If wealth inequity didn't cause the bust, what did? by SignyM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Being far over taxed and controlled by a imposing, tyrannical govt , which has instilled a sense of false entitlement, is what fueled the riots.

Er... except I wasn't talking about riots, I was talking about the financial and economic collapse of 2008 to 20??.

So how do the riots connect to the financial collapse?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 5:37 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Wealth inequity is being blamed, in large part, for the riots, per the comments of the rioters themselves.

Quote:
The U.K. is just the latest nation to be gripped by riots as the new economic normal descends. Riots and protests spurred by increases in wealth inequality and higher unemployment are happening around the world. Count on them happening here, too.

http://www.bnet.com/blog/sports-entertainment/londons-burning-8212-and
-the-us-can-look-forward-to-riots-too/1227

Figured that's what the topic was, since the reason for the '08 collapse have already been pretty much explained.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 5:41 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

I think it goes back to Clinton. Remember how pissed the Europeans were at him for maintaining such low interest rates? While low interest rates were not on their agenda or in their interests, they had to follow suit in this globalized economy. Also, many of the crafters of the global debacle are international in scope, like AIG, which aggressively took advantage of any gaps or tardiness in the regulatory systems.

Basically, international imprudent, poorly regulated lending.

HOWEVER - the countries hit hardest are generally the ones that followed the US lead the most with rampant real estate speculation - Iceland, Ireland, England, Italy. Greece cooked the books, and Spain got caught in the wrong place at the wrong time - it was borrowing to try and create an economy it didn't have yet when everything fell apart.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 7:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by RionaEire:
You know what really pisses me off? The fact that in this society one can't get anywhere without credit. For instance, I have not yet gotten a credit card because a) I don't currently have any large purchases that I would like to use it for. And b) its way too complicated for me and I don't like complications. The problem is that my dad says no one can ever buy anything or get approved for loans later on without credit because banks and stuff all check one's credit report and if one doesn't have a credit score then they will be denied. So I really don't know what to do.

It's a trap, Riona, a deliberate and intentional one to get you running on the treadmill that enriches THEM, all the while *pretending* that you own stuff when in fact it's all financed and therefore not yours till you pay several times what it's worth and by the time you do, you need a new one, yadda yadda...
Our whole society RUNS on a veil of red white and blue bullshit covering what really does amount to a kind of socio-economic feudalism, and all that gibberish about "economics" is just really fancy excuses for it in much the fashion of a lawyers doubletalk legalese that denies responsibility for any of it.

It isn't that you don't understand, that is the problem, it's that you DO - only they've so contaminated and exploited our society that if you don't play the game, don't guzzle the kool-aid, the rest of the people who did kinda resent you, plus you will be economically and socially discriminated against for not "getting with the program".

All that fancy talk really amounts to give-us-all-your-money... and doin it via inflation, currency manipulation, "credit", or government isn't really a whole lot different from the highwaymans gun in your face at the end of the day - and it is your realization of this which other people find offensive, I think.

Our Founding Fathers were in fact quite hostile to the notion of paper money and "bills of credit", to the point where this phrase was specifically included in the Constitution.

Quote:
"No State shall... make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts"

by one Roger Sherman, who had formerly penned a handbill called "A Caveat against Injustice", which wasn't even available online till quite recently.
http://www.constitution.org/cmt/rsherman/caveatagainst.htm

Of course, Hamilton set up the loophole allowing the Federal Government he wanted to do so since the provision says the states....

Anyhow, it's bullshit, Riona, myth and lies, is what it is, all to get your money-value in their pockets, and all the fancy words and doubletalk is just excuses for their hand in your pocket.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 7:26 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Section 8 - Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have Power ...

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

...

No State shall ... coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts ...

ie The states may not - that function is reserved to Congress.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 8:05 PM

Quote:
On August 28, 1787, Sherman and another convention delegate proposed that the states sacrifice the power to participate in paper money schemes. When it was counter-proposed that the states be allowed by Congress to make things other than gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts, we're told by James Madison that Sherman exclaimed, "We are making these measures absolute. This is a favourable crisis for crushing paper money. If the consent of the Legislature could authorize emissions of it, the friends of paper money would make every exertion to get into the Legislature in order to license it." Sherman's motion unconditionally prohibiting any state from making “any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts” was quickly approved and became the Supreme Law of the Land.

