tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post8666628234372591093..comments2023-10-24T01:46:47.151-07:00Comments on CynicusEconomicus: The World is Changed - We are Starting to see How...Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger25125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-78782299858019429062009-05-30T18:13:03.581-07:002009-05-30T18:13:03.581-07:00Hi Matt,
Only just noticed your message was direc...Hi Matt,<br /><br />Only just noticed your message was directed was towards me<br /><br />re "Modern human civilisation is uttrely dependent on the stuff in every sense and without it the world will look very different."<br /><br />Without wishing to get too Gandhi-esque, it depends on how you define "civilization". I'd be happy to concede that the Western Anglo-American version of society may not survive, but I'm not at all convinced that this would be a tragedy.<br /><br />The "difference" of which you speak will hopefully be one that benefits the 80% of the world who get a bum deal from the current ordering of things.<br /><br />"I really would recommend the archdruid blog posted here recently. I'm learning as much about peak oil and technology as I have learnt from CE about economics."<br /><br />Thanks for the recommendation, I will certainly check it out when I have more time.<br /><br />I'm sure it will have been linked here before, but <A HREF="http://www.chrismartenson.com/crashcourse/chapter-17a-peak-oil" REL="nofollow">Chris Martenson's presentation on Peak Oil</A> is also excellent.<br /><br />T.Tiberiushttp://tiberiusleodis.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-26166674758022862352009-05-29T02:54:55.327-07:002009-05-29T02:54:55.327-07:00US T-bill yield spike indicates we're now entering...US T-bill yield spike indicates we're now entering the end-game:<br /><br />http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/5402260/Bond-markets-defy-Fed-as-Treasury-yields-spike.html<br /><br />The Fed now either prints the dollar out of existence or gives up.Don Keyesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-40994060811255617222009-05-29T01:46:16.905-07:002009-05-29T01:46:16.905-07:00"We hope you are all aware that as the dollar fall..."We hope you are all aware that as the dollar falls inflation rises. That is because we don’t produce much anymore and as the dollar declines the cost of imported goods rises, including oil. By the end of the year oil could be $80 a barrel and gasoline over $3.00 a gallon. It started to feed on itself two months ago."<br /><br />From.<br /><br />http://theinternationalforecaster.com/International_Forecaster_Weekly/As_The_Dollar_Falls_Inflation_RisesAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-71977246714613039002009-05-29T00:56:15.099-07:002009-05-29T00:56:15.099-07:00I don't want to put words in Lemmings mouth but I ...I don't want to put words in Lemmings mouth but I expect, like me, he wasn't just talking about Western civilisation but the entire worlds prosperity over the last 300 years (even if it has been unevenly spread)<br /><br />The reasons why the West has been the strongest recipient of the benefits of this glut of cheap energy are obviously varied but the age of cheap energy, if not actually over, is on the horizon. <br /><br />Modern human civilisation is uttrely dependent on the stuff in every sense and without it the world will look very different. <br /><br />I really would recommend the archdruid blog posted here recently. I'm learning as much about peak oil and technology as I have learnt from CE about economics. <br /><br />This isn't even a global warming blog just fairly basic economics based on the reality that cheap energy IS finite and that as soon as it takes more energy to get the oil/coal/gas out of the ground than you get from the it it's history regardless of it's price.<br /><br />When that happens and who can say when an economic depression will look like a picnic.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05619808342670772745noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-65240113270911470172009-05-28T11:03:35.912-07:002009-05-28T11:03:35.912-07:00@CE
Think you'll find this of interest:
http://w...@CE<br /><br />Think you'll find this of interest:<br /><br />http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/KE27Dj07.html<br /><br />@Lemming<br /><br />I did post you a reply put it hasn't appeared on here so I guess it got lost in the internet-ether!<br /><br />Summary of it was:<br /><br />1. No need to apologies, I took your comment as intended.<br /><br />2. I think you overstate oil's (relative) importance in the history of Western development - as compared to say, colonialism, slavery, protestantism.<br /><br />You imply it was/is crucial, I think an argument could be made that the dependency it created was an obstacle to securing long-term economic growth.<br /><br />(my argument loses a lot in abridgement though!)<br /><br />T.Tiberiushttp://tiberiusleodis.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-67901873270990194792009-05-27T15:45:52.446-07:002009-05-27T15:45:52.446-07:00Since you first posted The World Is Changed..., S&...Since you first posted The World Is Changed..., S&P has made soothing noises towards U.S. sovereign debt and its attendant AAA rating. As one of the rating agencies upon whom one could reasonably ascribe some measure of culpability in the credit mess, I suspect that the mere threat of 'oversight' would be a sufficient enough lever to temper S&P's new-found quest for "The Truth", in much the same way as TARP-recipient banks 'elected' to swallow their secured Chrysler debt.TomOfTheNorthnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-39763974746809845002009-05-27T01:20:44.499-07:002009-05-27T01:20:44.499-07:00@ Lord Keynes
re The Weimar Hyperinflation
