digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Why Wont The Bail Out Work? MUST SEE! watch!

youtube.com — Voters are rightly furious at the proposal to spend $700,000,000,000 that the government doesn't have to bail out Wall Street bankers who created the current economic crisis in the first place. But why then aren't we concerned about the trillions of dollars the Federal Reserve is pumping into the system? Or the trillions missing from the Pentagon..

show profanity settings
expand all
  • bradysbeau, on 10/04/2008, -3/+92There is no accountability and that is the worst thing about it. The Fox is minding the Henhouse.
    • lajaw, on 10/05/2008, -3/+30Wow, Democracy Now endorsing Ron Paul.............in a round about manner. Seems these folks only get it when they are worried about their own pocketbook. We have been in the crapper since 1913. And it won't get any better till we get rid of the 16th and 17th amendments and the Federal Reserve Act.
      • brad3378, on 10/05/2008, -0/+7If you're talking about the Democracy Now watermark on the lower left side, take note that it is not used throughout the video. This particular video was not created by Democracy Now although some of the clips were apparently borrowed from there.
    • ruddy, on 10/05/2008, -0/+5What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it's natural manure.
      • seraph582, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1... as apposed to synthetic manure? Just sayin'...
    • silverharbinger, on 10/05/2008, -0/+6I find it interesting that the $100 trillion in total world wide assets to the $1 quadrillion worldwide derivatives bubble figure perfectly matches the fractional reserve banking principle of 10% reserves and 90% in asset investment. That would mean that almost all of the world's assets are in banks and almost none is being held privately. With the banks starting to freeze up their loaning practices and in some cases closing under the weight of some portion of their derivative assets becoming toxic, which usually means their value is too high (inflated) to support them, the central banks (and now US citizens through our central banks) are pumping more and more money into them, which in turn will create more inflation as the banks loan out that money, in most cases make interest plus principle back on the loan, and then loan 90% of it out ad infinitum. If wage inflation does not keep up with price inflation, which it rarely does, eventually we all become debtors and slaves.

      I guess what I'm trying to understand now is if the government is trying to get the banks to loan money out again by buying bad assets from the banks for more than they are currently worth, which Rep. Barney Frank said is not socialism, does this not reinforce the banks to make bad loans again? Couldn't these banks just continue to have one or more economic sectors go into distress by over investing in them, thus over-inflating their value, making a portion of the market become toxic through this overvaluation, and getting a bailout when they cease loaning as a result which continues the cycle ad infinitum? Why is it that the banks get government bailouts (S&L scandal, this housing crisis) but other types of busts which had more individual private investment (dot bomb) do not?
  • Matricul8tr, on 10/04/2008, -5/+57The traitors who killed America.
  • emazur, on 10/04/2008, -8/+181"Congressman, I couldn't agree with you more that inflation is a tax" -Bernanke's response to Ron Paul.

    And damn, I never heard about that 2.3 trillion $ pentagon snafu. Quite interesting how their accounting office was destroyed on Sep 11

    Also, dugg for Ducktails
    • normlsparky, on 10/05/2008, -3/+49quite interesting, and quite convenient. i heard something about building 7 holding records for the enron scandal as it was home to the Security and Exchange Commission Late 2001 was the time of the height of the investigation into Enron, so the majority of Enron’s SEC filings were likely destroyed when World Trade Center 7 came down.
      • twistaspliff, on 10/05/2008, -7/+33Most people don't even know about WTC7 - now THAT is interesting. A 37 story tall building can vanish in 6.8 seconds, without being hit by a plane, and most people don't even know about it. Even stranger is the fact that the BBC was on air about 20 minutes before it collapsed, saying that it had already collapsed, and you could still see the building over the reporter's left shoulder. Oops!

        http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=56618084048 ...
      • 1longtime, on 10/05/2008, -18/+14Don't buy the hype. Buildings actually CAN fall down without a CIA conspiracy.

        Debris falling about 80 floors, and large stores of fuel and a 4 inch gas main inside WTC 7 is a perfect combination for a collapsed building.

        Anyone who saw the damage to surrounding buildings would know this. I still can't forget the huge hole I saw in the building across the street from the WTC (I believe caused by a plane engine penetrating THROUGH one of the towers and falling down into). It looked like Godzilla punched it.

        http://www.loosechangeguide.com/lcg3.html
      • twistaspliff, on 10/06/2008, -8/+3Name ONE building that has fallen down on it's own. Just one.

        Didn't think so.
      • cypher35, on 10/06/2008, -5/+5I can't believe 1longtime is being dugg down for a perfectly reasonable comment... You people believe whatever you want to be true, apparently.

        It's pretty ironic actually... Digg users often point out the same behavior in fundamental christians and creationists. Now I'm not defending creationism by any stretch of imagination, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of jumping on board with a belief system because you want it to be true and then begrudging others of doing the same.
      • twistaspliff, on 10/06/2008, -4/+5He's being dugg down for being a brainwashed lemming. The same reason I am digging you down. Knowing that the laws of physics can not be broken is not "jumping on board with a belief system because you want it to be true". It's very simple - buildings do not fall from fire, and even if they did, they would never fall through the path of most resistance, and even if they could they could never do it at near freefall speed. Every time I see someone who believes this ***** I am stunned that they can make it through life being so ***** stupid.
      • jisrael, on 10/06/2008, -6/+6Oh Conspiracy Theorists... Two huge planes hit two huge buildings surrounded by a bunch of other buildings and you're convinced that you can analyze all the structural and chemical factors in this scenario through grainy video footage.
      • 1longtime, on 10/06/2008, -4/+6Ok, I'm not angry, even though I was just flamed by someone. I understand why people think there is a 9/11 conspiracy. It is very difficult to trust ANYTHING in this world. I had serious doubts about the 9/11 story after I watched the "Loose Change" video too.

        ...but structural engineers have studied and refuted everything in Loose Change regarding the WTC collapse, as well as nearby buildings (and provide many examples of fire causing large buildings to callapse).

        I provided that link above for a reason. Please read it before you call me names. Here it is again:

        http://www.loosechangeguide.com/lcg3.html
      • twistaspliff, on 10/06/2008, -3/+3What is the point of debating with people who are too brainwashed to trust their own eyes, or are government shills here to perpetuate the myth? There is no point, so I won't waste my time. Good luck in the NWO.
      • 1longtime, on 10/06/2008, -4/+3Ok, twistaspliff, you've made up your mind regardless of fact. I think that makes *you* a lemming. As you watched the planes strike and the Towers fall, I'm guessing the cause-and-effect was clear in your mind. Planes hit towers, towers fall down. Your own eyes, right?