Gotta remember here, our Founders for the most part laid out as much of their thoughts as possible for posterity so that the meaning behind those words penned to paper would be known.

It was indeed Shermans intention to crush paper money and "bills of credit", and the other founders were on board enough with it, especially right after some disastrous ventures with the notion, that said provision was indeed penned, only to be misconstrued and ignored, as much of our Constitution is - but the intention was abundantly clear, indeed.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 8:20 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht

I agree with you Frem, but how can I ever buy anything big/get loans to buy a house someday etc. I've got some ideas, but I don't know if they'll work if I'm not "playin the game".

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 8:27 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

The Constitution was a compromise of the times. What some wrote in private and what some personally believed is not the same as the compromise they officially reached on paper as a group. One of the best sources which traces that part of the constitution to the unhappy tendency of the various states to write their own script is unfortunately a for-pay article. Therefore I feel obligated to not post it without knowing the limits of 'fair use'. But a cursory examination through google scholar, which is something you can do yourself, indicates that they agreed the federal government should have discretion over currency, and states were to be limited in their ability to create currency and write credit by tying them to real gold and silver, which could be redeemed between states and the federal government.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 8:36 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

RionaEire

People do save and buy with cash. Similarly, for really big purchases you can't save for, and a house is the only one I can think of unless you like extremely expensive cars, you are not limited to banks. There are private lenders who - if you have enough down and a history of an adequate income (compared to the payments you will be making), will be willing to loan you money at a better rate than the bank, in order to make a better return than if they put it in the bank.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 11, 2011 1:46 AM

KWICKO

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
Being far over taxed and controlled by a imposing, tyrannical govt , which has instilled a sense of false entitlement, is what fueled the riots.
Er... except I wasn't talking about riots, I was talking about the financial and economic collapse of 2008 to 20??.

So how do the riots connect to the financial collapse?

Rappy's trying to say that the same wealth inequality that caused the economic collapse is what's fueling the riots.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 11, 2011 2:04 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Rappy's trying to say that the same wealth inequality that caused the economic collapse is what's fueling the riots.

No, that's not even close to what I was saying. You , as usual, have it 100% wrong. But thanks for playing.

Quote:
London rioter:“We’re just showing the rich people that we can do what we want”

Two girls who took part in Monday night's riots in Croydon have boasted that they were showing police and "the rich" that "we can do what we want".

The pair who were drinking wine looted from a local shop at 09:30 BST on Tuesday morning, spoke to the BBC's Leana Hosea.

Croydon was one of several areas plagued by unrest on Monday night, on a third night of riots in the capital.

There were also violent scenes in several other English cities.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14458424

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 11, 2011 4:07 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

RAPPY: So, the collapse caused austerity and austerity caused the riots? Not even close to the question I asked! I'm surprised you didn't take up the TP banner and say that "socialism" caused all of the problems! (But then, you would have to have gotten off your Fannie/Freddie hobby-horse.) [/response]

So, back to the topic at-hand.

Anyway, I didn't just idly ask the question, I've started looking into both the proximate (immediate) and longer-term causes of the financial collapse, and its effect on government spending, sovereign debt, and national economies.

The proximate causes were

Britain real estate bubble
Ireland real estate bubble
Spain real estate bubble
Greece government overexpenditure
Switzerland (skated close to collapse) investment in USA real estate bubble
Iceland fraud by the top officers/ shareholders of Iceland's three largest commercial banks

With the exception of Greece, the proximate causes all trace back to banks.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 11, 2011 5:30 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
The sick part is the government allowed regulations and protections to be repealed that would have prevented or at least slowed that extension of credit. One such example is the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act which separated traditional banks from investment banks. It the this repeal and mixing of banks that allowed things like mortgage bundling. All of which created the housing bubble. Banks and other lenders did not care if people could pay for loans. They just gave out the loans, bundled then and sold them. It became a huge game of hot potato. Just we all lost in the end.

Yup Nick, you got it. Except we didn't "all" lose in the end...they're still doing just fine, thank you! We bailed 'em out, which they knew we would, and they went on their merry way--from what I heard setting us up for yet another round of the same thing eventually. The American Way!

