Ao minuto: Trump quer "paz e harmonia" no Médio Oriente após retaliação iraniana

[EuroVerde]

Uma das coisas que constato aqui no Caldeirão é que 99% dos membros se baseiam em gráficos para investirem.
Existe por aqui muitissímo poucos investidores em valor tipo Mr.Buffett.
Só me estou a lembrar do LTCM ou do Atenttive que partilham info fundamental relevante.

Agora em termos de empresas e sua contabilidade futura, pouco ou nada há. O que uma empresa pode valer realmente daqui a 7 ou 10 anos, é independente do preço actual.

[Pantone]

zeca, neste caso os impostos sobem a 1 mas podem descer a 2 de Janeiro... Quantos mais dias passarem poderá haver mais consequências, mas nada de concreto se passa...

E se o problema é a divida, não haver acordo, só a melhora... :S Mas pondo em perspectiva:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ ... ml?hpid=z1

sobre se um acordo "resolve" alguma coisa: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/won ... it-matter/

E como se disse atrás, o que importa é o acordo sobre o Debt Ceiling, e wall street parece estar calmo:
http://www.google.com/finance

[Zecatreca_1001]

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/obama-make-statement-fiscal-cliff-white-house-130-pm-est

Acho que vai ser desta ás 18:30.
Ou sim...ou sopas!

Sopas!

Basicamente...sopas
e com menos de 12h para entrarem em acordo.
Se não houver acordo, crash I think!

POSIÇÕES FECHADAS.

[Dom_Quixote]

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/obama-make-statement-fiscal-cliff-white-house-130-pm-est

Acho que vai ser desta ás 18:30.
Ou sim...ou sopas!

Sopas!

[Zecatreca_1001]

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/obama-ma ... 130-pm-est

Acho que vai ser desta ás 18:30.
Ou sim...ou sopas!

[Zecatreca_1001]

http://www.trust.org/alertnet/news/hour ... -congress/

Republican aide says the two had "good talks"!

[Zecatreca_1001]

Estes gajos andam a brincar a poucas horas do final do ano...

http://www.trust.org/alertnet/news/diff ... -out-reid/

Eu nem costumo ligar a notícias mas acho que esta resolução é indubitavelmente importante.

[Pantone]

What’s at stake if no agreement is reached?

Nearly all Americans would be affected by expiring tax provisions if Congress doesn’t avert the “fiscal cliff.” Here is an overview of some of the issues in play — and who could be most affected:

in http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/sp ... ml?hpid=z1

[Pantone]

.... o problema é quando é que isso vai acontecer e que decisões serão tomadas.

Marco, "dès dimanche" - no domingo. Quanto às decisões em si mesmas para os mercados não terão grande relevância. Acho que o mercado só quer mesmo saber se há, ou não, acordo.

Parece que não foi este domingo

As decisões poderão não ter grande impacto imediato, mas as agências de rating terão de dizer alguma coisa e têm estado caladas (é claro que por pressão... o que só mostra o quanto são influenciáveis)... mas quando falarem, será para baixar os ratings americanos... e aí veremos tudo a cair...

A memória humana parece ser muito curta... já ninguém se lembra do que aconteceu o ano passado quando o acordo para aumentar o teto da dívida não foi alcançado?!?!

Marco Martins, como o ACintra posteou, (e eu erradamente o contrariei, apesar de nao responder ao seu post, como já anteriormente me aconteceu com o MarcoAntonio :S) o Debt Ceiling parece ser o verdadeiro problema, se não fôr aumentado.

Ainda não me é perfeitamente claro o porquê, mas assim parece.

Esse terá que ser resolvido apenas em Fevereiro e se não houver acordo para a (não) eliminação dos impostos agora, não será de esperar grandes consequências.

[Marco Martins]

.... o problema é quando é que isso vai acontecer e que decisões serão tomadas.

Marco, "dès dimanche" - no domingo. Quanto às decisões em si mesmas para os mercados não terão grande relevância. Acho que o mercado só quer mesmo saber se há, ou não, acordo.