        Then someone made a video with spooky music about a conspiracy and suddenly YOU WANT TO BELIEVE it was a conspiracy. Who's the lemming?

        For anyone else out there who wishes to pursue knowledge through fact, the NIST analysis is full of scientific proof. You know, computer simulations, structural analysis, experts on architectural failure. Or you can listen to twistaspliff. Your choice.

        http://wtc.nist.gov/media/

        ...or in particular, look at the WTC7 presentation, it gets really good around slide 25...

        http://wtc.nist.gov/media/WTC7_Technical_Briefing_ ...
      • twistaspliff, on 10/06/2008, -3/+3One more government shill for the blocklist.
      • 1longtime, on 10/06/2008, -2/+2Didn't respond to a single piece of evidence I provided.

        What a ***** chump.
      • specialK16, on 10/06/2008, -3/+2Twistaspliff you were not even able to refute any of his arguments.... 1longtime won't say it but I will: you are a ***** moron.
      • twistaspliff, on 10/06/2008, -2/+4Hey *****, read my comment above. It has nothing to do with whether or not I am "able" to as much as it is simply a complete waste of my time. Try and bait me all you want, I couldn't ***** care less. If you retards want to believe that a bunch of Arabs can suspend the laws of physics, and a 757 can fit inside a 16' diameter hole without breaking the windows with it's engines or making a mark on the lawn - go right ahead. You're too ***** stupid for me to waste my time writing out a long post just so you can toss some popular mechanics link at me in rebuttal.
      • spelunker, on 10/06/2008, -1/+3twistaspliff, I would just like to say that you are *highly* entertaining.
      • 1longtime, on 10/06/2008, -3/+1After collapse was initiated, the core of WTC1 stood for approximately 15 seconds, WTC2 for approximately 25 seconds. The fall was nearly a free fall, but watch the video and notice the smaller pieces falling faster than the core, that's what a free fall looks like. The structure was designed to support the static weight of the floors, and once they started producing downward force the supporting floors could scarcely even slow the fall. There's lots of data on this if you bothered to click my links and read them.

        Hole in the Pentagon was approximately 75'. Are you trying to say there was no plane? There are witnesses, you know, but I guess they're all just government schills?

        Tell me, does it look like maybe a few windows were broken in this picture?
        http://www.loosechangeguide.com/images/image079.jp ...


        ...and you don't have a shred of ***** evidence.
  • ratcatcher2, on 10/04/2008, -6/+35But remember, Wall Street didn't lead you to a ruinous war in Iraq. This is the sequel that we are all paying for.

    Who lead the USA to war? Why still pay?
    • mattlohkamp, on 10/05/2008, -2/+7"led", past tense, "who LED the USA to war", not "lead".
    • Unreal595, on 10/05/2008, -0/+2GO SWEDEN!
    • toetagger, on 10/05/2008, -0/+4Bankers are the #1 proponents of war as it is them who finance it.
    • didomi, on 10/05/2008, -1/+1watch zeitgeist part 3
    • Snarfy, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1Iraq's oil wealth is estimated at 10 trillion
    • Gorgamel, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1Because hey, its small compared to that other bigger expenditure!

      Stop beating your dead horse. We all know. Really.
  • leelandpalmer, on 10/04/2008, -2/+72Come on everybody, let's inflate our currency into oblivion!! YAY!!!
  • quesi, on 10/04/2008, -1/+31and the folks who are in the gold bubble, without physically holding the metal, wait until you find out.
    • jaymzdean, on 10/05/2008, -0/+35When you see gold go up in price, you're actually seeing the dollar fall in value.
      Gold holds a relatively constant value.
      And yes, those holding paper instead of the metal are in for a rude awakening.
      • coolremo, on 10/05/2008, -0/+2What is the rude awakening? I don't own gold, just wondering.
      • lendrick, on 10/05/2008, -0/+9Let's say that, hypothetically, all the gold they're selling certificates for actually exists. If there's a massive panic and money crashes, the people who are in control of the physical gold may decide they don't want to give it up, because they'll end up sitting on a worthless stack of paper that says "I.O.U. 1 oz gold". Of course, we all know that bankers are completely honest and none of this gold would ever go missing.

        Of course, that's the favorable scenario. Most likely, at least some people have already been sold certificates for gold that doesn't actually exist at all, in which case you might as well have just paid for a stack of paper.
    • copypasterepeat, on 10/05/2008, -0/+7Ok, firstly I'll admit I'm a little ignorant in this area. I was just wondering, what makes gold valuable? Is there a genuine core reason that gold creates wealth or, (not that it isn't a good enough reason) is it that we have bestowed this notion upon it?

      I mean, we're going back thousands of years, (so culture and time has played it's part) but fundamentally is it worth something just because it looks shiny? Would I be wrong in thinking that it's not really that rare/precious?

      I was just wondering what would happen if money became obsolete one day. Surely land, (and thus food and water) would become (primarily) the currency of the world.

      Apologies for going of on a tangent.
      • toejamz, on 10/05/2008, -0/+5Gold is valuable because people think it is. Really, nothing more than that. It's kinda pretty, and it doesn't rust.

        Anything can be valuable if we all decide to agree that it is valuable. For example, you take some medium-quality paper (with cotton fibers!) and put some green ink on it, and suddenly you have something everybody agrees is valuable.

        Around the 1900s, gourds (yes, the weird pumpkin things) were used as money in Haiti.

        Money will never become obsolete - we'll always need some medium of exchange so that we can transfer wealth.

        No money = no civilization.
      • tedfa, on 10/06/2008, -1/+3What if we lived in a society so technically advanced that scarcity didn't exist. Would there be a point for money then?
      • lilhurt38, on 10/06/2008, -1/+2If there is a limited supply of something, it has value. Gold is a rare metal with very unique properties, but it's not as rare as other things like platinum or diamonds. I think a big reason people have used it to base their currency on is because although it's rare, it is still abundant enough to have a stable value. If you think about it, you don't want to base your currency on something that is too rare and valuable because you have a large population using it. Not everyone would be able use the currency because they don't produce enough goods to equal the value of that currency. My guess is that people found out pretty early that gold has very unique properties and it's a beautiful metal, but there is also a steady amount of it. Kings used to cover their palaces in it, it's not extremely rare. But it is rare enough to a lot of value to it. So my guess is that people use it cause it's got a very steady value. Also, it has some qualities that you just don't see in any other metal.
      • youralbatross, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1I'd say that we want something not because of an intrinsic value that thing has, but because we give it value. I do think that gold is money in part because many people consider it beautiful.

