Do you believe in the "let the forest burn and better trees will grow" theory?

Discussion in 'Economics' started by Debaser82, Dec 25, 2008.

  1. Some of the opinions are pretty good, but as usual, we have to note that history does repeat itself. Of course, as my history teacher said: "You had to have been there (the Great Depression)." If anyone remembers post WWI Germany, one can see the similarities today. The biggest difference is that our current inflation and unemployment rates aren't as high. As someone mentioned, war, anarchy, chaos are possible results. Again, take at look at post WWI Germany. The ultimate result was Naziism and Hitler and WWII. I certainly don't want a repeat of that era here.
    #31     Dec 27, 2008
  2. your question really is asking do you believe in the natural cycle that, most believe, God put in place.....


    your attempt at linking that logic of that basic and grossly understated question towards some annalogy towards capital markets and man made corporations and the business cycle that feeds upon consumption, waste, greed, profits, taxes and such.

    care to restate your thesis?

    because the forests, whether touched or untouched do burn, and trees do grow back....

    companies?, well........

    ever hear of ....?
    #32     Jan 7, 2009
  3. Mouse21


    This is the thread folks. No more even needs to be said.
    #33     Jan 7, 2009
  4. I believe that if enough dry tinder builds up over time and there's oxygen and a heat source the f*&$er is gonna burn eventually whether you like it or not. - - You can let it burn when there's not too much dry underbrush built up and the fire will be relatively small. If you let the dry brush build up too much over time (and even pour gasoline on the brush) & there's a spark or a lightening strike, you may get a blaze that burns the down forest and all the surrounding towns too.
    #34     Jan 7, 2009
  5. Why does eveyone think this is a problem? Imagine how much better things would be now if we hadn't entered this crisis with a base $10 trillion national debt??? Not including the huge Social Security, Medicare and other multitrillion dollar obs we cannot afford or pay?

    What if we lived within our means the last century and always had to balance our budgets? State AND federal???

    And pork barrel, union and other demands had to be funded in THIS year's budget???
    #35     Jan 7, 2009
  6. during the "Jim Crow" era and the challenges to it during the 60's and 70's, the almost seemingly innocent claim used in the 50's of state's rights was often quoted in the media,

    it was used to challenge the usage of Federal troops enforcing national laws within states' that challenged them for their residents, particularly the south.

    so, since there are over 52 states within the United States America (ok, Puerto Rico, Guam, etc.) then each of those states have legislatures who regularly fail to balance their budgets on time

    so, I would settle and agree with your premise, if the States would start and set the example of balancing their budgets before expecting that the same people that are elected to the Federal level, who have responsibility to balance the Federal budget are tasked with doing that....

    perhaps they never learned right in the first place
    #36     Jan 10, 2009
  7. talknet


    For past 80 years world economy has grown & crashed & grown bigger again. So people always think world economy will recover again.

    Some damages are beyond repair. Example-: I used to trim a tree in my garden every year for 8 years. After each trim the tree would grow bigger & better. But the 9th year, I over-trimmed the tree and it never grew again. It Died.

    $60 Trillion loss = Over-Trimming of world economy. The situation is "highly serious". According to Dr. Marc Faber, S&P 500 will reach 100-levels. So DOW Jones will also reach 2000-levels. This will wipe out further $60 Trillion.

    That would be $120 Trillion loss for the world economy because Real estate and Commodities will crash Rock Bottom.
    #37     Jan 10, 2009
  8. Okay. We got it. You're short and you want us to be short, too. Can you quit repeating yourself over and over? And lose the bold, too? It's really not necessary.
    #38     Jan 10, 2009