Parece que não foi este domingo

As decisões poderão não ter grande impacto imediato, mas as agências de rating terão de dizer alguma coisa e têm estado caladas (é claro que por pressão... o que só mostra o quanto são influenciáveis)... mas quando falarem, será para baixar os ratings americanos... e aí veremos tudo a cair...

A memória humana parece ser muito curta... já ninguém se lembra do que aconteceu o ano passado quando o acordo para aumentar o teto da dívida não foi alcançado?!?!

[mpfreitas]

Isto parece estar Mauzinho:

http://www.rtp.pt/noticias/index.php?ar ... &visual=61

[Zecatreca_1001]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican Senator Lindsey Graham said on Sunday that chances for a small "fiscal Cliff" deal in the next 48 hours were "exceedingly good" and that President Barack Obama had won.
"I think people don't want to go over the cliff if we can avoid it," Graham said on Fox News Sunday.
"This deal won't affect the debt situation, it will be a political victory for the president and I hope we'll have the courage of our convictions when it comes time to raise the debt ceiling to fight for what we believe as Republicans, but hats off to the president, he won," Graham said.


http://news.yahoo.com/republican-senato ... iness.html

[Pantone]

The Deficit: Not as Bad as They Want You to Think
By Evan Soltas

If those so-called deficit hawks would stop moralizing long enough to look at the data, they might find something surprising: That data almost entirely undermine their argument.

Yes, the long-run path of spending on federal health programs remains a serious and legitimate source of concern. But the numbers show that our current fiscal deficit is well within control -- as have been the deficits of the last five years.

The right way to evaluate the U.S.'s current fiscal condition is not to look at at its budget deficit, which fluctuates sharply due to economic conditions. Rather, it is to calculate the structural budget deficit, the difference between government spending and revenues when the economy is normal. (More technically, it is when the "output gap," the difference between actual and long-run potential economic output, is zero.)

For this post, I have calculated estimates of the current structural fiscal deficit from 1949 to 2012 with data from the Office of Management and Budget.These estimates come from breaking down the deficit into its components -- spending by individual program and revenues from each tax -- and computing their sensitivity to the output gap over time through linear regression. My estimates of the output gap come from the Congressional Budget Office.

For fiscal year 2012, the annual structural deficit was $325 billion, or 2.1 percent of GDP. (See the first graph accompanying this post.)

That is worse than no structural deficit at all. But it is hardly unsustainable. The U.S. economy is capable of growing at that pace over thelong run, which means that the ratio of debt to GDP, a key measure of sustainability, will be stable. The weak economy explains the remaining $1 trillion of the deficit, which amounts to 6.5 percent of GDP.

My calculations suggest that federal taxes would bring in revenue of 18.2 percent of GDP, and federal spending would amount to 20.3 percent ofGDP, given an average economy. That compares to current tax revenue of 15.9percent of GDP and spending at 24.5 percent of GDP. (See the second graph with this post.)
It is likely that these figures overstate the size of the structural deficit in 2012. The OMB projections I use in my analysis appear tohave significantly overestimated the amount of spending, and underestimated the amount of tax revenues, in the 2012 fiscal year. So it is possible that the structural deficit is closer to 1.5 percent of GDP.
These calculations are never more than approximations, but theygive a strong indication of when changes in the deficit are cyclical and when they are structural. For example, spending on unemployment insurance is highlycyclical, whereas spending on veterans' health and Social Security payments are mostly structural. Not all changes in spending and tax revenues are createdequal, in other words, and looking at the deficit on a program-by-program, tax-by-tax basis allows a much more accurate structural estimate. (Here are my data and calculations.)

All of these calculations are robust to different specifications -- that is, no matter what assumptions I made, I came up with approximately the same numbers. The figures presented in this post are averages of the different specifications tested.
Paul Krugman came up with similar back-of-the-napkin estimates in a recent column, "That Terrible Trillion." These detailed calculations confirm Krugman's observation. They are also a follow-up on a 2009 report from the CBO that used similar methods.