        And I don't think land, food, or water would be very good money. I think you would only see them as such in a dire situation. To divide and move land as we divide and move money is impractical; food and water, if owned or stored, are usually consumed, and they're abundance fluctuates too often. Gold (and other metals) don't have these problems. They have uses outside of money, but they are not bartered as food, water, clothes, etc. are.
      • jus1haz2, on 10/06/2008, -2/+1lilhurt, if you think diamonds are rare then you are an idoit.
      • tacochampion, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1Aside from the created value, gold IS valuable. It is an awesome metal. If for whatever reason gold weren't expensive, it'd be all over the place, in your electronics especially.
  • jmoonb, on 10/05/2008, -6/+20I'm all against the bailout and all of what the FEDS have done but this is quite misleading. Injecting liquidity does not always mean inflation as long that the new amount added (inflationary) is equal to the amount defaulted (deflationary), which is especially true in our age of electronic currency. Even if the banks were to receive 100 trillion dollars in loans, the economy will head into a deflationary spiral if the banks do not lend it out. However, if the bailout works as intended, which most likely wont and just make the situation worse, and the credit opens up we will see massive inflation hitting the country before the mother of all credit fueled bubble bursts.

    Hooray the feds!



    • JoeVet, on 10/05/2008, -1/+2That kind of talk is not going to help Ron Paul's gold stocks.
    • david76, on 10/07/2008, -0/+2More importantly, the loans from the Fed are overnight loans, meaning they are repaid the following day.
  • DestroyFascism, on 10/05/2008, -5/+43Welcome to the Pyramid Ponzi scheme..

    Have you had enough yet?
    • twistaspliff, on 10/05/2008, -1/+9The Americans were even arrogant enough to draw the pyramid on the back of their dollar bill.
  • Berkana, on 10/05/2008, -0/+73“Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist.”
    —Kenneth Boulding

    The entire financial derivatives market is based on the idea of inflationary money, and un-earned wealth generated by self-compounding interest, which leads to exponential growth.
    • Stochio, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1What? How are all derivatives based on inflationary money? A call is a simple derivative that doesn't require inflationary money.

      And un-earned wealth? It's called hedging.
    • PAStheLoD, on 10/09/2008, -0/+2Could someone explain this derivative market without using the term "derivative"? :)
      Also what's the idea of inflationary money? How does this work? How is this different to a regular stock market? What things are actually being traded? Where?

      Thanks.
  • chrisj33, on 10/05/2008, -35/+40I stopped watching at the 9/11 conspiracy. Anything good after that?
    • muckemuck, on 10/05/2008, -5/+30yes.. and is it a conspiracy that whoops, the people and records that might have shed some light into where the "lost" Trillions went ... were in the exact spot in the pentagon that was hit by a plane? Or is that a fact?
      • flameboy, on 10/05/2008, -2/+9There is so much shady ***** going on in the Pentagon that plane could have hit anywhere and covered up evidence of SOMETHING.

        Besides, the government doesn't need to have a plane attack them to cover up spending fraud- they do it all the time. Hundreds of billions have been lost since the Iraq war started and nobody seems to care.
    • chrisaug18, on 10/05/2008, -7/+86There was nothing conspiracy about it.

      FACT: 2.3 Trillion dollars could not be tracked by the government.
      FACT: Sept 10 was when this was announced.
      FACT: The budget analysis office was destroyed on Sept 11.

      They quickly dropped the subject after stating these facts and left you to draw your own conclusion.
      • RePTaR, on 10/05/2008, -1/+18FACT: Lou Dobbs had Rumsfeld June 28, 2001 episode of Money Line discussing the problem. Even earlier it was discussed in an Associated Press article on 03/03/00. http://hv.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.t ...
      • Paulish, on 10/05/2008, -1/+7Indeed. Conspiracy theorists usually bug me cause they get all in your face for not doing "over 500 hours of research" or whatever, but this video just enumerated the facts and did not pester you. You can interpret it all as you wish.
      • megaton, on 10/05/2008, -8/+15...the net result was that they were IMPLYING "conspiracy." You don't have to quack like a duck to look like a duck.

        FACT: Bailout bill is voted down Sept 29th, 2008
        FACT: OJ Simpson is found guilty Oct 3rd, 2008
        FACT: Bailout bill is approved Oct 3rd, 2008

        Draw your own conclusion.
      • theright, on 10/05/2008, -1/+15@chrisaug18

        1. Misleading. $2.3 trillion in spending could not be tracked by the government with a reasonable amount of time and effort due to numerous varied and archaic accounting systems incapable of communicating with each other. As of February 2002, that figure dropped to $700bn as these systems were consolidated, and continued to drop

        2. False. It was a defense audit in 1999 that raised the $2.3 trillion figure. It was included in a report released in February 2000, in an Associated Press news article in March 2000, in numerous media outlets in January 2001, on PBS in February 2001, on DefenseLink in June 2001, and even by Rumsfeld himself on Lou Dobbs Moneyline in June 2001

        3. Misleading. An army budget office, staffed primarily by civilian accountants, was destroyed in the attacks. There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that documents or personnel involved into the investigation regarding the "missing" funds were lost in the attacks. The fact that the investigation continued and details of around two thirds of the funds were recovered within five months suggests the impact on the investigation of the attacks, if any, was minimal
      • dialectical, on 10/05/2008, -0/+3Thanks! To many gold bugs here to trust some of these comments. I appreciate the counter points...
      • PAStheLoD, on 10/09/2008, -0/+1It's good to have these facts, but it'd be even better to have some links, you know, like proof. :)
    • leelandpalmer, on 10/05/2008, -3/+20The 'Truther' conspiracy is quite ridiculous. HOWEVER, it seems plausible some pentagon deuche bags could've just taken advantage of the situation to shred a mountain of compromising documents and then just make up stuff like "oooooowww... the plane hit RIIIIGHT where all those docs where stored...... whaaaaaaaaaat a pity."
      • hugolp, on 10/05/2008, -0/+12No, the docs where there before. Thats a fact.

        If the explosion happen exactly there randomly or on porpouse is your decision, but the documents where there before 9/11.
      • silenceissexy, on 10/06/2008, -1/+1deuche = douche, because knowledge is power.
      • leelandpalmer, on 10/06/2008, -1/+1Speech is merely silver, silence is sexy.