Alth...@ Lord Keynes <br /><br />re The Weimar Hyperinflation<br /><br />Although I have never heard (but cannot dispute) the assertion made by Ellen Brown that hyperinflation in Germany was caused by mass short-selling of the German Mark, her analysis of how the German economy was transformed is incorrect. <br /><br />As she says, having completely unreasonable demands placed upon it at Versailles and starved of outside financial assistance laid the seeds for radical politics in Germany. <br /><br />However as soon as the Nazi party had got into power the Bank of England offered almost unlimited loans at favourable rates. It was largely due to this that the German economy made a seemingly miraculous recovery.<br /><br />Britain was not being charitable, rather it's aim was to create a fascist Germany that could be turned against an increasingly powerful Russia; by allowing these great powers (and potential challengers to the global order) to bleed each other to death, Anglo-American global dominance could be assured for a long time to come.<br /><br />(See: A Century of War by William F Engdhal)<br /><br />Today we do not have any countries who would be willing to bankroll the US for their own ends. Indeed only this week the US' biggest creditor issued a warning to the US on its policy of QE and paying back its debts with watered-down money.Jonnyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16119442844302447926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-40843293692696528702009-05-26T00:16:07.042-07:002009-05-26T00:16:07.042-07:00Tiberius
(An apology: when I said I "harped on ab...Tiberius<br /><br />(An apology: when I said I "harped on about" there never having been a pure form of capitalism I intended it as self-deprecation as I realised that your posts made my comments seem pretty trivial. Having re-read my comment in your post it didn't come across that way. Sorry if it sounded a bit aggressive.)<br /><br />My point is that economists can argue between themselves over which system delivers the best prosperity and/or fairness, when in reality our current prosperity is based purely on the one-off discovery of oil. Yes, it took some ingenuity to work out how to use it, but once that happened it made housing, clothing and feeding the world a piece of cake. It could have lasted hundreds or thousands of years, giving us plenty of time and resources to develop alternatives for when it did run out - or rather more practically, perhaps, to wind down gradually to a lower energy-consuming society. But instead, even CE admits that there may be something to this 'peak oil' idea (I think). I don't believe that the markets were ever capable of developing alternatives to oil until it was too late to avoid massive suffering.Lemmingnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-68092222277541952292009-05-25T17:00:46.505-07:002009-05-25T17:00:46.505-07:00@ Lemming
re "I enjoyed the piece on your blog an...@ Lemming<br /><br />re "I enjoyed the piece on your blog and I think I did harp on about there never having been a pure free market economy, on CE a few months ago"<br /><br />You probably did but I am relatively new to this blog. I have been slowly working my way through Cynicus' back catalogue of posts and usually find myself in agreement with most of your comments.<br /><br />re "But what is 'the answer'? We either demand evidence that a system works, or we impose one based on ideology. Or some imagined pragmatic blend of the two, which I think is what Gordon Brown and New Labour thought they were doing."<br /><br />I think the best evidence for any system comes from trying it out in practice.<br /><br />The problem however is that when so-inclined people (anarchists, syndicalists) have tried in the past to obtain what you may call the 'economic breathing space' necessary to to try other systems the prevailing orthodoxies have gone out of their way to crush them; they have no intention of seeing the 'the threat of a good example'- it's partly the reason the Western powers supported Franco's destruction of the Spanish Republic?<br /><br />So, I don't think there is any 'answer', nor do I think you can 'impose' anything; I believe all one can do is help to lay the foundations for something better. <br /><br />I agree that Gordon Brown is a pragmatist: he understands well the limits of State power in a globalised world, and the power of international finance to make-or-break goverments and their people. His 'problem' is that he has far less ability to shape public opinion than the 'vested interest' do, and, now both have turned against him, he has become unable to deliver the political stability that the system relies on. <br /><br />Whether that next step towards stability will be one of fascism or democracy is the worry.<br /><br />re "But what if what if this is all a red herring? What if all the philosophy and arguments are just fine tuning of an historical fluke: the discovery of oil?"<br /><br />Not sure I understand this point.<br /><br />'Oil' as a phenomena is/was the interplay between a naturally occuring resource and the human ability to utilize that resource: it wasn't of much use to the rest of the animal kingdom, nor to our cave-dwelling ancestors. So was the 'fluke' discovering the oil, or the discovering how it could be used?<br /><br />re "Isn't the reality that our discovery of a supply of concentrated free energy was a one-off, and all the economics and philosophy doesn't really amount to much, except for how long we have before the stuff runs out?"<br /><br />Well no, the best supply of 'free energy' is the sun - and all indications are that as technologies continue to improve, this and other renewable resources (tidal, wind, geothermal) will be able to provide for all man's energy needs.