:


> Let's make sure we are all talking about the same austerity.
> 
> Are we talking about "North American" austerity {Canada and USA}
> Just USA austerity
> ...


Outlooks may vary but math does not.


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2012)

emdeengee said:


> I disagree with "all" however I am in full support of stronger regulation of welfare benefits (not pensions and unemployment which people have paid for for themselves!) and ending all subsidy programs to business. If you believe in the capitalist economic system then sink or swim on your won.
> 
> Welfare did not cause the current destruction all on its own so its share of punitive measures should only reflect its part. The US is rich enough to provide necessary social services and safety nets to all its citizens in need. There are parts of the welfare system which are abused but they can be regulated. There is enormous waste in government and the military and the politicians are in the hands of big business and big money so nothing that would regulate and protect the average person will ever get passed. Deal with that mess first. Concentrate on the real abusers of the system.


While i find this statement credible, i also see it being used to make excuses for the abusers. The definition of needy has been stretched and the standard of living for the abusers raised beyond the workers.
If the US is so rich why are we borrowing so much? I think you might be getting the US citizens mixed up with it's federal goverment who is not so rich. And should quit acting like it.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

Getting back to the OP as Veggie wrote "I didn't start this thread to complain about cut backs. More i wanted to know things on how to get through the situation." 

I can only draw on personal experiences which were the result of recession, government austerity measures, private company layoffs and returning to school to get more education.

If you don't have back up funds you really suffer. We have faced very hard times when we had debt and no savings and we have faced very hard times when we had no debt and savings. Guess which was better? 

All financial advisors tell you to have at least 6 months of basic expenses for times when incomes are down or gone. If you also have large food stocks this just adds to your security. Debt is a sure fired way to go under because no matter what your personal position is you still have to service your debt.

So I guess the most important things are to pay off debt and accumulate savings both of which give you security and independence.

Right now if we are directly hit by austerity measures (or indirectly because no person is an island) we have lots of food and other products in storage and keep adding to it. We are in the process of getting a new wood stove and have nearly enough wood that we would need for a backup source of heating for two winters. Lots of candles and solar lanterns and flashlights. Books and games for entertainment. Water in storage but that will be a problem very quickly because of where we live. Or rather in summer. Winter has lots of snow. Gasoline in storage. We have enough in savings to pay basic expenses for 2 years. We have no debts, a newish vehicle and great tires, enough in other savings to pay off the last of the mortgage (not doing so for a personal reason) but will hold this in reserve and skills that we can use to be self sufficient. If worse comes to worse we can bug out to our wilderness home but that would be tough at this time of life.


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

Forgive me, I've posted this before. The root causes are not even being discussed. Why are we in this condition? 9/11/2008 550 billion is electronically withdrawn from money market funds in a little over three hours. Who withdrew those funds? I was laid off in early 2008 and that has little to do with this story but I have been under-employed since then. Who benefits or is benefiting from this calamity? The banks expanded their scope of profit taking when the Glass-Stegal act was repealed. At that point, the banking industry changed. For years the home loans were AAA rated and that was truthful. When banks got the opportunity to roll those mortgages into a package and then sell them as AAA rated securities, they were making $ hand over fist. Then they decided that they needed more mortgages, the government did not force them, the bankers went to the government and got the way paved for them to lower the lending standards so that it would not appear that they were giving out loans to bad risks. So the APR and all of the other loan gimmicks came into play. The bankers needed to get as many loans to roll into these exotic packages because everyone wanted in, yes, including much of europe. So the bankers continued packaging all these new loans but now they took an extra step, they insured the loans at 100 cents on the dollar, yes that was pricey, but it was apparently done with foreknowledge. In 2006, the failed loans began to hit the radar, they started piling up. It continued until 2008 when the bottom fell out. The bankers collected their insurance [AIG and other entities] and squealed to high heaven that they were going to fail. We, you and I covered their risky dealings and we hold the burden today. The poor did not cause this, the middle class did not cause this, the entitlements did not cause this. Inept government and corrupt businesses caused this, we're just their source. In many ways it sincerely looks like it was planned to happen just as it is, soon there will be a growing percentage of elites as the lower classes dwindle, it seems to be as such.


----------



## Sourdough (Dec 28, 2011)

Just walk away from the system, if you live a subsistence lifestyle you pay NO taxes, if you don't pay taxes you don't care about where other peoples tax money goes.