My figures, however, assign significantly more of the swings in revenues and spending from the Clinton administration onward to cyclical rather than structural factors. Income tax revenues, for example, have become more cyclically volatile as the burden has shifted in recent years toward high earners, whose incomes are less stable. Like mine, however, the CBO's analysis also attributes a large component of recent budget deficits to cyclical factors.

None of this is to say that the long-run budget picture is sustainable. In fact, it plainly is not, as the federal government faces a severe challenge of financing the large and growing cost of its health programs. But the U.S.'s budget problem is not as dire as the budget numbers would imply at first glance.

Fiscal policymakers need not think about fixing deficits in the short run. The cyclical deficit will take care of itself as the economy recovers. Instead, they should seek to contain long-run pressures on the structural budget deficit. The ideal solution would plot a path to reduce the structural deficit over a decade through increases in tax revenue and cuts to spending.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-2 ... think.html

[Pantone]

Wall Street Week Ahead: Cliff may be a fear, but debt ceiling much scarier
... ...

acintra... será?! Essa é a história que alguns querem passar... mas será verdade?! Curiosamente muitos dos seus impulsionadores são os mesmos que se recusam a aumentar os impostos para os níveis de quando Bill Clinton era Presidente, mas o déficit baixava...

There's Only One Way To Fix The Deficit — And Actually It's Totally Painless

People who insist that the US has a gigantic "spending problem" are ignorant of what really drives the deficit and the national debt, as Henry Blodget easily demonstrated in a series of charts.

Closing the deficit is not just about lowering spending, relative to GDP, but also about increasing revenue from our very low levels.

So how is that accomplished?

When people talk about the deficit, they almost always use the "pain" metaphor.
In almost any op-ed extolling the wisdom of the Simpson-Bowles plan, it's pointed out that we're going to need to take some pain. Obama has said that the Federal Government needs to tighten its belt, which is something that is painful. Conservatives say the government needs to go on a diet. Diets are painful. A recent USA Today headline was very standard: "Nation's soaring deficit calls for painful choices."

It's understandable why the pain metaphor is so popular. One, it's logical to think that the answer to big deficits is cuts, and cuts are painful. More importantly, it appeals to an innate sense that pain is frequently a long-run redeeming thing to experience. You go to do Crossfit, and you feel pain. But then pretty soon you're a beast that's never felt better. Some religious people used to mutilate their own flesh to show proper respect to The Lord.

So this is just a popular idea: Take the pain now, be redeemed.

The good news is that in economics and when talking about the deficit it doesn't need to work that way! Fixing the debt is painless!

That's because the primary driver of deficits is a lack of growth.

A chart that everyone needs to have seared into their brains is this one, which shows the deficit as a percentage of GDP (red line) vs. the unemployment rate (blue line).

... ...

Pain is entirely the wrong way to think about closing the deficit. If it's important to make it go away, we need to find a way of doing the exact opposite, putting people to work and making the economy grow.

in http://www.businessinsider.com/closing- ... ss-2012-12

Ler o artigo para ver os gráficos e os detalhes

[acintra]

Wall Street Week Ahead: Cliff may be a fear, but debt ceiling much scarier

Reuters – 5 hours agoEmail 0RecommendTweetShare0PrintRelated ContentView PhotoU.S. President Barack Obama opens his notes before remarks to reporters after meeting with congressional leaders at the White House in Washington December 28, 2012. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst
RELATED QUOTESSymbol Price Change
^GSPC 1,402.43 -15.67

^VIX 22.72 3.25

^INX 0.00

By Ryan Vlastelica, Edward Krudy and Doris Frankel

(Reuters) - Investors fearing a stock market plunge - if the United States tumbles off the "fiscal cliff" next week - may want to relax.

