No I'm not. I'm saying right figure is 60 billion euros, not over 200 billion dollars.kr@cker wrote:
even if colfax was using euros, you keep harping about how much more the euro is worth, which would actually make your debt higher
You have scewd numbers. Maybe your looking at a different debt but your EXTERNAL debt (I defined this earlier) is over 200 billion dollars.
Earlier i was told to show facts so now i am. My facts are 100% credible.
Look for yourself
again
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/fac … 9rank.html
Your 23
also here under economy
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/fac … os/fi.html
Earlier i was told to show facts so now i am. My facts are 100% credible.
Look for yourself
again
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/fac … 9rank.html
Your 23
also here under economy
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/fac … os/fi.html
Last edited by Colfax (2006-07-11 08:36:00)
HAHA! What more can I say. Yet another proof how intelligent your central intelligence really is. link to Finnish Department of the Treasury's site showing correct figures. First line is total foreign debt in millions. Use a dictionary if you don't believe me.Colfax wrote:
You have scewd numbers. Maybe your looking at a different debt but your EXTERNAL debt (I defined this earlier) is over 200 billion dollars.
Earlier i was told to show facts so now i am. My facts are 100% credible.
Look for yourself
again
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/fac … 9rank.html
Your 23
also here under economy
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/fac … os/fi.html
Agreed.... what use is it to give advice when you don't follow your own words?PekkaA wrote:
For a thousandth time: If only you'd do like your last sentence says, even this forum might be a bit more peaceful.TheEqualizer wrote:
Is it just me or are you guys noticing that non-Americans (and even some Americans) always post threads about the evil USA? Every day they pick a random topic to bash the US. One day, it's all about how we are imperialistic (or is it empirialistic?) invaders by taking out Saddam. Another day, it's about how we're jumping at the chance for war but won't give aid to 3rd world countries. Another day, we have WMDs. Another day, we are the cause of terrorism around the world. Another day, we have too much debt. Another day, we're either rednecks or yankees (both of which appear evil in the eyes of a non-American). Another day, all of our soldiers are lumped into a group called criminals. Another day, we're obsessed with guns.
Can you guys just worry about yourself for a change and fix your own country instead of worrying about ours?
America rocks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
edit. I meant second last.
Colfax, here's same page in english. figures
The CIA's data is accurate. Here's why:PekkaA wrote:
HAHA! What more can I say. Yet another proof how intelligent your central intelligence really is. link to Finnish Department of the Treasury's site showing correct figures. First line is total foreign debt in millions. Use a dictionary if you don't believe me.
The Finnish Government web site is only counting Public debt. Let me anticipate your response: 'Private debt doesn't count...'CIA Factbook wrote:
Debt - external This entry gives the total public and private debt owed to nonresidents repayable in foreign currency, goods, or services. These figures are calculated on an exchange rate basis, i.e., not in purchasing power parity (PPP) terms.
That couldn't be more wrong. Private debt will have just as much of an effect on your economy as public debt. Just ask the Japanese.
Now, we have a Finnish total external debt of $211 Billion vs a GDP of $161 Billion, and a US total external debt of $8 Trillion vs a GDP of $12 Trillion. Who is in more trouble?
Last edited by whittsend (2006-07-11 09:03:53)
Um....when did I endlessly start threads bashing Germay and Netherlands, etc.? Actually, that gives me an idea.BEE_Grim_Reaper wrote:
Agreed.... what use is it to give advice when you don't follow your own words?PekkaA wrote:
For a thousandth time: If only you'd do like your last sentence says, even this forum might be a bit more peaceful.TheEqualizer wrote:
Is it just me or are you guys noticing that non-Americans (and even some Americans) always post threads about the evil USA? Every day they pick a random topic to bash the US. One day, it's all about how we are imperialistic (or is it empirialistic?) invaders by taking out Saddam. Another day, it's about how we're jumping at the chance for war but won't give aid to 3rd world countries. Another day, we have WMDs. Another day, we are the cause of terrorism around the world. Another day, we have too much debt. Another day, we're either rednecks or yankees (both of which appear evil in the eyes of a non-American). Another day, all of our soldiers are lumped into a group called criminals. Another day, we're obsessed with guns.