----------



## janetn (Apr 26, 2012)

What are my plans is their is austerity. I have three years taxes saved. Already figured I can live bare bones on less than $500 a month. One way or another I can make that. Just have to be adaptable and versify.

I got the basics covered house heat and food - basic caloric needs anyway. The extras like coffee chocolate ect Ive got stashed


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2012)

I am glad some people can say no when they are offered loans they can't afford. or we would really be in trouble.

I am getting the idea that people confuse austerity with an total collapse.
I don't see it that way.


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2012)

janetn said:


> What are my plans is their is austerity. I have three years taxes saved. Already figured I can live bare bones on less than $500 a month. One way or another I can make that. Just have to be adaptable and versify.
> 
> I got the basics covered house heat and food - basic caloric needs anyway. The extras like coffee chocolate ect Ive got stashed


$500 a month is hard, but doable. we've been doing it for quite awhile.


----------



## time (Jan 30, 2011)

emdeengee said:


> Your 'circle of life' does not start at the beginning. The money that the government pays out in benefits to the poor which then goes into the hands of the middle class (don't forget all those small business owners!) and the rich comes from the taxes paid by the middle class and the rich. The difference is the rich make extra to keep and exchange but the middle class runs in place or falls behind because they are reusing their own money. And when it is airy fairy money just printed out of spider silk the middle class will bear the debt.


You bet it hurts the middle middle class. It ruins the middle class. It's the middle class that's doing most of the complaining. They are doing the complaining because they feel the most pain.

Austerity has to be across the board. It can't be social programs only. It has to ALL of government spending. Corporate welfare needs to go, foreign aid needs to go, including financial aid and defense. All of it. That is the only way austerity will work here. Cutting half won't work.

And yes, EVERYBODY will feel it. Everybody is going to feel it anyway when the ceiling is reached.


----------



## Wanderer0101 (Jul 18, 2007)

When you talk about government austerity it means you switch from throwing away money with both hands to only one hand.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

time said:


> You bet it hurts the middle middle class. It ruins the middle class. It's the middle class that's doing most of the complaining. They are doing the complaining because they feel the most pain.
> 
> Austerity has to be across the board. It can't be social programs only. It has to ALL of government spending. Corporate welfare needs to go, foreign aid needs to go, including financial aid and defense. All of it. That is the only way austerity will work here. Cutting half won't work.
> 
> And yes, EVERYBODY will feel it. Everybody is going to feel it anyway when the ceiling is reached.


Which I believe is what I said.

In truth my greatest concern - and I saw this everyday in my working life and now that I am retired but do volunteer work in the same field - is that there are millions of people who are working and earning good incomes and they are doing nothing to secure themselves. The time to plan for austerity is when you are making a good income not when you are already faced with the problem. 

People who have incomes continue to increase their credit spending and other debt, do not save for real emergencies ( a broken washer is not an emergency it is maintenance), unemployment, disability or medical situations that cause income reduction, maternity leave, caregiver leave (i.e. sick parents, spouse, child) and for retirement. 

There is a faction of the population (larger than even a year ago but still relatively small) who are preparing and taking care of themselves - no debt, saving their money, doing for themselves and learning useful skills - but the majority don't see the danger. And in truth a lot of people who now preach and even sneer didn't get it either until it became personal.

If real austerity measures are brought in these millions of people will be without the ability to cope and recover. People did live in abject poverty and starved during the dirty thirties. They were a threat to the security of others. That is why so many social programs came into being at this time.

If these millions are in trouble the government (and it will not matter which party) will cave because they cannot risk real political strife. 

All anyone can do since you don't know how bad your personal circumstances will be  is to do the most you can. 

And I am not talking about an apocalypse but financial austerity measures when millions will lose their incomes or part of their incomes with accompanying huge unemployment. Like it is today in Greece.


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2012)

Alot is going to depend on how it is explained to the people.
I remember the government cut backs and it was just taken as fact.
Now it seems it is being explained as an either or situation. That is the big problem.
I am hoping there will still be some social programs, but done at a more economical level. Commodities rather than food stamps. Even seed hand outs.


----------



## mpillow (Jan 24, 2003)

I think that compared to the 1970's.....welfare mentality/entitlements frame of mind has grown popular, stealing from gov't, neighbor, random person has increased, prescription and non prescribed drugs use has ballooned, synthetic drugs just turn people into monsters.... all these folks will become violent and needful....and willing to be violent and rob you blind.....bubba the drunk will help himself to your orchard....