But they should be scared if a few weeks later, Washington fails to reach a deal to increase the nation's debt ceiling because that raises the threat of a default, another credit downgrade and a panic in the financial markets.

Market strategists say that while falling off the cliff for any lengthy period - which would lead to automatic tax hikes and stiff cuts in government spending - would badly hurt both consumer and business confidence, it would take some time for the U.S. economy to slide into recession. In the meantime, there would be plenty of chances for lawmakers to make amends by reversing some of the effects.

That has been reflected in a U.S. stock market that has still not shown signs of melting down. Instead, it has drifted lower and become more volatile.

In some ways, that has let Washington off the hook. In the past, a plunge in stock prices forced the hand of Congress, such as in the middle of the financial crisis in 2008.

"If this thing continues for a bit longer and the result is you get a U.S. debt downgrade ... the risk is not that you lose two-and-a-half percent, the risk is that you lose ten and a half," said Jonathan Golub, chief U.S. equity strategist at UBS Equity Research, in New York.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said this week that the United States will technically reach its debt limit at the end of the year.

INVESTORS WARY OF JANUARY

The White House has said it will not negotiate the debt ceiling as in 2011, when the fight over what was once a procedural matter preceded the first-ever downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. But it may be forced into such a battle again. A repeat of that war is most worrisome for markets.

Markets posted several days of sharp losses in the period surrounding the debt ceiling fight in 2011. Even after a bill to increase the ceiling passed, stocks plunged in what was seen as a vote of "no confidence" in Washington's ability to function, considering how close lawmakers came to a default.

Credit ratings agency Standard & Poor's lowered the U.S. sovereign rating to double-A-plus, citing Washington's legislative problems as one reason for the downgrade from triple-A status. The benchmark S&P 500 dropped 16 percent in a four-week period ending August 21, 2011.

"I think there will be a tremendous fight between Democrats and Republicans about the debt ceiling," said Jon Najarian, a co-founder of online brokerage TradeMonster.com, in Chicago.

"I think that is the biggest risk to the downside in January for the market and the U.S. economy."

There are some signs in the options market that investors are starting to eye the January period with more wariness. The CBOE Volatility Index, or the VIX, the market's preferred indicator of anxiety, has remained at relatively low levels throughout this process, though on Thursday it edged above 20 for the first time since July.

More notable is the action in VIX futures markets, which shows a sharper increase in expected volatility in January than in later-dated contracts. January VIX futures are up nearly 23 percent in the last seven trading days, compared with a 13 percent increase in March futures and an 8 percent increase in May futures. That's a sign of increasing near-term worry among market participants.

The CBOE Volatility Index closed on Friday at 22.72, gaining nearly 17 percent to end at its highest level since June as details emerged of a meeting on Friday afternoon of President Barack Obama with Senate and House leaders from both parties where the president offered proposals similar to those already rejected by Republicans. Stocks slid in late trading and equity futures continued that slide after cash markets closed.

"I was stunned Obama didn't have another plan, and that's absolutely why we sold off," said Mike Shea, a managing partner and trader at Direct Access Partners LLC, in New York.

Obama offered hope for a last-minute agreement to avoid the fiscal cliff after a meeting with congressional leaders, although he scolded Congress for leaving the problem unresolved until the 11th hour.

"The hour for immediate action is here," he told reporters at a White House briefing. "I'm modestly optimistic that an agreement can be achieved."

The U.S. House of Representatives is set to convene on Sunday and continue working through the New Year's Day holiday. Obama has proposed maintaining current tax rates for all but the highest earners.

Consumers don't appear at all traumatized by the fiscal cliff talks, as yet. Helping to bolster consumer confidence has been a continued recovery in the housing market and growth in the labor market, albeit slow.

The latest take on employment will be out next Friday, when the U.S. Labor Department's non-farm payrolls report is expected to show jobs growth of 145,000 for December, in line with recent growth.

Consumers will see their paychecks affected if lawmakers cannot broker a deal and tax rates rise, but the effect on spending is likely to be gradual.

