rigorousintuition.ca

Posted: **Wed Jan 07, 2009 1:37 pm**

Here are some graphs, find some more and post here.

Posted: **Wed Jan 07, 2009 5:37 pm**

Posted: **Wed Jan 07, 2009 5:43 pm**

.

That was debt through '05!

Anyone got more recent? Cos it must have spiked to like 500% in the few months alone and it ain't topped yet.

.

Posted: **Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:03 pm**

Here you go:

It seems to be levelling off as debts are massively defaulted upon, and headed for the downward slope.

Errr... maybe.

Posted: **Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:29 pm**

Oh, leveling will come, but you just know Q3, Q4 and 09-Q1 are going to be the biggest spike up ever! A trillion just on the govt. deficit officially, plus 2 or 4 trillion in Fed bailout payouts, a lot of that in loans and debt/"asset" guarantees.

Posted: **Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:29 pm**

Thanks for the thread riddler. Interesting data. What is the link you got the charts from?

And to you barracuda, good charts...What is the link you got them from? I would like to browse around where you got em...

Posted: **Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:33 pm**

JackRiddler wrote:Oh, leveling will come, but you just know Q3, Q4 and 09-Q1 are going to be the biggest spike up ever! A trillion just on the govt. deficit officially, plus 2 or 4 trillion in Fed bailout payouts, a lot of that in loans and debt/"asset" guarantees.

U.S. 2009 Deficit: $1.2 Trillion and DOES NOT INCLUDE Bailouts or Obama’s Stimulus Plan January 7th, 2009

Associated Press: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... AD95IC0N80

The federal budget deficit will hit an unparalleled $1.2 trillion for the 2009 budget year, according to a Capitol Hill aide briefed on new Congressional Budget office figures.

The aide says the CBO also sees a $703 billion deficit for 2010.

The dismal figures come a day after President-elect Barack Obama warned of “trillion-dollar deficits for years to come.”

CBO’s figures don’t account for the huge economic stimulus bill that Obama is expected to propose soon to try to jolt the economy. At the same time, they do not reflect the immediate cost of the Wall St. bailout.

The shrinking economy has led to a sharp drop in tax revenues, which is largely responsible for the deficit, along with about $350 billion in spending so far for the Wall St. bailout.

Obama and Congress are promising quick enactment of the economic recovery plan, which will blend up to $300 billion in tax cuts with big new spending programs and could cost up to $775 billion over the next few years.

The flood of red ink probably won’t affect that measure but could crimp other items on Obama’s agenda.

The $1.19 trillion 2009 figure shatters the previous record of $455 billion, set only last year. It also represents about 8 percent of the size of the economy, which is higher than the deficits of the 1980s. The 2009 budget year began last Oct. 1.

Posted: **Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:33 pm**

We are living in a period of steep lines on graphs, none of them positive in any way. I don't have the link to hand to support what follows - wish I had. Apparently, MacDonald's is now the second largest processor of credit card transactions in the US. In plain English, that means the number of people paying for fast food via credit card has spiked upwards. Seems more and more people are paying for food by credit card. Poor devils.

I did find this nice little graph though:

Posted: **Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:36 pm**

Try the Market Ticker, vigilant.

Posted: **Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:59 pm**

slow_dazzle wrote:We are living in a period of steep lines on graphs, none of them positive in any way. I don't have the link to hand to support what follows - wish I had. Apparently, MacDonald's is now the second largest processor of credit card transactions in the US. In plain English, that means the number of people paying for fast food via credit card has spiked upwards. Seems more and more people are paying for food by credit card. Poor devils.

I did find this nice little graph though:

That one's very pretty. Can you explicate it for us? Thank you!

.

Posted: **Wed Jan 07, 2009 7:26 pm**

Posted: **Wed Jan 07, 2009 11:48 pm**

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/da ... 30_378.png

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:17 pm**

JackRiddler wrote:
That one's very pretty. Can you explicate it for us? Thank you!

Best and most succinct breakdown (imo) is on Mish Shedlock's blog:

Here's the deal. Bank reserves are net borrowed. This comes at a time when commercial real estate is about to plunge and bank balance sheets are loaded to the gills with them.

This also comes at a time when social attitudes towards debt are going to impair Bernanke's ability to inflate. For more on social attitudes, please see 60 Minutes Legitimizes Walking Away, Changing Social Attitudes About Debt, and a Crash Course For Bernanke.

Finally, banks will not be going deeper to the "TAF well" as long as the rules state "All advances must be fully collateralized." Once collateral runs out, it's the end of the line.