        Because handing over that piece of knowledge, the POWAH IS MIIIIIINE!!! MOAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
    • lazerus9, on 10/05/2008, -5/+10And you clearly lost your ability to reason some time ago.
    • drmangrum, on 10/05/2008, -5/+6The entire second half was a conspiracy theory. Apparently ALL the media is also under the control of "Them" to keep us distracted. Had he just stuck to the same line of thought from the first half, I would have taken it seriously.
      • hugolp, on 10/05/2008, -3/+7You mean you dont know all american media tv and radio stations belong to corporations? I think the country you are living in is quite differetn from the one you think you are living in. But dont take my word, just check it yourself.
      • rodgerdodger5, on 10/05/2008, -0/+7Yeah, it's not like they hold the American People in contempt or anything. Here ya go. Listen to the laughter. Have a look where this was recorded.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmwQTAA8H7Y

      • jessehadden, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3Yes, it's crazy to think that a handful of powerful corporations control all of the media in America, and that these same corporations are (under different names) the manufacturers of weapons, banks, political lobbying groups, and so on.

        Oh wait...!
    • Schrodinger2, on 10/05/2008, -1/+4pull your head out of your poop cave.
  • Nboy514, on 10/05/2008, -2/+21This needs to be seen
  • hudey123, on 10/05/2008, -0/+88I'm investing in WOW gold... it will be worth more than the dollar in about three years.
    • chaoswings, on 10/05/2008, -3/+4But the company that produces said virtual gold is in the US....
    • sassafras1232, on 10/05/2008, -0/+4If you'd ever played a mmorpg for more than a few months you'd know that mudflation is way faster than the dollar's inflation
      • Inaktivist, on 10/05/2008, -0/+6Fool, WoW gold is subject to inflation. Buy mats, that is the wisest investment... at least on my server's economy.
      • AlbinoRaven, on 10/05/2008, -0/+3I'm cornering the WoW market in vendor greys. FTW.
      • paksman, on 10/06/2008, -1/+0Stacking up primals FTW
      • brandoncoll, on 10/06/2008, -2/+1WoW gold value surpassed the real dollar the year Bush deployed the military into IRAQ.
      • seraph582, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2... 5 years before WoW's inception?
    • ep53, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2Or Linden Dollars.
  • lazydrumhead, on 10/05/2008, -13/+21I hate videos when people's voices are like this.
    • tekism, on 10/05/2008, -7/+7forget the voice listen to the context
    • t.toe, on 10/05/2008, -0/+6Yeah, really good (if pretty alarming) content. TERRIBLE voice over. The new voices built into OSX 10.5 (Leopard) sound better than this guy.
    • ruddy, on 10/05/2008, -2/+3Were you looking for a professional voice over, or a news reporter's voice?
  • jer2eydevil88, on 10/05/2008, -12/+16I like knowing whats going on as much as the next guy but why is this considered credible news? I'm not trying to say that the $700 Billion Dollar package isn't *****, I am trying to ask why a company that puts crap on youtube and built its website using one of Godaddy's website creation tools is considered credible?

    http://www.corbettreport.com/index.php
    • RePTaR, on 10/05/2008, -0/+2And some how its "Open Source" and "Intelligence"
    • odigity, on 10/05/2008, -1/+11Because when ever "credible" institution in America is in collusion to screw the American people and lie to them about it, the only source of truth we have left is each other. Or have you not figured out yet the real value of the internet?

      So you believe CNN when they lie to you because they have good production value, and disregard the contents of this video because it's on youtube? The entire country has been suffering from an acute case of Fallacy of Appeal to Authority for nigh on a century now.

      Here's a radical idea: Don't take any information at face value, regardless of the source. Do your own research and draw your own conclusions. The purpose of this video is not to deliver truth to you with no effort, but to tip you off that there might be important truth out there that you need to go determine for yourself. It raised the alarm. It is now incumbent on you to investigate.
    • etx313, on 10/05/2008, -1/+3I had a guy put a new roof on my house, he did a great job but had a terrible web site. Good thing he is selling roofing service, and not web sites.
    • 4degrees, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1since you feel that way i know a guy in a nice suit who wants your passwords...
  • Alegoo92, on 10/05/2008, -21/+12The Economist-- you know, that magazine written by economic experts and such-- supports Congress passing the bailout.
    • skinnyskittles, on 10/05/2008, -2/+29It's written by Keynesians. You know, the economists that wouldn't have jobs if the government didn't intervene.
      • kingmanic, on 10/05/2008, -3/+3Maybe re-evaluate your statement. You don't need government support to continue an ideology. An economist is employed by who ever wants his advice. A Keynesian economist would have a job so long as someone is willing to pay for their advice. If the government stopped intervening, Keynesian economists would still have a job so long as someone thought their ideas/advice were worth money.
      • DutchGuilder, on 10/05/2008, -2/+6> If the government stopped intervening, Keynesian economists would still have a job so long as someone thought their ideas/advice were worth money.

        In a nutshell, Keynesians believe that government should and must intervene in the economy. So if the government stopped this, Keynesians would indeed be out of a job.
      • kingmanic, on 10/05/2008, -2/+1skinnyskittles /DutchGuilder: A Economists job (consultant) is independent of what the government does. If the government stopped, that would independent of the economists employment as the economists is paid to consult. You can't see the distinction between these two activities? The government isn't Marxist but there exist Marxist economists who are employed. The government isn't free market capitalist, but yet again there are free market economists employed.

        Thus if the government decided they were Keynesian no more, Keynesian economists would still be employed.
      • flameboy, on 10/06/2008, -1/+2"Thus if the government decided they were Keynesian no more, Keynesian economists would still be employed."

        Yes. We ***** get it, they would not all lose their jobs overnight. But their influence would be severely stunted.

        Try looking at the overall point he was trying to make instead of arguing petty semantics.
      • mitch37, on 10/06/2008, -2/+1Thanks Professor Internet!
    • copypastry, on 10/05/2008, -1/+20Wow i guess if an authority says something, i should believe it straight away!


      RIP critical thinking
    • hugolp, on 10/05/2008, -3/+4Oh, ok. I am more convinced now, because The Economist is a private owned company that will allways stand for true, and never for the interest of its shareholders... yeah, definitively more convinced now... :-/
  • spepin, on 10/05/2008, -6/+15Wow, for a society who are so cautious with money and how we spend it, that's a lot of 0's that seem to go missing.

    Also, wtf @ that conspiracy about 9/10/01
    • pfhayter, on 10/05/2008, -3/+18I'm not about to put on a tin foil hat but anyone that doesn't find that coincidence a little fishy really isn't thinking it through.
    • Alfonrock, on 10/08/2008, -0/+0hahha... its funny what you say... "a society that is so cautious with the money and how we spend it"... really hilariouse...