PLAYING DEFENSE

Options strategists have noted an increase in positions to guard against weakness in defense stocks such as General Dynamics because those stocks would be affected by spending cuts set for that sector. Notably, though, the PHLX Defense Index is less than 1 percent away from an all-time high reached on December 20.

This underscores the view taken by most investors and strategists: One way or another, Washington will come to an agreement to offset some effects of the cliff. The result will not be entirely satisfying, but it will be enough to satisfy investors.

"Expectations are pretty low at this point, and yet the equity market hasn't reacted," said Carmine Grigoli, chief U.S. investment strategist at Mizuho Securities USA, in New York. "You're not going to see the markets react to anything with more than a 5 (percent) to 7 percent correction."

Save for a brief 3.6 percent drop in equity futures late on Thursday evening last week after House Speaker John Boehner had to cancel a scheduled vote on a tax-hike bill due to lack of Republican support, markets have not shown the same kind of volatility as in 2008 or 2011.

A gradual decline remains possible, Golub said, if business and consumer confidence continues to take a hit on the back of fiscal cliff worries. The Conference Board's measure of consumer confidence fell sharply in December, a drop blamed in part on the fiscal issues.

"If Congress came out and said that everything is off the table, yeah, that would be a short-term shock to the market, but that's not likely," said Richard Weiss, a Mountain View, California-based senior money manager at American Century Investments.

"Things will be resolved, just maybe not on a good time table. All else being equal, we see any further decline as a buying opportunity."

(Wall St Week Ahead runs every Friday. Questions or comments on this column can be emailed to: david.gaffen(at)thomsonreuters.com)

(Reporting by Edward Krudy and Ryan Vlastelica in New York and Doris Frankel in Chicago; Writing by David Gaffen; Editing by Martin Howell, Steve Orlofsky and Jan Paschal)

[Dom_Quixote]

.... o problema é quando é que isso vai acontecer e que decisões serão tomadas.

Marco, "dès dimanche" - no domingo. Quanto às decisões em si mesmas para os mercados não terão grande relevância. Acho que o mercado só quer mesmo saber se há, ou não, acordo.

[Marco Martins]

"Mur budgétaire": pour Obama, un accord est possible

"Nous avons eu une bonne réunion à la Maison Blanche", a déclaré M. McConnell, soulignant que lui-même et Harry Reid allaient travailler avec la présidence pour trouver un accord "dès dimanche" et éviter ainsi une cure d'austérité qui risquerait de faire replonger la première économie mondiale dans la récession.

http://www.lecho.be/dossier/usachine/Mu ... newsteaser

Luz ao fundo do túnel?

Dizerem que um acordo é possível, isso todos sabemos que é possível e terá de acontecer.... o problema é quando é que isso vai acontecer e que decisões serão tomadas.

[Dom_Quixote]

"Mur budgétaire": pour Obama, un accord est possible

"Nous avons eu une bonne réunion à la Maison Blanche", a déclaré M. McConnell, soulignant que lui-même et Harry Reid allaient travailler avec la présidence pour trouver un accord "dès dimanche" et éviter ainsi une cure d'austérité qui risquerait de faire replonger la première économie mondiale dans la récession.

http://www.lecho.be/dossier/usachine/Mu ... newsteaser

Luz ao fundo do túnel?

[Pantone]

Joshua Green:

With five days to go… Republicans and Democrats… can barely bestir themselves to maintain the pretense that they’re working to avoid the $600 billion of tax hikes and spending cuts due to arrive next week. President Obama is flying back from Hawaii tonight to keep up appearances. But almost nobody expects a deal before Jan. 1. Negotiations essentially ended after John Boehner’s Plan B fell apart…. As the political scientist Jonathan Bernstein noted:

[N]ot only do liberals believe that the expiration of Bush-era tax rates gives them a bargaining advantage, but many Republicans may well prefer that outcome as well. I think if there was any information generated by the Plan B fiasco, it might have been just that: some Republicans really would prefer an eventual outcome that involves relatively higher tax rates as long as they don’t have to make an affirmative vote for it.