If the Fed is not concerned about this situation, they soon will be.

Of course there are those who believe the Fed will break the rules and eliminate all collateral requirements. So far anyway, they have not done so. Let's assume however, when push comes to shove, the Fed acting under duress does just what Glassman says, and provides permanent capital for free.

The Checkmate Scenario

Stop and think what massive printing would do to the US dollar and long term interest rates. It's called Checkmate. And that is why the Fed would not do what Glassman suggests, even if they could. The market won't allow it!

Where is the money coming from if the Fed doesn't have any money apart from the stuff that comes off the printing press? (And what are those companies getting bail outs putting up as collateral?) AFAIK this is a recipe for Weimar style hyper-inflation but there are some people who think a massive deflation is the immediate problem as demand falls through the floor. Either way the fact that the Fed does not have actual capital is seriously worrying unless anyone with better economic knowledge than me can say otherwise.

BTW, remember the recent $700 billion "bail out"? Estimates vary but the consensus view is the amount of toxic investment out there is over $500 trillion. $700 billion won't even look at that amount of bad money.

What is happening right now is bad, is going to get steadily worse and is probably irreversible.

Hard times are here.

Best

s_d

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 5:38 pm**

slow_dazzle wrote:
JackRiddler wrote:
That one's very pretty. Can you explicate it for us? Thank you!

Best and most succinct breakdown (imo) is on Mish Shedlock's blog:

Here's the deal. Bank reserves are net borrowed. This comes at a time when commercial real estate is about to plunge and bank balance sheets are loaded to the gills with them.

This also comes at a time when social attitudes towards debt are going to impair Bernanke's ability to inflate. For more on social attitudes, please see 60 Minutes Legitimizes Walking Away, Changing Social Attitudes About Debt, and a Crash Course For Bernanke.

Finally, banks will not be going deeper to the "TAF well" as long as the rules state "All advances must be fully collateralized." Once collateral runs out, it's the end of the line.

If the Fed is not concerned about this situation, they soon will be.

Of course there are those who believe the Fed will break the rules and eliminate all collateral requirements. So far anyway, they have not done so. Let's assume however, when push comes to shove, the Fed acting under duress does just what Glassman says, and provides permanent capital for free.

The Checkmate Scenario

Stop and think what massive printing would do to the US dollar and long term interest rates. It's called Checkmate. And that is why the Fed would not do what Glassman suggests, even if they could. The market won't allow it!

Where is the money coming from if the Fed doesn't have any money apart from the stuff that comes off the printing press? (And what are those companies getting bail outs putting up as collateral?) AFAIK this is a recipe for Weimar style hyper-inflation but there are some people who think a massive deflation is the immediate problem as demand falls through the floor. Either way the fact that the Fed does not have actual capital is seriously worrying unless anyone with better economic knowledge than me can say otherwise.

BTW, remember the recent $700 billion "bail out"? Estimates vary but the consensus view is the amount of toxic investment out there is over $500 trillion. $700 billion won't even look at that amount of bad money.

What is happening right now is bad, is going to get steadily worse and is probably irreversible.

Hard times are here.

Best

s_d

Good points slow dazzle. And there is NO SUCH THING AS A TOXIC INVESTMENT CAUSE ITS ALL A BUNCH OF BULLSHIT.

FAIR VALUE PRICING RULES ARE IN EFFECT. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? IT MEANS THIS EXACTLY.

It means that the Fed has the authority to value assets, banks, firms, investment banks, hedge funds, etc...It means that they can ARBITRARILY ASSIGN A VALUE to any firm they please. If a firm and its assets are worth 100 billion dollars the Fed can decide that its only worth 1 billion at their discretion.

Which means they can buy said 100 billion dollar firm for 1 billion should they choose to deem it insolvent. This allows the Fed to undertake a hostile takeover of the firm and basically steal its assets.

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 5:47 pm**

US National Debt Clock:

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

Refresh & see how much it goes up (it is/was $10,639,227,038,659.27 when I wrote this:
The estimated population of the United States is 305,425,002
so each citizen's share of this debt is $34,834.15.

The National Debt has continued to increase an average of
$3.49 billion per day since September 28, 2007!)

rigorousintuition.ca

Graphing the economic crisis, notice a trend?

Graphing the economic crisis, notice a trend?

Another graph with a steep line

Re: Another graph with a steep line

Re: Another graph with a steep line

Re: Another graph with a steep line