Democratic National Convention **live commentary thread**

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

How does anyone with remotely major responsibilities find the time to watch these things? I've only been able to catch Obama's and Clinton's speech.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

How does anyone with remotely major responsibilities find the time to watch these things? I've only been able to catch Obama's and Clinton's speech.

I think you may have answered your own question.

[Niemeyerite]

Obama just admitted he hasn't solved the problems.  No, "We've turned the corner."  He harkened back to FDR.  Nobody under 86 is old enough to have voted for him.  Stable or worse job numbers?

Could you stop whining whenever someone mentions an older President, please? Do you really think people are so clueless that they don't know who Franklin Roosevelt or Dwight Eisenhower is?

I don't think he can.  J.J.'s posts often display the stereotypical MENSA snobbery, that if they understand something, the common simpletons cannot possibly comprehend it.  That attitude is one reason why I never bothered to join despite being more than qualified.

I did a MENSA test, when I was 14, and I passed, actually. But, after investigating about who they are, I decided my life was better with "normal" people around. MENSA people are either hacks or freaks.

[J. J.]

Great jobs numbers.  Down by .2

[J. J.]

Job creation numbers down, however, 96,000.

[Torie]

The Greek crisis isn't about debt. The Greek crisis is about Europe's half-step towards union. It just isn't a proper understanding of economics to put that up as a parallel.

The US has massive running room. The interest rate argument always baffles me. Interest rates won't perk up unless the economy perks up. And if the economy perks up, then revenues will perk up, too.

Interest rates will "perk up" if the perceived riskiness of treasuries perks up. Did you forget that scenario?  It really baffles me that someone as familiar with economics as you, is not terrified of this debt trajectory, beyond the revolting immorality of the Bommers (my generation) ripping off most of the posters on this forum with a huge debt that will chain them.

Of course none of this affects me personally, and never will. But it affects you, almost all of you. I just don't get the nonchalance about it, among those few who are informed - like you.

I'm not nonchalant at all. That's why I am informed. The perceived risk of Treasuries will not go up because there is no risk to Treasuries. Aside, that is, from political risk. So long as the will of the US government to repay its debts is unquestioned, then the repayment bondholders will receive shall be unquestioned. It is precisely the falsity of that statement which makes Greece Greece, and the truth of the statement which makes sovereign nations economically sovereign.

The truly terrifying debt trajectory was the trajectory of total debt, not just that of public federal debt. These categories are not islands or isolated silos but reflections of the single real economy, and the fact of the matter is that debt is transferred and traded off between different sectors of the economy. That is why countries like Ireland, Iceland, and Spain, with years of consecutive surpluses and low public debts, found themselves in crisis. That is why the US itself found ourselves in crisis in 2008 and not in 1992 (or the 1940s) when public debt to GDP was higher. Private debt must also be considered. That's why I consider that we've actually been moving in the right direction on the debt front. What's needed now is faster growth and more employment.

When considering the impact of non governmental debt, is the debt amount of folks or their net worth more important in your opinion?  I mean would it be "better" if the average Joe had no assets and no liabilities, or 100K in assets, and 50K in liabilities?