Can you guys just worry about yourself for a change and fix your own country instead of worrying about ours?
America rocks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
edit. I meant second last.
Last edited by TheEqualizer (2006-07-11 08:50:55)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_debt
Government debt (also known as public debt or national debt) is money owed by any level of government; either central government, federal government, municipal government or local government.
As the government represents the people, government debt can be seen as an indirect debt of the tax payers.
Government debt can be categorized as internal debt, owed to lenders within the country, and external debt, owed to foreign lenders. Governments usually borrow by issuing securities such as government bonds and bills. Less credit worthy countries sometimes borrow directly from commercial banks or supranational institutions. Some people consider all government liabilities, including future pension payments and payments for goods and services the government has contracted for but not yet paid, as government debt.
Your talking internal debt.
____________________________
Whittsend Quote:
Now, we have a Finnish total external debt of $211 Billion vs a GDP of $161 Billion, and a US total external debt of $8 Trillion vs a GDP of $12 Trillion. Who is in more trouble?
_____________________________
me again:
Hit the nail on the head.
Government debt (also known as public debt or national debt) is money owed by any level of government; either central government, federal government, municipal government or local government.
As the government represents the people, government debt can be seen as an indirect debt of the tax payers.
Government debt can be categorized as internal debt, owed to lenders within the country, and external debt, owed to foreign lenders. Governments usually borrow by issuing securities such as government bonds and bills. Less credit worthy countries sometimes borrow directly from commercial banks or supranational institutions. Some people consider all government liabilities, including future pension payments and payments for goods and services the government has contracted for but not yet paid, as government debt.
Your talking internal debt.
____________________________
Whittsend Quote:
Now, we have a Finnish total external debt of $211 Billion vs a GDP of $161 Billion, and a US total external debt of $8 Trillion vs a GDP of $12 Trillion. Who is in more trouble?
_____________________________
me again:
Hit the nail on the head.
Last edited by Colfax (2006-07-11 09:16:10)
The World Bank's website lists Finland's gross external debt at $217 billion dollars at the end of 2005.
First your logic is broken. Someone else's GDP could never be "your problem". You put far too much weight on a role that the EU and ((especially Finland?)) lolz ?? plays. In reality it is a VERY minor role.PekkaA wrote:
Actually I had over 6 months old numbers. HERE'S fresh numbers.
To Gunslinger, if that continues, your GDP will be our problem..
Ignorant blathering ? The US national debt is 80% internal 20% foreign of which Finland owns less than 1%. your role in the debt is less than 1% of 20%, you are irrelevant! The national debt here has raised significantly but the sources have NOT changed. its 80% fed and state reserves and 20% foreign investors so your 1.1 trillion and 54% *national fund?* is BULLSHIT. You don't have a fucking clue what you are talking about go take and economics class.PekkaA wrote:
Here's couple of facts regarding your great economy. Since 2000 election, usa's national debt has increased over 1,1 trillion dollars and ALL of that money has come from foreign investors. This means that at the moment 54% of national fund is in foreign ownership. If your government keeps up same good work, you've soon sold your country to us. wink
You try to misconstrue numbers, 50% of the foreign sector of the debt is from Asia, thats 50% of 20% ,..thats just another example of what a minor role the EU and of course Finland play. "Put my head back to Bush?" What the fuck are you talking about ? First that shit doesn't even make sense, only thing close i can put that broke ass English to is you trying to say I'm a right winger and a Bush supporter? You don't know me kid and NOTHING I've said has given any political affiliation.PekkaA wrote:
Your private sectors debt is 150% of your GDP and private savings rate 0%. Therefore only way is to loan money abroad. At the moment usas net debt is 46% of your GDP and 50% of that money has come from Asian central banks (China, Japan, Korea, Indonesia and Taiwan). And there are estimates that usa will borrow 75% of world's savings.
So stop reading News of the world and try New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Forbes Magazine if you want to seriously debate about economics. Otherwise, please put your head back to bush.
At the end of the day you can babble all day about the debt and try to make it into some huge monster. In reality world we use loans and pay interest in order to keep taxes low and further stimulate the economy. It not something that will ruin America's GDP or even hurt it. At any point we can simply pay back the loans with taxes.