That strikes me as exactly right, although I’d characterize the Republican motivation slightly differently…. [A]ll recognize that taxes will rise on Tuesday… to their Clinton-era levels…. Plan B… called on House Republicans to cast a career-threatening vote to raise taxes… [but] the cliff would do the dirty business of raising taxes for them if they just waited a week…. [O]nce rates reset, Republicans (and Democrats, too) would find themselves in the much more comfortable position of negotiating tax cuts for the vast majority of Americans. Given this reality, the question to ask in the days and hours leading up to the fiscal cliff is not whether the two parties will strike a deal, but why they would want to.

Why would the parties want to? How about this. Running up to the explosion time of the austerity bomb has already reduced likely year-2013 real GDP growth from 3.0% to 2.5%. If no deal is reached until June 30 then our likely year-2013 real GDP growth rate will be -0.5%.And each day from January 1 to June 30 the damage to the year-2013 economy is roughly linear: each day a deal is delayed the year-2013 likely real GDP growth rate falls by 0.0084%--and that is if a deal is ultimately reached that would have held the economy harmless in 2013 had it been reached on November 10.

in http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2012/12/y ... o-off.html

[Marco Martins]

Republicanos desistem do próprio plano orçamental
Pedro Duarte
21/12/12 12:14
economico

Os congressistas republicanos recusaram apoiar a proposta de redução do défice do seu próprio líder.

A votação que deveria hoje ter lugar no Congresso sobre a proposta orçamental republicana foi cancelada, devido à forte rejeição por parte dos membros mais conservadores deste partido do plano apresentado pelo seu líder, John Boehner.

"A proposta não tem apoio suficiente dos nossos membros para ser aprovada", afirmou o gabinete de Boehner em comunicado emitido ontem à noite.

Os analistas notam que a posição negocial de Boehner sai enfraquecida deste episódio, uma vez que ficou demonstrado que os outros republicanos não aceitam as suas ideias, nomeadamente porque o seu plano previa uma redução dos impostos a 99,8% da população, mas um aumento da carga fiscal a todos os que ganham mais de um milhão de euros.

Em reacção, a Casa Branca disse em comunicado que ainda tem "esperança de que um acordo bipartidário possa ser alcançado rapidamente", enquanto que o porta-voz do presidente Jay Carney já havia classificado o plano do líder republicano como "um exercício em futilidade, numa altura em que não temos tempo para isso".

Com efeito, se um acordo de redução do défice não for alcançado até ao dia 31 de Dezembro, no dia seguinte entrarão em vigor uma série de cortes automáticos da despesa, bem como uma subida de impostos - o chamado ‘fiscal cliff', ou ‘abismo orçamental' - que irão levar a maior economia do mundo a entrar em recessão, com efeitos negativos sobre a economia global

Ou seja, amanhã serão 28 e depois fim-de-semana e na segunda 31, sendo que dia 1 é feriado e a 31 muitos não trabalham.

Provavelmente amanhã as bolsas americanas poderão cair e arrastar a europa, na dúvida se durante o fim-de-semana conseguirão chegar a acordo.

Para quem tem títulos, parece-me que será o momento para colocar os stops mais apertados.

[Pantone]

Guess Who Still Believes in Invisible Vigilantes
... ...

Oh, dear — does the president still believe that failure to reach a Grand Bargain will cause an attack by the invisible bond vigilantes, and that this is the reason we should fear the fiscal cliff? How many times do we have to show that this notion is wrong both in theory and empirically? America can’t run out of cash (except politically, if Congress refuses to raise the debt ceiling); it basically can’t experience an interest rate spike unless people see an increased chance of economic recovery and hence a rise in short-term rates. And the people who have been predicting an interest rate spike any day now for four years shouldn’t have any credibility at this point.

Oh yeah, and a global recession would surely mean lower, not higher, interest rates.