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 11, 2011 5:34 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Riona, you can do what most people do (only do it more sensibly). Get a credit card, and carefully buy some things with it and pay them off immediately. That's how most young people used to do it in my day (nowadays, I'm guessing, kids have credit cards from an early age!). Just don't swallow the hook by letting ANYTHING stay on there long enough to start accumulating interest. Unfortunately we're forced to work with in the system, and that's what my husband does now (and has always done). Me, I'm quite happy with my ATM card, which doubles as a credit card if I ever used it as such, and my credit sucks anyway since I've been "arguing" with my insurance company for a decade or so over a charge they should have paid which I refuse to pay. I don't give a shit, we own our home and if we need aything we tap into savings.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 11, 2011 9:09 AM

Actually, lemme see if I can't break this down into normal sane people talk, just so it's understood.

There's different ways of making a loan, you see - logically, you sign a contract with the bank, they go to the vault, procure the currency or goods, and hand it over, from their stock to your hands, value is exchanged, and you pay them back that amount plus "interest" which in this case amounts to a service fee, sure.

That AIN'T what happens, however.

What *really* happens these days - the bank magically "creates" the amount on their balance sheet and then electronically "loans" it to you, that "money" didn't EXIST before that time, it's created out of thin air, they risk nothing, deliver no asset beyond an etheral promise based on assumed assets, YOUR assets - they deliver no ACTUAL goods or value.

Now, you take that promise, that "credit" and "buy" something with it, a car, a house, whatever - it doesn't really BELONG to you till you've paid the whole contract, and if you fail to do that the bank is gonna yank it from you, and if done via intermediary or finance company such as many auto or home purchases, YOU are liable to them, the bank ain't, any dispute financially they'll come for YOU, not the bank - even if it's the bank which don't pay up.

Because they risk nothing, even if only one in ten pays up the bank still makes out like a bandit, and they do indeed squirrel a bit of that away to pay collection or legal enforcers to harrass, threaten or rob those who fail to cough up even if they don't have the means, even if the bank knew they didn't have the means, cause every drop of real value is pure profit to them, since the "money" they gave you was essentially fake, but they demand ACTUAL value in return - they risk nothing, and demand everything, this is called Usury and it's actually illegal in every decent, respectable place on the planet, of which there are few, and in many religions it's also considered a pretty grave sin, you see.

Now we danced around that by redefining it, saying as long as it's not TOO rapacious, as long as everyone smiles, nods and plays along with a wink, doesn't tip the hand so that the peons realize the scam, it's all okay, but really that's what it is, a scam, basically a ponzi type scheme, and that's american "economics" for you, trying to get eleven marbles.

Quote:
The problem with all modern reserve banking systems is that the moment the first bank note goes into circulation as the proceed of a loan at interest, more money is owed to the banks than actually exists. Ten marbles have been put into the tin can, but the bankers see 11 marbles owed back to them. Sooner or later the non-existence of that eleventh marble will create a crises of faith. People will stop believing in the religion called private central banking, and that crisis of faith will bring the system crashing down, as did the Temple of Baal in ancient times when the Syrians saw through the priests' trickery. This evil magic of creating money out of debt was a fraud all along, as fraudulent and silly as the idea that one can put ten marbles into a tin can, and take out eleven.

Cause it's all bullshit, myth and lies you see - lies agreed on by the folks running this so-called economy cause those myths benefit them, and when people start calling bullshit, it all starts to come apart.

And THAT, is essentially what S&P just did, called bullshit, you see ?

Pastor Shedlon Emry pointed this out even better, some time ago.

Billions for Bankers--Debts for the People
http://www.bigeye.com/bankers.htm

So it's all essentially... lies.

Just cause you can see them, doesn't mean there's nothing wrong with you - what it means, at least in my opinion, is that there's something wrong with the society you live in.
It was my awareness of stuff like this, even as a child, before I even had words to put it in, which warped my development down the path it eventually took.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 11, 2011 9:18 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
The Constitution was a compromise of the times. What some wrote in private and what some personally believed is not the same as the compromise they officially reached on paper as a group.

Just out of curiosity, have you actually read the debates related to the formulation of the Constitution ?