      I love cynical jokes!!
  • mdonato, on 10/05/2008, -2/+29Who killed the Constitution? We did by our apathy. No more apathy and no more free passes. As Willie Nelson says, "Throw the bastards out!!!!"

    http://www.voterbomb.com/2008

  • OneLess, on 10/05/2008, -27/+12Screw 9/11 conspiracy *****.
    • supertramp97, on 10/05/2008, -13/+5I agree, I cant believe people are digging a video with 9/11 conspiracy content! I thought diggers were smarter.....
      • TrevorBelmont, on 10/05/2008, -3/+14I thought people were smarter than to discount something outright because they've heard the word "conspiracy" associated with it.
      • OneLess, on 10/05/2008, -1/+1I discount it outright because the "theories" are full of misrepresentations of facts, outright lies, and spurious interpretations of events.

        I thought people were smarter than to paint everyone who doesn't believe in conspiracy theories with the same brush.
      • NightVortez, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1Well, aside from the 9/11 *****, which you can like me just turn off when it starts, the video does present a good point about inflation and government bail outs spent in the last week.
  • Sean23, on 10/05/2008, -2/+64Isn't this taxation without representation?
    • hugolp, on 10/05/2008, -0/+27Yes.

      Are you suggesting that you are surpised because the US constitution is not being followed? it has not been for almost 100 years.
      • Sean23, on 10/05/2008, -0/+4We went to war for that once, but now our quality of life has improved so much anyway that it's not worth fighting for.
  • chourobin, on 10/05/2008, -20/+5his arguments have been disproved. our economy is facing a deflationary phase, not inflation. if the bailout were not passed, we would face a deflationary depression. also, his argument is countered by the fact that the dollar has been soaring after the bailout, recently hitting its 7 year HIGH against the EURO. the fact is, a strong economy translates to a strong dollar. the euro, yen, yuan are all plummeting because their economy is worst off than ours. in a slow economic growth environment, inflation is not what we have to worry about. that is also why Merill Lynch analysts have downgraded the price of oil to 50 dollars within 1 year.
    • ericdano, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1Interesting. Sources? Links? Got them?
    • eagles1, on 10/05/2008, -0/+3Get this straight..if you can.....every dime that you have is highly manipulated...its very very manipulated just to keep the world happy...dont get excited about the strong dollar right now....
  • 5fifteen, on 10/05/2008, -13/+4I'm transferring my money into offshore accounts. Go Euro.
    • Hiltonizer, on 10/05/2008, -1/+8they're doing the same thing.
    • ghatid, on 10/05/2008, -0/+5Lol, you might want to put a pause on that smart idea. The euro to USD exchange rate has dropped to about 1.38 USD to 1 Euro, where it was around 1.6 USD to 1 Euro in April/May 2008.
    • pfhayter, on 10/05/2008, -0/+4Its a global economy, the TSX goes down with the DOW and I'm sure the EU markets are the same. Me, I'm buying a donkey and some fertilizer.
    • eagles1, on 10/05/2008, -1/+2Thats a smart move....if u can transfer money you should...starting 2009 dollar is going to be weak..at least for 5 to 10 years....if you study Ron Paul's message, thats exactly what's going to happen.
  • chourobin, on 10/05/2008, -17/+4his arguments have been disproved. our economy is facing a deflationary phase, not inflation. if the bailout were not passed, we would face a deflationary depression. also, his argument is countered by the fact that the dollar has been soaring after the bailout, recently hitting its 7 year HIGH against the EURO. the fact is, a strong economy translates to a strong dollar. the euro, yen, yuan are all plummeting because their economy is worse off than ours. in a slow economic growth environment, inflation is not what we have to worry about. that is also why Merill Lynch analysts have downgraded the price of oil to 50 dollars within 1 year.
    • TheMoniker, on 10/05/2008, -2/+1How dare you come on Digg and start calmly discussing economics?

      Listen friend, it's clear as day:
      1) The Illuminiti/Freemasons, in conjunction with the reptoids, who have owned the world since just before the Egyptian civilization have been planning every war in existence in order to gain control of the world that they ... uhh ... already own and to make more money ... uhm... though they pretty much had it all to start with.
      2) They are starting wars in order to further technology (even though they already had this very advanced technology hundreds of years ago) so that they can achieve their end goal of neohuman potential for themselves as bio-borg robot overlord reptoids and create a slave race out of the rest of us. They invented a story called evolution to support their belief in eugenics, then fought against it with their religions, then it just ... uhh ... happened to be true.
      3) They want us to move away from the gold-backed dollar so that they can collapse the American economy (which they already control and could have sunk at any point in time) through providing the banks with liquidity so that they can start lending again and the market won't collapse ... uhm... wait, anyhow, they're going to collapse the market through inflation instead ... so that they can some to the rescue and establish a New World Order.
      4) Evolution is a lie, global warming is a scam, the LHC will blow us all up and Ron Paul!
    • Sagags, on 10/05/2008, -1/+1Diggers are to stupid to realize anything your saying.
  • pigfister, on 10/05/2008, -2/+11who exactly is being bailed out?

    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ONUSxiGN4m4
  • Labyrinth336, on 10/05/2008, -27/+9***** liberals
  • yelnatz, on 10/05/2008, -7/+45Zeitgeist: Addendum

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7065205277 ...
  • damntourists, on 10/05/2008, -3/+4oh *****
  • HenvY, on 10/05/2008, -16/+6I knew this was going to turn into a ***** Ron Paul video. Why do people like to pretend like he's some world class economist?
  • t3rmv3locity, on 10/05/2008, -15/+5Wrong title, it should be "Why the Bailout is a necessity". If the derivative bubble collapses then our entire economy will collapse, and that is why this bailout is so necessary. Unfortunately Bush has been exploiting it for his own presidential power, which is why the markets were a bit uncomfortable with the bailout (the dow dropping as an example).
    • muckemuck, on 10/05/2008, -0/+6 IF?

      You are an optimist comrade.
    • fancypantscz, on 10/05/2008, -0/+5dude... the derivative bubble IS collapsing
      that is why the bailout is worthless
      even if it stemmed the tide for some time
      unless we invent free energy or something akin to limitless resources
      the next collapse is eminent

      our monetary system is fundamentally flawed
    • pfhayter, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1The bailout has to be enacted rather fast to accomplish anything. Everything I've been hearing from all sources other then network news is that the bailout will not work.
  • elektronjunge, on 10/05/2008, -18/+11Wow yet another video posted by diggers who have absolutely no understanding of how the fed operates!
    • muckemuck, on 10/05/2008, -3/+7oh.. I know how it operates. I also know what damage they've done in the past
      http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=5940 ...
      and how we're seeing them do the same thing again.