PekkaA Finland is not important accept your minor role in the world and move on
Aww Finland didn't even make the list so sad...
Last edited by ﻍﻏﺱﺖﻇﻸﮚ (2006-07-11 11:13:22)
goddamnit why do people blast shit out their asses without any knowledge??ﻍﻏﺱﺖﻇﻸﮚ wrote:
First your logic is broken. Someone else's GDP could never be "your problem". You put far too much weight on a role that the EU and ((especially Finland?)) lolz ?? plays. In reality it is a VERY minor role.PekkaA wrote:
Actually I had over 6 months old numbers. HERE'S fresh numbers.
To Gunslinger, if that continues, your GDP will be our problem..Ignorant blathering ? The US national debt is 80% internal 20% foreign of which Finland owns less than 1%. your role in the debt is less than 1% of 20%, you are irrelevant! The national debt here has raised significantly but the sources have NOT changed. its 80% fed and state reserves and 20% foreign investors so your 1.1 trillion and 54% *national fund?* is BULLSHIT. You don't have a fucking clue what you are talking about go take and economics class.PekkaA wrote:
Here's couple of facts regarding your great economy. Since 2000 election, usa's national debt has increased over 1,1 trillion dollars and ALL of that money has come from foreign investors. This means that at the moment 54% of national fund is in foreign ownership. If your government keeps up same good work, you've soon sold your country to us. winkYou try to misconstrue numbers, 50% of the foreign sector of the debt is from Asia, thats 50% of 20% ,..thats just another example of what a minor role the EU and of course Finland play. "Put my head back to Bush?" What the fuck are you talking about ? First that shit doesn't even make sense, only thing close i can put that broke ass English to is you trying to say I'm a right winger and a Bush supporter? You don't know me kid and NOTHING I've said has given any political affiliation.PekkaA wrote:
Your private sectors debt is 150% of your GDP and private savings rate 0%. Therefore only way is to loan money abroad. At the moment usas net debt is 46% of your GDP and 50% of that money has come from Asian central banks (China, Japan, Korea, Indonesia and Taiwan). And there are estimates that usa will borrow 75% of world's savings.
So stop reading News of the world and try New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Forbes Magazine if you want to seriously debate about economics. Otherwise, please put your head back to bush.
At the end of the day you can babble all day about the debt and try to make it into some huge monster. In reality world we use loans and pay interest in order to keep taxes low and further stimulate the economy. It not something that will ruin America's GDP or even hurt it. At any point we can simply pay back the loans with taxes.
PekkaA Finland is not important accept your minor role in the world and move on
http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/6568 … ebt2xs.jpg
Aww Finland didn't even make the list so sad...
Over 47% of the personal income taxes (but not of total tax revenue) collected in 2003 will be spent on paying interest on the debt
Political risks:
Treasury statistics indicate that foreigners bought 58 percent of the securities that Treasury sold to investors. Some 60 percent of that 58 percent was bought by central banks. A large percentage of that went to the central banks of Japan and China. This exposes the United States to financial or political risk that either bank will stop buying Treasuries - or selling them heavily.
This is seen as a very substantial risk by some who study geopolitics and creditary economics.
Another risk of possibly even greater magnitude is the possibility that OPEC will begin to price oil in Euros, as Saddam Hussein began to do in 1998 - until this decision was reversed by the 2003 invasion of Iraq. According to economist Henry K. Liu, the 'float' achieved by the necessity of all industrial nations needing to keep a U.S. dollar reserve to hedge against rising prices of oil, is also numbered in trillions of dollars. A shift to a different reserve currency shifts that float as well, and sends those saved dollars back to U.S. shores to be redeemed for goods. This causes inflation, rises in interest rate, and increases in bankruptcy as obligations and assets are called in, to increase flow of cash or goods to the offshore buyers redeeming dollars.
The impact of this would likely be to make U.S bonds have to rise in rates to appeal to investors in a thinner market - which would trigger inflation all over the industrialized world, given the central position of the U.S. in it. A round of hyper-inflation is possible that would potentially break Bretton Woods institutions capacity to react. This would be a larger scale repeat of the George Soros attack on the British Pound Sterling that forced Britain out of the EU fixed rate exchange system.
