Speaking as someone who receives his income in dollars, I hope US defaults. Maybe then people in US will finally start to give a second thought on the US military expansion all over the world, and the trillions of dollars it's spending on weaponry. There are a lot of domestic programs are that very wasteful, too - not just the police militarization ones, but also social ones.
Maybe this will make them look at every program from sub 100,000 in funding to the hundreds of billions of dollars. Almost $4 trillion in spending a year with a little over $2 trillion a year as income is simply unsustainable, no matter how you cut it. I think everyone can see that. As others mention, the default will happen eventually. It's just a matter of time, and the more it's delayed, the bigger the impact will be.
What worries me most, though, is that if an imminent collapse of the dollar will happen in the future because countries start dropping the dollar, out of desperation, US will start becoming a lot more aggressive in its bullying, and possibly even take military action against them for "hurting their economy", or at the very least use NSA surveillance to blackmail them into not doing so (my guess is that's already happening, though), and it's part of their "diplomacy" with those countries.
It's unlikely that the US will ever really default in the near future. Why ? Well, the global economy is becoming more and more linked as time passes. A US default will trigger a collapse in the larger global financial markets. Do US creditors want this ? Nope. They'll just keep extending deadlines but of course this charade can only last for a certain amount of time. Personally, I think the collapse will not come from a US default but due to this bubble over extending itself and eventually popping in a Lehman'esque style.
An example of this is how last year India (a developing country, although with a rather large GDP) donated money to the European Union in the form of an economic stimulus, basically to prevent a default. The reason was simple, an unstable european market hurts growth prospects worldwide. There's a saying in India "When Wall Street sneezes the Indian markets catch a cold". An increasingly linked global economy puts economic stability at #1 on everyone's agenda. Of course, this is great for the US because they can wage wars, etc. etc. while taking on unlimited debt and no one wants to lift a finger (militarily, they can't - economically, they can't either because of the repercussions). Of course the bubble will pop at some point. We don't know when, though.
Just wondering what a crash of that magnitude would do to a city like Bangalore.
Big IT shops will shut down most of their operation. Several hundreds of thousands of people will lose jobs. They in turn will default on their loans. For those who don't know the real estate scenario in Bangalore, these days even mediocre 2BHK flats sell for >65 lacs. People who are in neck deep in debt, will default. Big real estate projects(which are a common place in Bangalore today) and even small time real estate builders will crash and burn. The lenders to those builders will in turn crash and burn.
A lot of bad blood will be eliminated and won't be able to come back for years.
But I think it will ultimately do good for IT community as a whole. The current scenario is full of super idiots powered by dirtiest form of politics climbing the corporate hierarchies and building their real estate wealth with that money and position.
I'll join you in the prayer too. But be very aware of the fact that once the investors and companies are off, even the bright ones around will have a tough time. IT(sic) would take a lot of time to stabilize in India.
My friend, it's not that easy. The guys who have already made it big (those in top management) have a great deal of financial security built up for themselves. The unfortunate ones would be the 'supposedly' good folks who have only been slogging while making those fat fellows richer. Now, again, much of the wealth and means of production is with the erstwhile PHBs. And now, they would have even better control on things as they won't have an organization to report to but can call shots by starting their own companies. And the 'good folks' will have nowhere to go but those firms, casue the other bigger/better ones are all gone by now. In such a situation, who do you think would still get jacked?
>>The guys who have already made it big (those in top management) have a great deal of financial security built up for themselves.
Not really, I agree for people at VP levels etc. But you could count these people in numbers of 10's.
Most people are neck deep in debt and lifestyle expenses. These are middle management layers. And I have no sympathy for them.
The most unfortunate ones will be guys who are not productive, who don't read or learn often and just don't have the appetite or the curiosity to work on difficult projects and build something of value. These are basically people who pick up programming because some one told them there is good money in it. And now the only way they can make it to the top is either by job hopping or doing all kinds of politics.
Either way with the growing start up community in Bangalore and what I have seen when it comes to meritocracy, its already becoming a trend that good people leave to either start up on their own, or help others.
By that standard, we should not just kill the military but :
1) social security
2) medicare
3) Obamacare (because it will merge with 2)
I don't think Obamacare is a bad idea, BTW, coming from Europe. I just want to point out that cutting the military, which arguably helps more people than social security, is not the solution.
Europe has the same problem. Social security simply can't be maintained, yet people won't give it up.
This is partly a problem of societal shift that has happened during the past decades. Some of the programs, like the retirement fund here in Germany were conceived with some measure of sustainable calculation.
After the war (WWII) there were few old people and life expectancy was generally much lower than now. So the social programs created back then (mostly talking about retirement funds) did make some economic sense, as most people did not reach that age. More people were paying than draining the fund. Now with time the number of old people became greater with prolonged peacetime and medical advances and the social programs left the funds empty and the shifted the burden on state budget.
Sadly there is no easy and morally acceptable solution for this, so we are just staying on track towards the inevitable wall.
One could always delete debt against debt. All those debts are connected. Germany owes France, France owes The Netherlands, The Netherlands owes Germany and this a thousand times over worldwide.
Maybe this will make them look at every program from sub 100,000 in funding to the hundreds of billions of dollars. Almost $4 trillion in spending a year with a little over $2 trillion a year as income is simply unsustainable, no matter how you cut it. I think everyone can see that. As others mention, the default will happen eventually. It's just a matter of time, and the more it's delayed, the bigger the impact will be.
What worries me most, though, is that if an imminent collapse of the dollar will happen in the future because countries start dropping the dollar, out of desperation, US will start becoming a lot more aggressive in its bullying, and possibly even take military action against them for "hurting their economy", or at the very least use NSA surveillance to blackmail them into not doing so (my guess is that's already happening, though), and it's part of their "diplomacy" with those countries.