      I know that the Federal Reserve is at the heart of the problem that caused the economic mess we're seeing right now - and yet Bernanke is right there in the middle of it all telling us how to fix it? What a load of BS.
    • TrevorBelmont, on 10/05/2008, -3/+11Offer a counterpoint.
    • fancypantscz, on 10/05/2008, -3/+4I would really like to educate myself about the fed

      please link to some resources

      because I'm developing an opinion similar to one supported by this video
    • cheezintern, on 10/05/2008, -2/+2it was a good video, they just over simplified it, leaving out important information.
    • mistertrogdor, on 10/05/2008, -1/+6Google "The Money Masters"
      • odigity, on 10/05/2008, -0/+2I'll save you the time:

        The MoneyMasters Part 1 of 2
        http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-158315456 ...

        The MoneyMasters Part 2 of 2
        http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-733684576 ...
      • highPhone, on 10/06/2008, -2/+1is this an objective account of the history of banking or is this some conspiracy theory propaganda.

        I'd like to know before i invest 4 hours watching this thanks :)
      • mistertrogdor, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2highPhone that is for you to decide... I still have not finished the whole thing because google won't let me download it.

        Given the amounts of 'missing' money described in the video 'Why Wont The Bail Out Work' It seems like the history described in 'The MoneyMasters' is going to repeat itself, except this time, it will be on a much larger scale.


      • highPhone, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1@mistertrogdor: I'm about halfway through the MoneyMasters now and it seems like the credit crisis we're having right now has happend lots of times in the past.

        In regard to my previous comment, MoneyMasters is propaganda, but it has a libertarian bias (not a bad thing).

    • elektronjunge, on 10/05/2008, -1/+3I have offered counter points in the past, I just got sick of typing them. If you would like to learn about the fed just open up any economics text book to the federal reserve. I would read the wikipedia page to start its points out the criticism and is much less biased then these random fed hate videos on digg. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_Syste ...
      • odigity, on 10/05/2008, -2/+2You Fallacy of Appeal to Authority suckers simply can't accept the government is lying to you, can you. It's just inconceivable to you that there are bad people in the world.

        Sigh.
      • elektronjunge, on 10/05/2008, -1/+2And its just inconceivable to that they wouldn't destroy us all! I believe they may have malicious intent but they do not have the power to use it in the manner all of these videos say. The fed honestly doesn't have that much. Sorry to inform you. Simply put the fed does not have the ability to put its printed money directly on the market. The market must buy bonds from the reserve to get the new money.
    • enzomedici, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1
      The whole problem started because credit was cheap and home owners took out adjustable rate mortages (ARMs) and bought houses. This created the real estate boom and everyone wanted in on it. Once home prices rose too high, the Fed raised interest rates to cool things off. The problem is that once prices started to fall and interest rates went up, people couldn't sell or refinance. Plus, ARMs readjusted at the higher rates ***** things up even worse. People did the smart thing and foreclosed, which lead to further home price declines and a worse market. Now prices have dropped bigtime, but credit is hard to get, so if you have to sell your home, you are *****, because no one is buying. The bailout is fine for banks, but does absolutely nothing to address the housing market.

      More and more people will default unless interest rates come back down, credit becomes available and housing prices rise. Right now, people who want to buy cannot, people who want to sell cannot and people who want to refinance cannot.
    • SnaggyMcGee, on 10/06/2008, -0/+0Your post doesn't demonstrate any fiscal wisdom either, douchebag.
  • TheEnthusiast, on 10/05/2008, -4/+7oh *****
  • u8eR, on 10/05/2008, -18/+4Just an attempt to inject 9/11 conspiracies into Digg.
  • texas85, on 10/05/2008, -2/+6Trillions missing? How and where?
    • lazerus9, on 10/05/2008, -0/+10Here is your answer.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdHLUHwU
    • muckemuck, on 10/05/2008, -0/+9here's an unedited CBS report on it.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj1rT4bszWg
      and there's this.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rRqeJcuK-A&feature ...

      It was in the mainstream media for a while so there are some articles on it out there.. it's not a hidden fact or conspiracy or anything. It happened and people didn't get too upset about it probably because what was happening at the time (9/11 kind of got the attention then).
    • fancypantscz, on 10/05/2008, -0/+13military industrial complex
      +
      worst congress ever
      +
      voters busy watching tv
      =
      massive corruption and missing trillions

      not so hard to comprehend
    • TheBigShovel, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1Pentagon "misappropriated" Sept 10, 2001, Sept 11, 2001 A jumbo-jet crashed into the file cabinet flown by a Saudi Arabian taxi cab driver. 50 cameras and we only got 4 crappy frames that doesn't show anything worthwhile.
  • Br3ach, on 10/05/2008, -1/+2Great, I feel so much better about our Gov spending now...

    How can they be such incompetent *****
    • AlbinoRaven, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1step 1: be born rich and stupid
      step 2: ???
      step 3: profit
    • odigity, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1They're not incompetent. They're some of the most competent people in the world. They've robbed trillions from the American people and have so far gotten away with it.

      Stop thinking in terms of the mythical models of government incompetence and "ordinary" corruption that people just assume happens and don't seem to care about. This is coordinated and massive and intentional.
  • JJCDAD, on 10/05/2008, -11/+4Anyone got a non-truther take on this?
    • statrick, on 10/05/2008, -2/+1umm, i can give it a try.

      the economy is great, just take my word for it. now get back to work. praise jebus!!!!
    • TheMoniker, on 10/05/2008, -0/+11) The short term ban on short selling financial institutions will probably lower the volatility of that sector.
      2) U.S. & Canadian central banks didn't cut interest at their latest meetings, so they likely aren't predicting a steep recession/downturn.
      3) The injection of liquidity into the market will allow banks to continue lending, though we are still likely to see a rollercoaster year ahead of us at the very least.
      4) Home prices as a multiple of median household income have returned to normal levels.
      5) It's hard to tell, but it appears that U.S. subprime loan delinquencies as a percentage of subprime loans outstanding have finally peaked.
      6) U.S. T-Bonds and Canada 10-year bonds are at a low in terms of yield range, with most major institutions predicting 4.25-4.5% this time next year.
      7) A number of factors, including price momentum indicate that the market is oversold and it may soon be time to do some shopping.

      While it's true that there are a bunch of greedy corporate douches who are making money off of terrible living conditions globally, it seems unlikely that this is part of a global conspiracy involving the Freemasons/Reptoids.
  • m7even, on 10/05/2008, -7/+0Or instead of watching the video...
    Why wont the bail out work? Bush made it.
  • TheMachine1, on 10/05/2008, -11/+6The video describes the loans the Fed gave such as to AIG as a "sweetheart deal". Thats not the way AIG shareholders would describe it. The terms of the loan leave the Fed with nearly all the upside potential.

    When the video brought up 911 needless to say I stopped watching it.
  • simeon4110, on 10/05/2008, -2/+4Digg it up!
  • zippy757, on 10/05/2008, -14/+8what a bunch of crap. This is the kind of internet junk that hurts the US....much like the 9/11 conspiracy videos.

