Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (6105)	5/6/2006 11:24:20 AM
From: Moominoid	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 219578

Net present value of course is much lower... Not an immediate crisis I think... will it be in a decade or so's time? Maybe?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (6105)	5/6/2006 3:02:39 PM
From: energyplay	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 219578

Great comments everyone. The 49 Billion is a straw man. >Let's project expense 75 years into the future without any projection of income...duh. There is roughly about 1 Trillion paid each year on these "obligations" - so the next 75 years should cover the 49 Trillion. Note that private pension funds need to be funded because they don't have a reliale future income stream - they cnago out of business. The assumption is that the Government will not go cease to exist or have income (taxes). Note that GDP (which sometimes feels hedonic) and Federal govenment tax revenue (which feels painful when paid and not at all hedonic) are still growing > 2.5% At that rate they will double in 30 years with out tax rate increases. The people publishing this have agendas, usually: 1) Sell books and newsletters, 2) Sell precious metals, 3) Increase tax rates now. There is a real Federal Budget defict, that needs to be reduced by cutting spending (Iraq is part of this, but there is lots of FAT all over the Federal government), and then maybe some very small increases in tax rates - like 1-2 %. The spending cuts need to come first, or they won't happen. There is a real (but overstated) trade defict, which will need a USD drop of about 25% in value. About 4% has already happend. I will post more on how this trade defict number is distorted by tax avoidance. Even Paul Krugman is picking up on the trade number distortion. ********************** >I will address Social Security in a later post. Seeker - well I can't think of anything better than energy - right now. Look, we are all using computers and software and and sell phones and broad band and search engines and buying more stuff through the internet than ever before, but Nasdaq and the intel and Cisco and JDSU are back to where they should be. Meaning there is nothing that says we can't have bubble pricing for energy assets. We had it in the early 1980s. I expect I am a few years early on this call, but events (Iran) could cause the future to arrive sooner.