Of particular note are the Federalist/Antifederalist Papers, available in all their glory on the internet, and of particular interest to me are some of Patrick Henrys speeches on the matter besides, because IMHO the Antifederalists were correct, chapter and verse, beyond even their very worst imaginings, and history have PROVEN OUT that almost every assessment of their examination of the documents flaws was correct - in part due to Hamilton, Madison and Jay wanting to set up a new artistocracy with themselves at the head of it rather than a classless society as what was intended, and working to loophole and subvert the purposes of that document, something which came to a head with the presidency of Adams and the Alien and Sedition Acts (which also, IMHO, showed the true colors of the Federalists which evolved into the GOP, cause it's the same fucking agenda as behind the Patriot Act), and caused the idealistic Madison to jump ship and throw in with Jeffersons crowd instead of Hamiltons.

The Federalist Papers
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/histdox/fedpapers.html

The Antifederalist Papers
http://www.wepin.com/articles/afp/

Patrick Henry Speeches
http://www.constitution.org/afp/phenry00.htm

If you read naught else, read the latter, the man was damn near prophetic in his accuracy due to a much keener understanding of human nature as regards to politics than his peers.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 14, 2011 5:01 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

BYTE- I'm still working my way through this.

Credit bubbles are NOT the cause of "all" depressions, as far as I can tell. There were many serious, wrenching depressions long before banks and credit became widespread features in the economy. For example, "you shall not crucify mankind on a cross of gold" came from a time when the USA was on the gold standard, and was in fact an argument for inflation to end the depression of 1893.

SO I STILL think it comes down to a significant imbalance between rich and poor, which leads to a significant imbalance between production and consumption.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 14, 2011 3:55 PM

DREAMTROVE

In a way, yes, but only an extreme way.

The basic situation is this: america has a net asset value which is not going up

At value is divided by the number of dollars, which is radically going up through several mechanisms*

The result is a falling currency value, falling much faster than others, which is what we register, but intrinsically, it's collapsing.

* some of the ways our currency decays:

1) the creation of debt, and its interest accumulation
2) the creation of credit and its interest accumulation
3) Creation of wealth through mark to market
4) the issuance of stock
5) derivatives

Therer's just a huge flood of currency.

Additionally, economic dilution is created by embedded taxation in the price fo goods and services, abotu 75% of everything, and in the reduction of wages, about 50%

All of this makes america a very unattractive place to do business.

After that, labor laws make it unpopular, some of which make sense, others of it are just over the top (like employers paying us prices for bennies)

Add to that, the household debt, which drains incomes, including mortgages and student loans.

Add it all together and it's absurdly expensive to hire americans.

Numbers

If you hire an employee for a median wage of $44,000 in the USA with benefits, the cost is $66,000.

From 66k, 9900 for fica, 9600 fed inc tax, 2980 amt, 3520 state, is 26,000 so the worker "takes home" 22,200. From that, the typical american pays 5k local taxes, 10k mtg, 6500 student loan. Is -21,500, that leaves them 700 for utilities, food, etc.

Now, cut some expenses, or pump the income, you raise the tax rate, or run into purchasing american goods and services which have 75% embedded tax in the price.

You can go over this 600 ways to sunday and there is just no way this is ever going to be a functional economy.

The system is resoundingly broken, and it is all of the various claws, govt and corporate alike which are digging into it, forcing it to fail.

Stick a fork in it.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 14, 2011 4:13 PM

M52NICKERSON

DALEK!

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
If you hire an employee for a median wage of $44,000 in the USA with benefits, the cost is $66,000.

That all depends on what you are hiring an employee to do, and if you are going to give them benefits. Plus $44,000 is the median household income in the US, not the median wage.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 14, 2011 8:30 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
After that, labor laws make it unpopular, some of which make sense, others of it are just over the top (like employers paying us prices for bennies)

DT, we don't have to be like China.

We could be like Germany, that highly-unionized, wealth-redistributing, 35-hour-a-week economic locomotive that every other European is hoping has the juice to pull them through.

The other thing is, I keep hearing people say We have to compete with China! and I keep wondering.... WHY?