Every dollar of increased U.S. public debt, and every rise in interest rates, and every shift in pricing of a major industrial commodity, decreases the cushion available, and increases the potential that the U.S. might default on its own bonds. This would likely mean that U.S. dollar savings would be worth drastically less. Far-fetched as this seems, it happened in Argentina when International Monetary Fund-required measures forced an economic austerity regime that was widely blamed by economists as leading to a meltdown in its currency.
Far more serious than either of these questions, which involve 'only money', is the question of the triple bottom line which is the financial, social and natural debt created by exploiting systems with an internal integrity, drawing on them as if they were free. Financial capital is not in general a good guide to social or natural capital flows, and many economists claim it is a contrary - even inherently contrary - process. See uneconomic growth for this discussion in detail.
A serious failure in accountability for instance causes loss of social capital which decreases trust essential to commerce and polity, while loss of natural capital causes a reduction in nature's services (such as irrigation or flood control) that must then be made up for by human effort, stressing the human economy. There are no economists who claim that the financial debt or deficit is actually independent of these factors, and very few who claim that economic growth indicators or measures of national income work well enough to rely on them utterly.
Thus, the ultimate political risk: collapse of an entire polity, which happened for instance in the collapse of the Soviet Union, or rise of a wholly different political economy, as happened after hyper-inflation in Weimar Germany, with the rise of Nazism.
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm
YES, US trade policy affects Canadians, and it's notoriously biased in your favor, as far as we can see it. You depend on us, the rest of the world, to hand you our natural resources, only for you to open up wal mart factories in China that take money away from north America
Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-07-11 12:13:21)
Your posted sources are of politically motivated sites, drawing political conclusions from political documents (White House Budget Office), and even so, they don't say what you think they do. I'm not inclined to accept the data at face value, as the budgets from which they get their figures are all compiled to make incumbents look great, and political rivals (in some cases the incumbents predecessors) look bad. Bad data begets bad data.
Does the US have a debt problem? Unquestionably yes. Is the fact that some of that debt owned by foreigners a problem? Not at all. I see a lot written in your post, and while some of it is valid (we do need to be watchful of the debt problem - and clownshoes Bush spending out of control while cutting taxes isn't helping), but more is double talk. Break Bretton Woods? Bretton Woods has been defunct for decades! You aren't even directly addressing what had been discussed, merely stating that the US is in bad shape. As noted, that is beyond question, but your predictions of gloom and doom are unwarranted. Many of US problems will be (admittedly painfully) self-correcting long before they get to the point where your predictions would come about.
As far as US trade policy goes, I deeply regret the US's failure to abide by the judgement of NAFTA. One more reason to deplore the Bush Administration. But, beyond that, what problems are you talking about? The idea that the US is shipping money overseas to China makes sense, in a world where the monetary supply is static. But we don't live in such a world, and Wal-Mart doesn't own factories.
Point: Your post sure does use a lot of words, but their relation to facts is not proportional.
Does the US have a debt problem? Unquestionably yes. Is the fact that some of that debt owned by foreigners a problem? Not at all. I see a lot written in your post, and while some of it is valid (we do need to be watchful of the debt problem - and clownshoes Bush spending out of control while cutting taxes isn't helping), but more is double talk. Break Bretton Woods? Bretton Woods has been defunct for decades! You aren't even directly addressing what had been discussed, merely stating that the US is in bad shape. As noted, that is beyond question, but your predictions of gloom and doom are unwarranted. Many of US problems will be (admittedly painfully) self-correcting long before they get to the point where your predictions would come about.
As far as US trade policy goes, I deeply regret the US's failure to abide by the judgement of NAFTA. One more reason to deplore the Bush Administration. But, beyond that, what problems are you talking about? The idea that the US is shipping money overseas to China makes sense, in a world where the monetary supply is static. But we don't live in such a world, and Wal-Mart doesn't own factories.
