Posts
Trim Expenses While You Trim the Tree
The holidays are typically a time we think about spending money, not cutting expenses. But let's face it, you're going to have to pay for all those shiny new packages under the tree (or whatever holiday icon you choose to celebrate).
Unfortunately, what is good for each of us individually (spending less) might not be so good for us as a group (recession).
That might require Ben Bernanke to convince us to spend again, and he's pretty much just got one way to do it.
Friday: No Major Economic Releases
-
[image: Mortgage Rates] Note: Mortgage rates are from MortgageNewsDaily.com
and are for top tier scenarios.
Friday:
• At 10:00 AM ET, *University of Michig...
6 hours ago
4 comments:
Perhaps not the best choice of currency, though. ;))
Our perpetuallty expanding government and credit economy would have a fatal seizure if spending didn't continually increase. No doubt the fed will cut rates. They already have. Twice. Some say this rate cutting is done at the expense of savers, but maybe it just seems this way on the surface. Some savers will be diluted for sure, at least initially. Other savers, who understand the playbook, will go all-in betting the fed will lower rates if aggregate spending even thinks about slowing. Fortunes are made this way. Spending, it seems, is the economy's slave. I would prefer to see credit being created without artificial inducements, but hey, I'm just a pea in a pod.
Savers really do seem like easy targets though. There are so few of us. Our votes are a drop in the bucket. I've read that most American families would be insolvent within 3 months if they lost their jobs or became unable to work. You would think people would wake up and conclude that work (or more realistically their lifestyles) just don't pay. Sadly, if the poor didn't spend every penny they make and more, they wouldn't be as poor. And the rich wouldn't be as rich. Worse still, if all these sheeple without a pot to piss in ever voted, nobody would have any money. Savers may be easy targets, but the alternative looks like indentured servitude to me.
In ancient Babylon slavery was legal, and primarily brought about by the non-payment of debt. Poor people could also sell themselves into slavery for a fixed period. Laws mandated that owners treat slaves reasonably well, providing food, shelter, and education for a slave and his family. Hey, Twain was right, history does rhyme.
Me, well, I've always been a saver. Just makes sense. Rainy days and all. Maybe I'm different, but more likely, most people are slaves. Politicians call them constituents or voters, I call them morons. Due to the mortgage mess, the slaves, with the help of their politicians, want to modify the terms and length of their indenturedness. Of course the savers will have to oblige. But so will the slaves.
dierieme,
You are correct of course, but I thought that it would be more amusing, lol.
MAB,
Well said.
dearieme,
Apologies for torturing your name. Oops!
Post a Comment