For a smart guy, you're kinda dumb. You don't look deep enough. Maybe YOU should stick a fork in it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 14, 2011 10:57 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

There are two different ways to compete:
-on price
treating people like commodities and finding the cheapest labor possible around the globe
-on technology
being highly educated and offering forefront goods and services nobody else offers.
While the technology route avoids the problem of starvation wages, sweatshops, child and conscript labor etc, it doesn't avoid concentration of wealth.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 14, 2011 11:08 PM

DREAMTROVE

Nick

Yes. Sorry, symantic point, but i meant median tax return, which yes, is household, not individual.

Sig, didn't say china, did I? Germany would be fine, though their economy is a mess, it's not as bad as ours. Having a realy single payer system helps the,, but there are other countries I'd put higher up: Korea and India. Japan, normally, lately it's been in a slump.

Of course we do have to compete with china, but that doesn't mean we need foxconn. If you follow my numbers, you realize the american worker is mwking close to nothing on an hourly basis. With the price of goods inflected 300% by tax and regulation, american wages, which seem to come in aorund $2-$7,000 in free disposible income, are axtually 1/4 of that in effective buying power. It is this which makes us a third world country.

As for the ending snarks, i understand. if you did do it, you'd lose your reputation as a troll. It must be nice to sominate teh field now that kaneman has given up trying to compete for the title

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, August 14, 2011 11:18 PM

DREAMTROVE

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
There are two different ways to compete:
-on price
treating people like commodities and finding the cheapest labor possible around the globe
-on technology
being highly educated and offering forefront goods and services nobody else offers.
While the technology route avoids the problem of starvation wages, sweatshops, child and conscript labor etc, it doesn't avoid concentration of wealth.

In thepry, yes, but alas we're not competing on quality against germany, let alone india and moreover, korea. China is cwtching up very quickly.

Nearly everything in my house that might be considered a quality product, every piece of electronics, and sure, some of the furniture, came from korea. I picked out the products on the basis of quality. However, economically, they are also trouncing us, and doing so without slave labor, in fact, wage rates are high.

It used to be japan, but the japanese govt has gone too far down our overspe ding road, and now they're in a long slump depression. Most of what i have from japan is manga and anime. Most of the japanese tech products i have are from a decade ago. They're still ahead in cars.

Also, quality wize, people underestimate china. They are catching up real quick. Still, i suspect the real threat to korean dominance of high tech at the moment is india.

It all depends on how s. China's currentnautomation revolution and free market structure works out. Frankly, i expect china to surpass everyone pretty quickly on all fronts, but to be economically dragged down by big govt.

Also, no mention of technology can be complete without a nod in the direction of finland. There's something finish in almost every product i own, which is fairly impressive for a country the population of kentucky or so

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 15, 2011 3:05 AM

M52NICKERSON

DALEK!

We do not buy or use as many good from China as you might think!

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2011/08/made-in-china.html

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 15, 2011 5:07 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

I guess what I was saying is...

Why do we "have" to compete AT ALL???

Seriously.

What is the purpose of this competition? What do we, as a nation, get out of it?

Think about it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 15, 2011 6:31 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

In the meantime, I think I know why the EU got into such a mess. Been talking with Rue offline. Apparently, the ECB dropped its rates because The Fed had kept ITS rate low during the Bush years.

I know that rates during the Clinton years were low. That made sense, because the government deficit was actually going down... had moved into surplus territory IIRC... and the government was not borrowing money. So demand for money was low, and borrowers had to pay less to borrow (low rates).

But when Bush got into office, blew the budget on a bunch of things that we couldn't afford (tax cuts and wars and Medicare Part D) and the deficit started to skyrocket, the rates STAYED low.

I remember thinking at the time that was a very political decision: It kept the government costs of borrowing low, kept the value of the dollar low (which made exports more affordable, and also BTW kept the value of the renminbi low, which kept the Chinese happy because they had tied the renminbi to the dollar), and injected a lot of funny money into circulation. Hence, the bubble: artifically cheap capital. Lower dollar valuation. It was about that time I invested in the forex and gold.

What I hadn't realized at the time was that the ECB has appealed to the Fed to raise American rates to more realistic levels because the ECB had to keep lowering ITS rates to keep the Euro from rising into the stratosphere (which the Euro did anyway).