So even with proper measures taken to stave off such measures....we are targets and those things we do to "save ourselves" make us bigger targets...


----------



## machinist (Aug 3, 2010)

The size of the National Debt is mind boggling. The numbers are incomprehensible. This video puts it into perspective, and tells how much additional tax we would need to balance the budget. 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jboTeS9Okak]The National Debt and Federal Budget Deficit Deconstructed - Tony Robbins - YouTube[/ame]

Here's a clue--it ain't that easy to get 'er done. Just cutting a little here and there in entitlement programs is not gonna do it. Not even a drop in the bucket...

The problem is that we have been overspending as a nation and as individuals for WAAAAY too long now. It is gonna be one DOOZY of a hangover. Think, a generation or two.
________________

Here's one explaining why we WILL have an economic collapse. (Some adult language.) [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaIxghroMpQ&feature=related[/ame]

Ron Paul explains how it will work out: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVKcB_PSdb8&feature=related[/ame]


----------



## Sourdough (Dec 28, 2011)

Just release a virus that kills anyone over 49.9 y/o and most problems are solved. Note: I am 66 y/o.


----------



## Guest (Aug 30, 2012)

Sourdough said:


> Just release a virus that kills anyone over 49.9 y/o and most problems are solved. Note: I am 66 y/o.


No one wants to do that.


----------



## Sourdough (Dec 28, 2011)

veggiecanner said:


> No one wants to do that.


It may have escaped notice that no one is very "Woopie" for austerity either.


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

Austerity is the first, and likely the most merciful, of several Pipers that must eventually be paid by a nation stupid enough to be taken by the liberal welfare mentality.

....and, therein is THE argument against such a system.

Sourdough's virus might be a relief.......


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

machinist said:


> The size of the National Debt is mind boggling. The numbers are incomprehensible. This video puts it into perspective, and tells how much additional tax we would need to balance the budget.
> 
> The National Debt and Federal Budget Deficit Deconstructed - Tony Robbins - YouTube
> 
> ...


VERY interesting and an easy way to picture the whole situation. It clearly shows that neither party has a clue. Cutting entitlements alone will not do it and neither will only taxing the rich into extinction. Even together this will not pay the debt. Austerity in spending and raising revenues. Nobody wants either but that is what it will take just to start. Oh well. Reagan raised taxes seven times.


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

My whole way of life is austerity. I cut wood to heat my house, raise animals and veggies. I get no government check and never have, probably never will.

What the government calls austerity is luxury to me.


----------



## sidepasser (May 10, 2002)

One of the things that I lost due to GA. practicing austerity was my homestead exemption. You should see what that does to a property tax bill. sigh..

Thankfully I put money aside to cover it all year long, but that is one more thing to add to the list of preps for austerity. Money to pay your ever increasing property tax bills.


----------



## texican (Oct 4, 2003)

veggiecanner said:


> If the goverment has to impose austerity what does that mean to you?
> 
> 
> Do you think there is a way to prepare for it?


It means absolutely nothing to me. I live austere now... it's 'everyone' else that'll be welcomed to my world.

Of course, if the govt. instituted real austerity, I'd make sure all my magazines were topped off and my firearms were extra clean, lubed, and ready to go... for, imho, the entitlement masses that might get cut off would rather fight than work. Recipe for Civil War... with the slaves willing to kill free men to keep their free stuff coming... and free men willing to kill the slaves to keep what they've got. AND, for this reason, the country will go over a cliff first... no Pol is going to go down in the history books as starting the 2nd Uncivil War... they'd rather do nothing, and have the same effect happen, thinking history would judge them less hard.


