tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post7829028981489811213..comments2023-10-24T01:46:47.151-07:00Comments on CynicusEconomicus: The World Economy: The State of PlayUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-37163418757253882192012-09-21T06:06:19.053-07:002012-09-21T06:06:19.053-07:00Added to previous post:
For example:
""...Added to previous post:<br /><br />For example:<br />""Degrowth recognizes that humanity’s access to the earth’s resources and services of the biosphere are constraints upon socioeconomic activity. It also holds that politics and economics cannot trump thermodynamic and ecological realities. It places the limits to growth and ecological overshoot at the center of the predicaments Homo sapiens confront. It connects to culture and political/economy through this root public policy question: How to equitably distribute a shrinking economic pie?"<br /><br />http://healthafteroil.wordpress.com/2012/09/14/neoliberalism-degrowth-and-the-fate-of-health-systems/ronanpeterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13375024006869462385noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-53683333012211596342012-09-21T03:25:26.266-07:002012-09-21T03:25:26.266-07:00what would be your opinion on the growing de-growt...what would be your opinion on the growing de-growth movement based around the ideas of Schumacher, Boulding, Herman Daly and other economists? <br /><br />also, is much of the "growth" we see reported today simply an end result of financial engineering boosting the stats or are there actual improvements in real economic activity evident?ronanpeterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13375024006869462385noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-43772450648712073172012-09-19T09:41:53.003-07:002012-09-19T09:41:53.003-07:00You Sir are a 1st class fool. The world is full of...You Sir are a 1st class fool. The world is full of them, but none of them consider themselves one.<br /> <br />Welcome back CE, I've missed your intelligent posts. More please. academia8noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-46331192501961466212012-09-18T03:50:32.573-07:002012-09-18T03:50:32.573-07:00From CE: You have given a chart which gives prices...From CE: You have given a chart which gives prices, but nothing about supply and demand for oil. Giving inflation figures without this information is a little odd, is it not? In terms of the thesis I have given, it is not really relevant, or have I missed something?<br /><br />In simple terms, if demand for a commodity is increasing, then is it not reasonable that prices will be determined by the increased demand unless supply increases at a commensurate rate with the increased demand? Or are you saying that supply was keeping up with the increasing demand from the emerging economies? <br /><br />Instead, you propose that speculation was driving prices; this ignores that, at some point, the oil must be sold into a real world market which actually uses the oil. At that point, the price will reflect the underlying value of the oil as perceieved by the market place, and that value will be determined by how much oil is on the market at that time. If there is a glut of oil (more than the market can use at that time) there will be a fall in prices, if there is a shortfall of supply, prices will rise. Whilst oil can be stored for a while (oil tankers were being used for a short while a couple of years ago) this can only be sustained for the short term. <br /><br />Instead, there is a more reasonable explanation for price spikes; the rising trend of demand against a non-commensurate increase in demand. Which seems more plausible?<br /><br />You will no doubt reply. I have had this same discussion a long while ago with another poster. Nothing was going to convinde that poster, and I assume the same will be the case with you. The small detail of an explosion in demand and limited increase in supply as a driver for prices is not apparently a reasonable explanation. Nothing in the thesis denies that speculators might make a quick buck in the short term, but it does not explain the trend, and certainly does not explain it as logically as the simple math of increased demand etc. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-53216234725741240102012-09-18T00:14:37.226-07:002012-09-18T00:14:37.226-07:00Take a look at the inflation-adjusted price of oil...Take a look at the inflation-adjusted price of oil since 1946:<br /><br />http://inflationdata.com/inflation/Inflation_Rate/Historical_Oil_Prices_Chart.asp<br /><br />From 1986-2003 right at the time when your "hyper-competition" should have been driving the price of oil through the roof it was quiet stable, fluctuating around $30 - not far above its 1946-1973 trend price of $22-23.<br /><br />So where was the massive price spike in the 1990s right down to 2003 when this alleged hyper-competition was causing supply problems??<br /><br />In reality, two factors explain the spike from 2003:<br />1. around 2003 the price of oil soared right at the time of severe uncertainty and political/military chaos in the Middle East.<br /><br />2. around 2003 pension funds and other big financial market players moved into speculation in commodities:<br /><br />http://www.economonitor.com/lrwray/2011/09/22/the-biggest-bubble-of-all-time-commodities-market-speculation/<br /><br />When they withdrew in 2008 the price collapsed.<br /><br />> The idea that commodity prices are all controlled by <br />> speculation is a myth<br /><br />Correct, but I did not argue that above. The argument was that cheap money and low interest rates with speculation was the "major cause of the price spikes in energy and other commodities" . Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-12689137968237940262012-09-17T14:12:52.374-07:002012-09-17T14:12:52.374-07:00Nice to have another post to chew over. Thank you...Nice to have another post to chew over. Thank you! <br />Setting government policy aside for a moment (as if we could), would you agree that downward pressure on wages and increasing rewards to capital have lowered the growth potential of the entire world economy? Those with only their labour to sell can't afford any more to buy what can be produced, whilst those with capital won't invest it in new productive capacity because the mass market for new output isn't there any more. <br />This lands us in a version of the Prisoners' Dilemma. It would be in the long-term interest of all employers for the general level of wages to rise, but not in any one employer's interest to pay more unless every competitor did so too. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-66720304604875660532012-09-17T05:33:35.535-07:002012-09-17T05:33:35.535-07:00I like to keep things simple. So my question is, w...I like to keep things simple. So my question is, what do the banks do with the money that supports them - who ultimately is this money going to? International investment houses? - a few hundred people?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-9602414680047916322012-09-16T15:19:10.992-07:002012-09-16T15:19:10.992-07:00Anonymous - you are too stupid for words.
Kindly s...Anonymous - you are too stupid for words.<br />Kindly stop wasting our time with your puerile comments - frankly the main reason for the decline of developed nations lies in having too many idiots like you.<br /><br />- TheEvilSpeculatorAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-55253030574190302482012-09-16T02:13:43.014-07:002012-09-16T02:13:43.014-07:00From the "conservative commentator" you ...From the "conservative commentator" you quote:<br /><br />"> One of the manifestations of this shift is <br />> that we have to pay a lot more for our <br />> commodities – be it food, oil or metals – <br />> than we used to. <b>Speculation, Western <br />> money printing and ultra low interest rates <br />> have turbo-charged the bubble</b>."<br /><br />Bingo. It is now widely known that the radical changes in commodity futures speculation and commodities speculation in general have been the major cause of the price spikes in energy and other commodities in recent years. Which smashes your 'hyper-competition' thesis.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com