So competition for capital and relative currency valuation makes the situation considerably more complicated, but I think I'll have a theory soon which ties this up all rather nicely.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 15, 2011 8:07 AM

Seriously, Forex Gold ? *wince*
You know they're shorting it badly and that paper is no good, right ?
Not to mention Forex is kinda rigged, but these days one has little choice after the State Dept cracked down on anyone trading outside of it cause that was a more level playing field, the bastards, and not just precious stuff either, I was makin bank on lead and brass from the former yugo territories to ammunition makers here...

Oh, and doublecheck any physical product you do lay hands on, wasn't too long ago some supposedly-reputable institution tried to foist off on me a couple fake 100oz bars of silver, which was kind of a one-off deal from an estate auction - they wanted to foist off paper silver and I told em kiss my ass, I want goods in hand, and when I came to pick it up, I went through the stack and noticed the rep getting all twitchy and sweaty, and some of the bars underneath that top row looked kind of hinky, so I did the plastic bag and mallet trick.. CLUNK... hooo boy.
Wasn't just one either - I pressed em hard and demanded cold hard cash, full value, or I was takin legal issue with the sale, and no electronic credit neither, bills in hand - which I did get, eventually...

I think they got screwed initially, and figured they could pass the screwing down the line rather than having to eat the loss, but weren't prepared for someone who was actually going to CHECK, and I doubt this jerks management even knew about it cause he looked about like he was pissing himself when the jig was up.

Right now there seems to be a lot of adulterated or less-than-honest physical product out there, so be careful Siggy, and I wouldn't trust that paper promise too much either, cause when the rubber meets the road they're not gonna honor it.
That and we both know ya can't eat gold, and it's wise to re-invest that value into more immediately useful things if possible.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 15, 2011 8:11 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Oh, I traded in my forex contracts a long time ago, and thanks to Rue I have a minor stake in gold (actual coupons, creditable source.)

Rue? OMG she made out like a bandit! I bought about a pound of gold. She bought a lot more.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 15, 2011 8:47 AM

Oh yeah, it's nice to have a small stockpile of precious on hand.
(I love that word, I even say it in Gollum-fashion, Preeecciiouussss....)

But like I say, you can't eat it, so I tend to roll it into other things of more immediate value, and also it tends to draw attention, and moving or rolling any significant amount draws down potential thunder via everyone from the taxman to greedy law enforcement drooling over forfeiture, so I generally launder (legally, not as a tax dodge, but in order to escape the aforementioned drooling horde) it via high quality tools and such.

And yeah, I know all about makin bank on things, which does on occasion involve exploiting the gullible - I already had connections in the former Yugo territories cause that's where TOMOS bikes were made, and Rev had even more from his deployment in Kosovo, and we had a good solid lock on sources of lead and brass - now you can't ship ammo internationally without a lot of bullshit, and unwanted attention, but what with the election of Obama and the outright panic amongst the gunbunnies, we had ourselves a right sweetheart commission deal putting them suppliers in touch with american manufacturers, and boy howdy did we prosper on that one, right up till the State Dept started stomping around like godzilla on everything outside of officially-approved ripoff channels which are set up to funnel your money into corporate pockets.

They did that to my currency clouting too, which sore pissed me off - one of the other ways we'd run on this was by taking payment in one currency, and then exchanging it to a second before clouting it back to US Dollars, which would often significantly enhance our profit margins, although we kind of drew the line at certain forms of immoral behavior cause we just couldn't stomach the notion of DELIBERATELY causing suffering as a result of our profit.

Of course, just that tenative involvement is enough to see just how dirty american corps play the game, especially with their WTO/IMF "helpers" re-writing the rules in their favor all the damn time.

Of course, if I *really* wanted to get rich, there's also certain connections with a few south american arms manufacturers, but the only part of it I'd have interest in (arming groups like RAWA or certain populations in Africa) isn't really profitable, and arming the bad actors is, that one is a non-starter for me...
I actually do have morals, of a sort, they might be in many way radically different from most westerners, but I *DO* have them.
And causing harm for gain is right out.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 15, 2011 9:52 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Heh. It's not that I despise the system because I can't "swim with the sharks". For a pilot fish, I do OK.

I hate the system because it forces us to behave against our better selves. Every man for himself, god against all, or you're a sucker. Who the fuck wants to live in a world like that? And the funny thing is, it's not "natural". There's nothing inherent in the natural world or "human nature" that requires us to be this way; it's something we've chosen, all by ourselves.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 15, 2011 10:44 AM