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

hmm... no responses. Funny. The largest transfer of wealth just happened, is it too big for people to talk about? Look at what Iceland did in response to the bankers telling them to pony up... they are almost out of their dire straights. I wasn't shocked that no one called me out, the facts that caused my post are solid, why will no one speak of this? You didn't cause this "whatever" in our economy. I didn't cause it. Who caused it? Will they get a free pass from all of you? - then we deserve what we get, austerity away. Tell me - who walks away unscathed? And you will allow them and then bicker amongst your fellows about "what will you do". We have been had. They have stolen the wealth from almost all of us. Let us continue to bicker amongst ourselves regarding the scraps, let someone here become the scrap king whilst they laugh at us, enjoying the circus. I would love to have someone to try to explain to me how this was an accident, how helicopter Ben didn't see this coming, how he was left in control, how the banks are still dealing in the same exotic securities that crashed the economy in more than one country, how the central banks are now having to prop up the individual bankers rather than the people, tell me how this is anything near to logical and then tell me - why haven't you raged against the machine? Now... go prepare to live on $500 a month, go try to live growing your own food, try to escape the thought that many will die - tell yourself, " they were not prepared" - blame them for their lack of preparation and then ask yourself, "Do I hate humanity enough to let the excesses of the elite allow me to hate those that did not see this as clearly as I did or will I target them that caused this with my hatred?" Crap - this is almost completely bogus, but I welcome the crash, at least people will have to wake up then. They will not listen now...


----------



## Guest (Aug 31, 2012)

The people have as much responsibility as te goverment and banks do.
No one forced them to take those loans.
Or to run up their credit cards.


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

veggie.... you miss the point. I was given a loan that I did not deserve. I should have been turned away. My credit history was iffy at best, yet I qualified for a loan for 63k, and then I was allowed to refinance for 85K after 3 years. I applied myself religiously to that promise. I fell behind because it WAS more than I could handle during a divorce, there are many variables that factor into my being unable to handle this responsibility. The good Lord intervened and I sold the home for $190K, the other party in the divorce took the lion's share but I satisfied my loan. That was in 2006. Are you saying that the persons that got the loans were the ones at fault? Or are you saying that the banks should be free from guarding their resources and allowing people who do not deserve loans to get one? No one forced them, but the advantage to owning your home is a drawing force. I will not speak of the credit cards, that was not called out in this thread...


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

Question: What improvements in the home that I owned allowed me to almost triple my investment - was this escalation in price real - or manufactured. I think you know the answer.


----------



## Guest (Aug 31, 2012)

I was offered many loans and many credit cards, You know how many I accepted and took out. zero. Why? Because I knew I could not pay them back. I had no desire to pay them back. 
So yes, I think that those people who applied for loans they couldn't pay back are responsible as much as the banks were.
If people don't realize that they could easily repeat their mistakes.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Look at what *Iceland* did


LMAO

What purpose would that serve?



> The country has a population of about *320,000* and a total area of 103,000 km2 (*40,000* sq mi), which makes it the most sparsely populated country in Europe


We have CITIES larger in population than that


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

Veggie - I was not targeting you specifically, I was asking you to consider how many people would grab at home ownership if it was made available and then I asked how many should have been turned away using the logic that brought the home loan scenario up to the late '80s as AAA. Who started accepting loanees of lesser quality? Sure, you were able to evaluate what you were able to deal with... have you never been to a carnival, to a used car lot, have you never been told that you can have something that you should not have? You might not blame those that had something to sell, but I do.

BFF - your point please? The purpose that Iceland served is not publicized in our world, why do you think that is so? They have turned their economy around, you wish to say that they have followed the wrong path - please expound... I do not see your point at all...


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

My primary point is that many should have been denied the responsibility of home ownership, why do you think the banks gave them a loan? I am pretty sure that I understand why, this appears to be taboo amongst most of us, as it would serve to show the bankers as predators. Go ahead - say they were benign. You cannot stand on that point if they were GIVING loans to people that should not have them, my earlier post comes into play. What is happening was intended to happen, close your eyes - it is not real, open them - deny this idea at your own risk.

BFF - are you saying that the Iceland economy is not recovering faster than the Greek or Italian or Portuguese economies? Please share - do tell... Why do you think that there appears to be a turn around in the Icelandic economy? I can provide citations to my stance - will you share in the same fashion?


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

FYI - Iceland charged the bankers with crimes, told the IMF and the Central Bank of Britain to take a hike. If you do not know this - I ask why. 

From DailyPaul:
Last week 9 people were arrested in London and Reykjavik for their possible responsibility for Iceland&#8217;s financial collapse in 2008, a deep crisis which developed into an unprecedented public reaction that is changing the country&#8217;s direction.

06/2012

Your suggestions in this matter ->?


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

I guess a more important question would be - Where do you stand? Free pass to the bankers? Maybe we should have spent the lion's share of our GDP to help them? What says you? This is annoying. It seems crystal clear to me, why is there any question?