    Exactly who do you think 'owns' wall street, This video talks as if 'Wall Street' is a 3rd party, something separate from you and I. It isn't. Wall Street is owned by you, I, your parents, retirement funds etc. When it fails, we all fail. It's not like there's some Boss Tweed getting fat on this...it's mom and pop. Go ask them. Go ask your parents if they have lost money on Wall Steet, and if they want it to fail. Of course they don't.

    The kids of America must start to learn basic money 101 and stop this 'we-they' thing that is evolving. It's a by-product of the campaign that in the end will hurt you.

    If wall street tanks...kiss your college, your jobs, your DIGG, your internet away. You had better pray that the 'big bad government' and 'wall street' work 24-x-7 to get this fixed.

    You kids are so much better that this..please don't sit there and let some unnamed video editor with a campaign agenda influence you. Go research it. Use facts...from real web sites...figure it out yourselves.... don't let dopes tell you the answer, Use your brains.
    • bobfell, on 10/05/2008, -0/+4Fear and half truth... the great oligarch tools to control.

      Go sell a bridge somewhere else, some of us can spot a con when its being perpetrated.

      A retraction in the stock market (that has gained 600% in the past 25 years) is healthy but rampant inflation and corporate welfare is not!!!!
    • ericdano, on 10/05/2008, -1/+2Digg going away wouldn't be a bad thing.........

      Though Kevin Rose might need to get a "real" job
    • fancypantscz, on 10/05/2008, -0/+4I completely agree that people's money makes up Wall Street.

      But if you are NOT heavily invested in Wall Street isn't it better to let the meltdown run its course so that we can get the corrupted interests out of the system. Or better yet wouldn't it be a good idea to address some of the fundamental problems with our monetary system that have directly caused this failure.

      If you have some articles from 'real' web sites that actually does a better job of explaining how our monetary system works than 'money as debt': http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-905047436 ... I implore you to share because it is the only thing that makes sense out of this mess in my mind.
    • nycmac247, on 10/05/2008, -0/+3"Wall Street is owned by you, I, your parents, retirement funds etc"
      ...so now incorporations are democratic institutions, Mr. Mussolini?
  • Weed86, on 10/05/2008, -5/+11***** 2.3 TRILLLLLLLLION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...



  • dhjackburton, on 10/05/2008, -11/+8This video failed in the first sentence when the narrator said that the, " Paulson-Bernanke plan to bailout Wallstreet by giving the [US] Treasury 700 billion dollars and cart blanche to do whatever they want with it." The fact is that the treasury will only have 250 billion in ‘cart blanche’ spending. 100 billion will be discretionary be the president and the other 350 billion dollars will have to be approved by congress. No one likes this bill, but without it more financial institutions will collapse and people will start making runs on banks. 700 billion dollars and the inflation it will cause is nothing compared to what will happen if congress does nothing and lets the entire US financial system collapse. Not to mention the fact that European banking institutions are beginning to fail now as a result of Wallstreet. Seriously, I don’t like this bill any more than any of you, but that doesn’t mean its not a necessary evil.
    • jguy584, on 10/05/2008, -1/+3I couldn't agree more, people who know so little about the economy are the ones screaming their throats out not to pass the bailout. Ask anyone of them what will happen if their is no bailout and they will tell you that the greedy corporate monsters who made this crisis happen will get what they had coming.

      That's true, they will. What's also true is that they [the anti-bailoutees] will get what they had coming too, and those who didn't have it coming will also get it.
      Banks will start to fail left an right, people will get scared and withdraw all their money, FDIC will jack its member rates, more and more banks will continue to drop.
      The credit market will be rock solid at this point, and the unemployment rate will jump leaps and bounds.
      More or less we will have a second great depression.

      It sucks because these huge mega firms got to be too large, and as a result they wrapped their hands around our economies throat. If we don't pay up we are dead, if we do pay up we can maybe buy enough time to sort this mess out.
      We are stuck between a rock and a hard place, and no matter what someone is going to have to loose a lot of money.

    • Asianwaste, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1While I agree, I think this is a simply applying a bandaid to something that needs serious stitching. People don't like the idea of this bailout because it's giving more money to the same firms that (supposedly) were a large contributing factor in this crisis.

      This is like paying for your kid's college who was a ***** up all throughout his first year. You're worried about his future so you continue to pay for his second year in a vain hope that he'll shape up for some reason.

      We need to either restructure some of our economic policies or these companies need to rethink the way they conduct business. Otherwise we are just throwing money in the air.
      • diemunkiesdie, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2Sometimes you need a bandaid while you try to fix the problem. The bailout tides the situation over while new regulations can be put into place to strengthen our financial system.
      • Asianwaste, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2Agreed. The worst possible action in this situation is inaction. I personally don't see any better solution so I won't complain that they throw money in a hail mary pass.

        I can only say they are wrong if they think they can use this money as a ticket to put all the weight of this crisis on the companies they are bailing out. Their involvement in finding a solution to this should only have begun.
    • scalarpotential, on 10/12/2008, -0/+0So why not enforce the bankers, by law, to loan out as if nothing is happening? Why just try to 'ease their minds' by spending so much money. Why not try to get the money back from the mortage brokers? Why not bring some people before justice? Why put in the bill 'Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.'?
      Is there any proof for the claims that banks do not want to lend out money to each other and is their any proof everything will fall if nothing is payed to them? Proof, not tv-news...
    • 3n7r0py, on 10/22/2008, -0/+1You are a fuqtard moron. Do more research. The "$700,000,000" is a ROLLING amount.
  • Weed86, on 10/05/2008, -6/+5ONE QUADRILLION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    10000000000000000
  • Albumen, on 10/05/2008, -7/+2Why do people continue to talk about devaluing the dollar by printing money when we as tax payers are footing the bill? Am I missing something or are people just being pig-headed on this issue?
    • muckemuck, on 10/05/2008, -0/+5Find an answer for this: How exactly will we as taxpayers pay for this? Are they going to raise taxes? Are they going to borrow the money (and from where)? Or is the Fed going to go to the Treasury and ask for more money "from thin air"?
      • chadpyle, on 10/05/2008, -0/+5The printing presses are running as we speak.

        Since 1913, when the Federal Reserve was created by Congress, our money has lost 96% of its purchasing power due to inflation. The more "money" the Federal Reserve creates - the less your "money" buys. It is the Federal Reserve who creates inflation when it issues US dollars backed by government debt.

        The national debt grew to $6 trillion from 1913 to 2001. In the next three years it increased a trillion to $7 trillion dollars in 2004. In the following year it increased sharply to over $8 trillion dollars. The national debt is now well over $9.5 trillion dollars! Congress just raised it to almost $11 Trillion dollars!!

