American debt debacle.

Good diagram here of where all the money goes...

[url]http://s3.amazonaws.com/infobeautiful2/billion_dollar_gram_2009.png[/url]

Quoted from jock dock tower

....mainly by Fox News, owner, Rupert Murdoch.

I guess your viewpoint is coloured by your politics; if you are left-of-centre Fox News is ultra-conservative. If you are right-of-centre then BBC News is pro-Labour.

The truth as always is somewhere in the middle.

Quoted from kingofthekippers

I guess your viewpoint is coloured by your politics; if you are left-of-centre Fox News is ultra-conservative. If you are right-of-centre then BBC News is pro-Labour.

The truth as always is somewhere in the middle.

....not with Rupert it ain't, even your good self must acknowledge that?

Interesting debate now going on in American politics where there's an attempt at setting up some kind of mass partiicpatory political movement to try and reclaim the "sensible" middle ground. The Tea Party are widely viewed with disdain, even among hard line Republicans - basically because they're stupid, ignorant, and downright dangerous and the majority of Americans simply don't want them. They don't have the money, wherwithal, or resources though to fend off a very rich and vocal organisation that is very clever at getting what it wants (very ably supported by Murdoch and Fox News)
What the new group is trying to do is to get two well known moderates from the Republicans and the Democrats to stand on a "3rd way" ticket for moderation. Will be very interesting to see whether it can succeed, because if it does show signs of doing so then I'm sure the likes of news Corporation will throw billions of dollars at trying to stop it. Interesting times.......

Quoted from jock dock tower

The Tea Party are widely viewed with disdain, even among hard line Republicans - basically because they're stupid, ignorant, and downright dangerous and the majority of Americans simply don't want them. They don't have the money, wherwithal, or resources though to fend off a very rich and vocal organisation that is very clever at getting what it wants (very ably supported by Murdoch and Fox News)

Obviously they will be demonised like crazy by the manintream media and likes of Murdoch - all mainsteam is left AND right, it's one big illussion like you've actually got a real choice.

Most tea partiers just want their country back and to live within their means, uphold the constitution and have smaller, less criminal govt, less out of control with their war agendas.
I think you're the one who's maybe being a little ignorant here, don't simply believe everything must be true just because one side tells a pack of lies and says so.

The bottom line is, the whole debt principle flies against what common sense economics says - that if you're in debt, you can't keep increasing your debt level forever.
You can't stop the bubble bursting if you keep inflating it, it's just a case of how big it gets before it does.

To criticize people who want to burst the bubble before things gets worse later is somewhat missing the point.

Quoted from Marinerz93

money is made from nothing

Yep most is created as debt.

....and is exploding across the world's stock markets this morning. Had to laugh when watching the BBC News this morning when it talked of "markets across the world are in freeefall" as if they are some kind of living organism, instead of the reality of financial speculators causing the run.

Quoted from jock dock tower

....not with Rupert it ain't, even your good self must acknowledge that?

I've never seen how people think Rupert Murdoch holds so much sway in this country. The idea that his newspapers hold so much influence is laughable; the Sun has a readership of 7.5m and the Times is read by 1.5m people which means there are 40m people over the age of 15 who DON'T read a Murdoch paper. 15m people read papers that don't come under the 'influence' of Rupert Murdoch.

Sky News is effectively a minority channel and its ability to influence events is minimal. Now compare that to the BBC. I bet Rupert would love to have two national free-to-air networks, five free-to-air national radio stations, 40 local radio stations, a state-subsidised worldwide radio and television news service and the most popular internet site in the UK. But he doesn't, the BBC does. So who influences more of what we see and hear?

I suspect the hatred of Murdoch (especially on the left) comes not from any pretence of 'power' but because of how he revolutionised Fleet Street and broke the stranglehold of the print unions. Without the likes of Murdoch and Eddy Shah our newspapers would still be inky, would contain no colour and would have little or no up-to-date news. Internet editions of newspapers would simply not exist; the power of the print unions would have put the kybosh to that. But where News International went the rest were sure to go, even the Guardian and the Mirror. Many of our news titles today were loss-making then (some still are) but they owe their existence to the actions of Murdoch and this is what rankles some.

Thought I would revive this thread for debate.
As we all know it is 2012 next year, and alhough I do not see it as the end of the world, I do believe there will be some major change.
I think the current economic system is all set for collapse as the debts worldwide are not sustainable. Austerity measures only put a temporary plaster on the wound, they are not cures.
Are we looking at a 'new world order' as many people feel or are there other solutions to this mess. I personally dont believe that the politicians ultimately control what goes on really, there are much more powerful people (eg Billderbergs) out there who pull the strings and they will be keen to hold onto their power at any cost. It will be a very bumpy ride for us all next year.
I'll probably be ridiculed as some sort of nut for posting this now.

Quoted from carrot top

Thought I would revive this thread for debate.
As we all know it is 2012 next year, and alhough I do not see it as the end of the world, I do believe there will be some major change.
I think the current economic system is all set for collapse as the debts worldwide are not sustainable. Austerity measures only put a temporary plaster on the wound, they are not cures.
Are we looking at a 'new world order' as many people feel or are there other solutions to this mess. I personally dont believe that the politicians ultimately control what goes on really, there are much more powerful people (eg Billderbergs) out there who pull the strings and they will be keen to hold onto their power at any cost. It will be a very bumpy ride for us all next year.
I'll probably be ridiculed as some of nut for posting this now.

I fear you are probably right. I don't subscribe (yet) to the doomsday prophecies, but I am becoming increasingly convinced by the NWO conspiracists.

Going back to the original issue of US debt, one of the things I don't get is the position regarding the UK. On 31 December 2006, the UK paid US$83m (£45.5m) to the US and so discharged the last of its loans from World War II. Now the UK is owed over US$300bn by the USA. Is this just institutional lending (ie UK banks/funds lending to the US) or does the US gov't actually owe the UK gov't? And if it is (and it probably is the case) institutional lending, how much must America owe it's own financial institutions? There must be some pretty big bubbles getting ready to burst....