If Obama is still confused about this, it has real-world consequences — in particular, it makes him too eager to reach a deal now now now, and hence too willing to concede on fundamental priorities.

Now, this wasn’t a direct quote, and we can hope that whoever was talking to the WSJ got it a bit wrong. But not what I wanted to hear about administration thinking at this point

in http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/1 ... igilantes/

[Elias]

Seven Ways the 'Fiscal Cliff' Crisis Could End

1. Obama and Boehner return to secret negotiations.

2. A huge drop in the stock market sends a loud message to Washington politicians to stop arguing and cut a quick but meaningful deal.

3. No deal happens in the dwindling days of 2012 and the government jumps off the fiscal cliff -- at least temporarily.

4. No deal occurs for another six weeks or so.

5. Boehner decides on a gutsy move: Call a House vote on a bill that would raise tax rates for families with net annual incomes above $250,000, exactly what Obama has sought.

6. A partial deal is struck at any point.

7. Stock markets do not tank and Washington politicians conclude that the "fiscal cliff" is not such a bad thing.

Artigo completo em
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100335283

[Pantone]

AND JOHN BOEHNER SAYS THAT HIS OPPOSITION TO THE 2009 RECOVERY ACT WAS BULLSHIT...

Boehner: "We can't cut our way to prosperity."

John Cochrane, Luigi Zingales, Robert Lucas, you others who know who you are, care to join John Boehner in admitting that you were bullshitting when you claimed that shifts in government spending did not affect the level of aggregate demand in the same direction and thus employment and production even in the short run? It's long past time to do so…

in http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2012/12/a ... lshit.html

[Quimporta]

OK Muffin, percebido.
Continuemos então à espera que alguém explique como se contrai a dívida, sem afectar o PIB e o emprego...

Há dias ouvi uma entrevista à Christine Lagarde sobre o assunto (aplicado aos EUA), e ainda a jornalista da CNN fazia a pergunta (tipo "se por um lado isto, por outro aquilo, mas pelo contrário se então aquilo, bláblá"), ela interrompeu com um refinado sentido de humor para observar "a senhora vês-se que devia ter sido economista"

Abraço

[Pantone]

E assim se reduz a dívida! Ah, e pelas contas de muitos iluminados não haverá recessão que isso de o déficit publico baixar é positivo para a economia.

E não queres mesmo dizer quem são esses iluminados, Muffin?
Os que tens citado dizem claramente o contrário [ex. post Mufin - Colocada: 3/12/2012 18:59 ]

Longe de mim querer entalar-te. Apenas tenho tido um azar do caraças, e ainda não apanhei um só artigo de fonte credível a defender empurrar o país pelo cliff abaixo. Os mercados muito menos...

Uma vez que estamos a chegar à época das previsões, deixo a minha: vamos ter um final de nao "à Holliwood"! Um herói qualquer vai aparecer no úlimo segundo a safar a miuda de se afogar na banheira da casa de banho, que por sinal até estava a arder

Recuso-me a acreditar que estejamos perante dois grupos de bombistas suicídas. É uma fé como qualquer outra, mas até ver ainda acho isso impossível numa democracia.

Quimporta... quando falo de iluminados estva a ser irónico... e idem para o post que transcreves...

Os iluminados são os mesmos que diziam (quando estava en discussão) que um plano de intervençao do Estado na economia não teria efeitos efeitos positivos no crescimento e apenas aumentaría o déficit (e a dívida), o que era a causa de todos os males.

Esses mesmo iluminados agora que a consequência é a redução do déficit (e da dívida) já aderiram à teoria de que a Austeridade afinal sempre é contraccionista (como os malandros dos Keynesianos andam a afirmar desde 2007).

Quanto às tuas previsões... acho que a bomba vai estourar sim. Os Repúblicanos estão invadidos por um grupo extremista que não olha a meios para implementar as suas ideias dogmáticas. Penso que soluçoes... só para o princípio do ano que vem. Mas isso sou eu a dizer...