Point: Your post sure does use a lot of words, but their relation to facts is not proportional.
nice cut and paste there spumantii dont try and pass shit off as your own thoughts
http://experts.about.com/e/u/u/U.S._public_debt.htm
National debt interest comprises 12% of federal taxes
Treasuries and securities are THE safest investment in the world there is no risk of investors losing interest
Conjecturing that the US would default on its bonds is nothing short of science fiction
The most stable economy in the world suddenly collapses ? I guess a hobby of yours is spreading misinformation and ignorance
To be honest tho im arguing with your cut and paste and not you
http://experts.about.com/e/u/u/U.S._public_debt.htm
National debt interest comprises 12% of federal taxes
Treasuries and securities are THE safest investment in the world there is no risk of investors losing interest
Conjecturing that the US would default on its bonds is nothing short of science fiction
The most stable economy in the world suddenly collapses ? I guess a hobby of yours is spreading misinformation and ignorance
To be honest tho im arguing with your cut and paste and not you
I don't agree eith you. Why? Because big companies like Nokia or upm-kymmene are actually in international ownership. But because them are registered here, also their debts are on that list.whittsend wrote:
The Finnish Government web site is only counting Public debt. Let me anticipate your response: 'Private debt doesn't count...'
That couldn't be more wrong. Private debt will have just as much of an effect on your economy as public debt. Just ask the Japanese.
Now, we have a Finnish total external debt of $211 Billion vs a GDP of $161 Billion, and a US total external debt of $8 Trillion vs a GDP of $12 Trillion. Who is in more trouble?
What comes to being in trouble, well my country has been decreasing its debt for a last decade, unlike usa that is actually artifically respirated with borrowed money.
For sure it'll be our problem if your economy keeps going down. It'll have effect on Europes economy also.some weird letters wrote:
First your logic is broken. Someone else's GDP could never be "your problem". You put far too much weight on a role that the EU and ((especially Finland?)) lolz ?? plays. In reality it is a VERY minor role.
I'm not retarded. I would never assume that a country this small would have a big effect on world economy. It was a joke. Do you know what means? And those figures are not bullshit. Do some research. I have only documents written in Finnish, and I quess you only understand english.same again wrote:
Ignorant blathering ? The US national debt is 80% internal 20% foreign of which Finland owns less than 1%. your role in the debt is less than 1% of 20%, you are irrelevant! The national debt here has raised significantly but the sources have NOT changed. its 80% fed and state reserves and 20% foreign investors so your 1.1 trillion and 54% *national fund?* is BULLSHIT. You don't have a fucking clue what you are talking about go take and economics class.
No I didn't try to say anything political. I tried to say that you're not seeing world around you. You're disregarding my english and same time your sentence is missing a word.mr sensitive wrote:
"Put my head back to Bush?" What the fuck are you talking about ? First that shit doesn't even make sense, only thing close i can put that broke ass English to is you trying to say I'm a right winger and a Bush supporter?
I hope your prediction is right. Unfortunately most of worlds top economists are very concerned about the way your economy is run.fortune-teller wrote:
It not something that will ruin America's GDP or even hurt it. At any point we can simply pay back the loans with taxes.
And the economy isnt going down. Feel free to rest easier our GDP is higher than ever .. thats an upwards trend.PekkaA wrote:
For sure it'll be our problem if your economy keeps going down. It'll have effect on Europes economy also.
Actaully i speak spanish french and some japanese. I dont speak Finnish becuase i really only have interest in learning relevant languages spoken by large groups of people.. when it becomes necesary for me to learn Finnish i'll do so but dont hold your breath or else youll die.PekkaA wrote:
I have only documents written in Finnish, and I quess you only understand english.
Really ? I'm sorry i confused you lumping me in with GDub as political i duno hoow i coulda done that..PekkaA wrote:
No I didn't try to say anything political. I tried to say that you're not seeing world around you. You're disregarding my english and same time your sentence is missing a word.
Feel free to show me examples where i dont see the world around me.
I didnt miss any words..
I am rather sensitive thats why i moisturize with at least a SPF of FUCK YOUR MOM ^^ j/k
Last edited by ﻍﻏﺱﺖﻇﻸﮚ (2006-07-11 15:43:33)
I am rather sensitive thats why i moisturize with at least a SPF of FUCK YOUR MOM ^^ j/k
Another school-abused teen. Why did I even bother answering you...