        Graphic of our national debt over time: http://c3.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/9/l_00 ...

        Graphic of the dollar's purchasing power over time: http://c3.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/33/l_7 ...
      • flameboy, on 10/06/2008, -1/+3Every time money is "borrowed" it is the same as money "from thin air"
        Technically, no new money is being printed, the Fed is simply borrowing that 700billion. But since our banks are on a fractional reserve system, the same money can be in more than one place at the same time thus causing inflation.
    • flameboy, on 10/05/2008, -1/+5"Why do people continue to talk about devaluing the dollar by printing money when we as tax payers are footing the bill?"

      Taxpayers are footing the bill via the "inflation tax". Inflation will occur when money is created out of thin air.
  • dipdog21, on 10/05/2008, -2/+7Dug for Quadrillion!
    • AlbinoRaven, on 10/05/2008, -0/+2Its actually closer to 1.64 quadtrillion. Derivatives are the tools made by fools that can't count or understand how to work.


      The king will be the man that can fish, grow food and build when the ***** hits the fan.
    • betocool, on 10/05/2008, -3/+1thats OVER 9000!!!!!!!!!!!11
      • odigity, on 10/05/2008, -0/+2You are so annoying. That meme wasn't funny to begin with (like the very artificial go-kart one), and you keep repeating here over and over just in this one thread, like a nerd desperate to look cool by repeating a bad joke that worked one time for him and got him some attention.
  • fancypantscz, on 10/05/2008, -1/+18The only possible good that could come from our current meltdown is a mass awakening of the American people to how our money system actually works. Under the current fractional reserve/fiat money system, we need to comprehend our 'money as debt': http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-905047436 ...

    The boom and bust cycle is not an natural consequence of capitalism and we should no longer stand for it. These bubbles are the result of a destructive aberration built into our current money system. A gold standard is one way to avoid creating money as debt and there are other alternatives as well. But we must educate ourselves and demand a sound money system from our representatives.

    If we fail to make fundamental changes in our monetary system I fear any wealth we create in the future will simply be taken to service the massive debt we must necessarily create to 'solve' the crisis this time around.
    • flameboy, on 10/05/2008, -1/+3You would think the last 8 years would have caused some sort of "awakening" but somehow half of this nation still thinks the GOP deserve another 4 years.
      • fancypantscz, on 10/05/2008, -0/+3frankly I see little difference between the two parties as this point
      • odigity, on 10/05/2008, -0/+3And the other half think Obama will be any different.

        There's a lot of work today. We're still only at about 5-10% awake. But there are large numbers of people starting to rub their eyes.
    • svendm, on 10/08/2008, -0/+2Boom-bust cycles (AKA trade-cycles) existed long before the gold standard was abolished. Speculation bubbles as well. (The Dutch tulip mania of the 17th century being the classical example) Monetary policy has little to do with it.

      A gold standard still consists of creating money as debt - a loan with gold as collateral. As opposed to government securities - ultimately the assets of the government - as collateral.

      The gold standard certainly has its benefits as well as drawbacks. - But the fiat currency system is not to blame for the current economic crisis. You're claiming a simple solution to a complicated problem which, I assure you, smarter people than you or I have studied in far greater detail.
  • JovialTempest, on 10/05/2008, -1/+2This seemed like a legit movie till it started to speak of end debt as though it was going to be the end of the world. This debt is bad but I am still finding it hard to believe all this information completely. We cannot be that bad off.

    I will digg this up
    • muckemuck, on 10/05/2008, -0/+8A year ago lots of people in high places (Barney Frank, Ben Bernanke, etc) told us Fannie and Freddie were perfectly fine while other people (Peter Schiff, Ron Paul, heck even McCain and Obama) told us we were in for a *****. Who was right?

      Do your own research.. try to find if he's lying about the missing 2.3 Trillion. Find out if the derivatives bubble is really a quadrillion, or is it closer to 500 Trillion... try to find out why we had to pass this bailout when the Fed can (and does) loan BIG money to the banks at will on a daily basis.
    • chadpyle, on 10/05/2008, -0/+5We most certainly can be that bad off. The US isn't immune to financial crisis, in fact, we have a rich history of it.
  • Skibum657, on 10/05/2008, -18/+7The bible is more plausible than the 911 conspiracy.
  • rezilient, on 10/05/2008, -2/+10Great video, not many people know about the derivative market being the bigger issue here.
  • TheMachine1, on 10/05/2008, -4/+2If you know the future then you can take steps to not only avoid loss but profit. If these flakes claiming inflation is about to explode are right they should be shorting the US dollar with a lot of leverage. If on the other hand they really do not have a clue by all means keep making shocking videos.
  • Natron9, on 10/05/2008, -12/+3It was a great video until they started ranting about 9/11
  • Morac, on 10/05/2008, -3/+5I don't know if the bail out will work or not, but since the average American has no idea how the financial system works, I don't think they are in the position to say the bail out won't work. The fact is that something really needed to be done. I don't know if the bail out was that something, but if nothing was done the world could sink into a depression. The last time the world was in a depression it took a World War to get out of it.

    If the world sinks into a depression I fear nothing short of World War 3 will get us out of it and I don't think we'll be any better off after that.
    • odigity, on 10/05/2008, -0/+4WWII did not get us out of a depression, that's a myth perpetuated by those who want you to believe that government deficit spending is good for the economy. It's blatant *****, as you can figure out for yourself if you think about economics logically from basic principles, as I did. I arrive at pretty much the same conclusions as the Austrian economists:

      http://mises.org/
      http://www.amazon.com/Economics-One-Lesson-Shortes ...
      • Morac, on 10/06/2008, -1/+2WWII got the entire world out of the depression, not just the United States.

        In the U.S., there might of been other factors that helped end the Great Depression such as the New Deal, but it was WWII that ended the depression since it got people back to work. The depression might have ended on it's own without the war, but it would have taken a lot longer.

        WWII resulted in more jobs being created than any thing else since people were hire to build and man factories to build tanks, planes, ships, etc. Also people were "hired" to go fight the war. This created the war economy that helped drag the world out of the depression.

        Technically the fact that places like Great Britain were buying supplies from the U.S. during the war would have helped as well, but the U.S. never actually got any money from that.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_depression

        http://www.amazon.com/Cambridge-Economic-History-U ...
    • donotclickjim, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2I agree that wars are artificial ways to stimulate the economy. "New Deals" are another way to artificially stimulate the economy and I believe the government will try both before all this is over. It doesn't matter if a Pachyderm or Donkey is elected.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 95 of 95 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.