----------



## mekasmom (Jan 19, 2010)

Shine said:


> We, you and I covered their risky dealings and we hold the burden today. The poor did not cause this, the middle class did not cause this, the entitlements did not cause this. Inept government and corrupt businesses caused this, we're just their source.


I think you make a good point.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Two words: 

Riots and looters

Ok, three words but you get the point.


----------



## Guest (Aug 31, 2012)

Shine said:


> Veggie - I was not targeting you specifically, I was asking you to consider how many people would grab at home ownership if it was made available and then I asked how many should have been turned away using the logic that brought the home loan scenario up to the late '80s as AAA. Who started accepting loanees of lesser quality? Sure, you were able to evaluate what you were able to deal with... have you never been to a carnival, to a used car lot, have you never been told that you can have something that you should not have? You might not blame those that had something to sell, but I do.
> 
> BFF - your point please? The purpose that Iceland served is not publicized in our world, why do you think that is so? They have turned their economy around, you wish to say that they have followed the wrong path - please expound... I do not see your point at all...


Of course I've been to a used car lot. That's how i bought my pick-up. They had nice pretty brand new trucks on the same lot. But I bought the used one with cash. because that is what i had saved up for. Dh dealt with them and because we had cash, he got a nice discount. No fees or intrest nessasary.
When we went house shopping we did the same thing. I don't get what your saying. i go to the store all the time. I buy the groceries I can afford.
When i had the roof done on my house i paid cash. Why, because I could save all the intrest. I didn't want the bank to have any lean on my house. It is my home not a piggy bank.


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

OK, let's go here... You have relative A who does not save, does not prep. Another relative, relative B has offered other of your relatives loans in the past but was really strict about giving those loans out. Relative B then tells everyone that he has more funds to offer, Relative A immediately goes to him and gets a loan, almost immediately he can't make the payments. Relative B then starts crying about his losses to the rest of the family asking for them to pay him back. Who do you fault, Relative A or Relative B?


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

Did relative A put up his home for collateral ?


----------



## ldc (Oct 11, 2006)

emdeengee is right about all boomerang relatives, regardless of age. I had 6 of our elderly to at least partially or more - care for, over a 17yr time period. My relatives, many of whom live til their late 90's, had mostly outlived their money.


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

No, relative A did not. He left town and was never heard from again. Relative got a lawyer and forced all the other relatives to cover his losses, it was later found out that Relative B insured all the loans that he made and was covered 100 percent but the other relatives never found out... except that old cranky hermit relative that no one would listen to...


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

I just knew the story had more to it. :thumb:


----------



## mekasmom (Jan 19, 2010)

Shine said:


> No, relative A did not. He left town and was never heard from again. Relative got a lawyer and forced all the other relatives to cover his losses, it was later found out that Relative B insured all the loans that he made and was covered 100 percent but the other relatives never found out... except that old cranky hermit relative that no one would listen to...


How did he "FORCE" them to cover the loan? That is curious to me. Was it just from whining and manipulating or did he legally force them?


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

Taxpayer funding would be the answer.
Shine failed to mention that relative C was in charge of enforcing family policy and collecting taxes.......


----------



## Guest (Sep 1, 2012)

Shine said:


> OK, let's go here... You have relative A who does not save, does not prep. Another relative, relative B has offered other of your relatives loans in the past but was really strict about giving those loans out. Relative B then tells everyone that he has more funds to offer, Relative A immediately goes to him and gets a loan, almost immediately he can't make the payments. Relative B then starts crying about his losses to the rest of the family asking for them to pay him back. Who do you fault, Relative A or Relative B?


what does this have to do with the banks and the bad housing loans?


----------



## belladulcinea (Jun 21, 2006)

Relative B was a stupid horses patoot for loaning A the money and Relative A was just as stupid for getting the loan. Except that B is pretty impotent compared to the government which collects our taxes pretty much at the barrel of a gun. 

Veggiecanner is right "we" are as much to blame as anyone. Those with 401ks demanded better dividends to fund our retirements, which in turn led those on the boards of the companies we were invested in to cut staff and go overseas to get a profit margin. Then those with their 401ks began making money but lots of people lost their jobs when moved to other countries. We are to blame for a lot of the misery we are going through, we are just in denial. I use the collective "we".