Another school-abused teen. Why did I even bother answering you...
To be honest, I skipped over the first 5 pages of this article, but Spumantiii's last post brought up a point. The fact that the $2 Trillion dollars in foreign debt can single handedly be called in if the purchase of oil is switched to Euros. So you don't think a quarter of your entire debt, that just floats around year after year wont collapse your economy when other countries start asking for their money?
Boy, its a pretty good idea that you guys invaded Iraq just when OPEC started to realize Iraq made a good move when it switched to Euros. Whew...
Boy, its a pretty good idea that you guys invaded Iraq just when OPEC started to realize Iraq made a good move when it switched to Euros. Whew...
id blame your language barrierPekkaA wrote:
I am rather sensitive thats why i moisturize with at least a SPF of FUCK YOUR MOM ^^ j/k
Another school-abused teen. Why did I even bother answering you...
instead ill blame you for not being able to take a joke
p.s. douchebag j/k = just kidding
p.p.s. you didnt realy answer anything just babble about things you do not understand
I could have posted the link but not everyone would read it, claiming it to be biased, so I copied it to the post. I didn't say I wrote it.ﻍﻏﺱﺖﻇﻸﮚ wrote:
nice cut and paste there spumantii dont try and pass shit off as your own thoughts
http://experts.about.com/e/u/u/U.S._public_debt.htm
National debt interest comprises 12% of federal taxes
Treasuries and securities are THE safest investment in the world there is no risk of investors losing interest
Conjecturing that the US would default on its bonds is nothing short of science fiction
The most stable economy in the world suddenly collapses ? I guess a hobby of yours is spreading misinformation and ignorance
To be honest tho im arguing with your cut and paste and not you
The most stable economy in the world suddenly collapses. It has happened before.
ps what does your name mean?
Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-07-11 18:05:52)
back on topic,
Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)
Weapons of mass destruction are weapons capable of inflicting massive destruction to property and/or population, using chemical, biological or radioactive material. Weapons of Mass Destruction are also known by the abbreviation WMD.
according to http://www.army-technology.com/glossary … ction.html
On a topic of interest, please (if you have an opinion) say why you think Depleted Uranium ammunition is or is not actually a WMD
Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)
Weapons of mass destruction are weapons capable of inflicting massive destruction to property and/or population, using chemical, biological or radioactive material. Weapons of Mass Destruction are also known by the abbreviation WMD.
according to http://www.army-technology.com/glossary … ction.html
On a topic of interest, please (if you have an opinion) say why you think Depleted Uranium ammunition is or is not actually a WMD
Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-07-11 18:42:11)
In the BF2 community, using such weapons would be called 'noobish' since it can affect so much with so little effort. Considering such types of weapons, they have the ability to affect a widespread area with little to no resistance. I believe they are held in a seperate regard apart from 'conventional' weapons because they take away what honor was left in battle.Spumantiii wrote:
back on topic,
Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)
Weapons of mass destruction are weapons capable of inflicting massive destruction to property and/or population, using chemical, biological or radioactive material. Weapons of Mass Destruction are also known by the abbreviation WMD.
according to http://www.army-technology.com/glossary … ction.html
On a topic of interest, please (if you have an opinion) say why you think Depleted Uranium ammunition is or is not actually a WMD
Now with DU, it may have a trait reflected in WMD's (radioactivity), however considering its actual use is to blow a hole in a tank instead of affect 10 square miles, it cannot be qualified IMO as a WMD. Now I am not advocating its use by any means, just that in the context that the term, WMD, is used, it cannot be considered one.
the negative effects of DU are exaggerated by conspiracy theorists who want to villify america.
true wmd's are tools of countries that cant succeed in conventional warfare i.e. not the united states
true wmd's are tools of countries that cant succeed in conventional warfare i.e. not the united states
Then why does the US posses the world's largest stockpile of nuclear weapons?ﻍﻏﺱﺖﻇﻸﮚ wrote:
the negative effects of DU are exaggerated by conspiracy theorists who want to villify america.
true wmd's are tools of countries that cant succeed in conventional warfare i.e. not the united states
insurance policy