----------



## time (Jan 30, 2011)

belladulcinea said:


> Relative B was a stupid horses patoot for loaning A the money and Relative A was just as stupid for getting the loan. Except that B is pretty impotent compared to the government which collects our taxes pretty much at the barrel of a gun.
> 
> Veggiecanner is right "we" are as much to blame as anyone. Those with 401ks demanded better dividends to fund our retirements, which in turn led those on the boards of the companies we were invested in to cut staff and go overseas to get a profit margin. Then those with their 401ks began making money but lots of people lost their jobs when moved to other countries. We are to blame for a lot of the misery we are going through, we are just in denial. I use the collective "we".



Actually, both vegiecanner and shine are correct.

Both A and B participated in the scam. The difference is, the banks knew it was a scam and profited. Those that took the loans were ignorant of the scam, but participated so they do bear some fault.

The biggest issue is that the government chose a side. They chose to protect the scammers. They are robbing the rest of us to do it.

The proper thing to have done would have been for government to allow both parties to the scam to fail. 

Since they chose a side, it's clear who runs government. It's not the people. It's the scammers.


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

Psalm 69:22.....

"Let their table become a snare before them: and that which should have been for their welfare, let it become a trap."



"Table" was sloppily translated from a word mord akin to _bank_.

Go figure.


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

Thanks for covering for me... had a pc replacement going on. In a more soft tone I would ask how can we allow this to happen, how can the government take the lions share of the wealth from this country and give it to those that caused this problem, that was my major line. We, meaning all Americans in the 99% did not cause this, we;re just paying for it, so are the Europeans if you follow the situation closely, they too bought heavily in those exotic security mechanisms. We just let it pass over our heads. To all - look at what Iceland has done - they were hit hard but they took another path... Love one, Love all... You know, the Arabs were not hardly involved in this, their culture will not allow people to participate in the profit made from speculation, - don't go there, I am a man that tries to follow Christ's teachings, it's just an observation...


----------



## time (Jan 30, 2011)

Shine said:


> Thanks for covering for me... had a pc replacement going on. In a more soft tone I would ask how can we allow this to happen, how can the government take the lions share of the wealth from this country and give it to those that caused this problem, that was my major line. We, meaning all Americans in the 99% did not cause this, we;re just paying for it, so are the Europeans if you follow the situation closely, they too bought heavily in those exotic security mechanisms. We just let it pass over our heads. To all - look at what Iceland has done - they were hit hard but they took another path... Love one, Love all... You know, the Arabs were not hardly involved in this, their culture will not allow people to participate in the profit made from speculation, - don't go there, I am a man that tries to follow Christ's teachings, it's just an observation...


I don't think anyone has a satisfactory answer.

Your guess is as good as mine.


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

Forget the "wealth" of accumulated federal reserve, interest-bearing notes.

There are far greater atrocities that our immediate ancestors allowed, even invited, upon themselves that sold us into this fiasco.

.....and, Shine, I will "go there". You raise a very interesting point in re the Arabs.
They are not the enemy. If you will do a little research, you will find that, like clockwork, each "Arab" nation, as well as a few scattered elsewhere, (Panama was one) who have been demonized by the media immediately preceeding US military invasion..... was holding out from allowing the world banks to come in and control their currency.....and charge interest, and collateralize private property............

Recall the "merchants of the earth making merchandise of the souls of men" and rethink how the banking cartel has converted the free men of the world into debt instrument slaves who are now barred from owning anything....serfs on a master's land, driving the master's vehicles, all by taxed and registered permission.

The clincher is that the _Bible_ is full of warnings and admonitions that, if followed, would keep a man unencumbered and free to walk by his God-given conscience, subject only to the common law, free to possess and utilize land, substance and rights, answering to no one but his Creator..............


*NOW* tell me what happened.


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

What happened? The vices of pride, gluttony, greed and sloth have become ultra comfortable. Even I lose the battle between the old/new man often, I cannot win that battle by myself - to Him goes the glory. I believe that there is goodness in everyone, some find it easy to hide, some find it uncomfortable to hide. If everyone could find some measure of comfortableness in "goodness" then those that are able to hide their goodness will stick out like a sore thumb. Austerity is only needed to fill the coffers of those that want what is considered "wealth". Me, I believe that I could find wealth in things other than money. Others will never find the wealth that I am speaking of.


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

Not so long as we surrender our birthright for a bowl of pottage.


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

...about the Arabs, tie what you said about them together with determining which ones wanted to sell their oil in anything other than dollars and see how long they were allowed to exist after that, you'll be a tad surprised.


----------