<br /><br />The 'problem' again though is that these resources are non-centralizable, and, hence, more democratically-conducive than our hydrocarbon-based economy will allow for: you can stick some tanks around your oil-well, you can build the most enormous embassy in Iraq, but noone is going to cordon-off the sun (except perhaps Mr Burns!)<br /><br />So the powers-that-be in this system have every intention of down-playing the significance of 'alternative energies', opposing their advancement, and (when they are unable to defeat them) looking to co-opt them.<br /><br />'The stuff' running out is, from both an environmental and humanitarian perspective, a good thing I think: the price of oil on people and planet has been enormous.<br /><br />T.Tiberiushttp://tiberiusleodis.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-53755427309534524822009-05-25T16:59:00.910-07:002009-05-25T16:59:00.910-07:00@Steve Tierney
re "I'm reluctant to answer your p...@Steve Tierney<br /><br />re "I'm reluctant to answer your post for two reasons.<br /><br />The first is that this is CE's blog and I don't want to hijack it. My earlier comments were loosely in keeping with his post and that's fine, but if we go too far into personal politics that would no longer be the case.<br /><br />The second is that you are asking huge questions, the answer to each is an essay."<br /><br />Both points taken. I have posted my responses on my own blog here:<br /><br />http://tiberiusleodis.wordpress.com/2009/05/26/minimum-wage<br /><br />(Note: for stylistic/eccentric reasons all my blog post are written in the third person)<br /><br />Though I realise you very are busy at the moment, I will welcome your comments there whenever you get the time. <br /><br />re "Well no, I don't support Minimum Wage. I don't accept it means what you think it means, but it would take a very long debate for us to get to the bottom of that."<br /><br />I don't know what you think I mean it means (!!), but would definetly welcome a very long debate to get to the bottom of it!<br /><br />T.Tiberiushttp://tiberiusleodis.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-13731912302394369962009-05-25T03:24:32.158-07:002009-05-25T03:24:32.158-07:00Why No Hyperinflation in the US and the UKWith the...<B>Why No Hyperinflation in the US and the UK</B><BR>With the massive increases in the money supply in the US and the UK, the question must surely be: why has there been no Weimar-style inflation?<br /><br />This fascinating aricle should provoke debate:<br /><br />Ellen Brown, The Weimar Hyperinflation? Could it Happen Again?<br /><br />http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13673<br /><br />The link was in one of Kecske's posts.Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-80222170327946835092009-05-25T01:36:39.405-07:002009-05-25T01:36:39.405-07:00@Tiberius
I enjoyed the piece on your blog, and I...@Tiberius<br /><br />I enjoyed the piece on your blog, and I think I did harp on about there never having been a pure free market economy, on CE a few months ago. <br /><br />But what is 'the answer'? We either demand evidence that a system works, or we impose one based on ideology. Or some imagined pragmatic blend of the two, which I think is what Gordon Brown and New Labour thought they were doing.<br /><br />But what if what if this is all a red herring? What if all the philosophy and arguments are just fine tuning of an historical fluke: the discovery of oil? <br /><br />If we discovered mines bursting with fully-formed cars, DVD players and plasma TVs, people would still argue over the best way to distribute them. Some might argue that the system that enabled each family to have ten cars and TVs was the most successful while others might argue that some families having none, and others having one hundred, would provide better incentives to search for more such mines, or to invent machinery for pulling cars out of the ground faster. And others might argue that enabling everyone to have just one car and TV would make the existing mines last for hundreds of years. <br /><br />Isn't the reality that our discovery of a supply of concentrated free energy was a one-off, and all the economics and philosophy doesn't really amount to much, except for how long we have before the stuff runs out?Lemmingnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-20592208588994335382009-05-24T14:37:23.689-07:002009-05-24T14:37:23.689-07:00@Tiberius:-
I'm reluctant to answer your post for...@Tiberius:-<br /><br />I'm reluctant to answer your post for two reasons.<br /><br />The first is that this is CE's blog and I don't want to hijack it. My earlier comments were loosely in keeping with his post and that's fine, but if we go too far into personal politics that would no longer be the case.<br /><br />The second is that you are asking huge questions, the answer to each is an essay. For instance you ask: "Do you support the Minimum Wage?" and then suggest that if I don't I must not be humanitarian. Well no, I don't support Minimum Wage. I don't accept it means what you think it means, but it would take a very long debate for us to get to the bottom of that. <br /><br />The same is true for your other questions. By all means email me privately if you'd like the debate.Steve Tierneyhttp://www.blog.stevetierney.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-3045634375749038992009-05-24T08:54:40.951-07:002009-05-24T08:54:40.951-07:00@Cynicus
Interesting piece.
The psychological ph...@Cynicus<br /><br />Interesting piece.<br /><br />The psychological phenomenon you describe is often refered to as the 'Primacy effect' and, as you rightly point out, is a common bias in reasoning.<br /><br />However, I feel I should urge caution about employing psycho-biological explanations to explain economic phenomena; the powerful elites of all epochs have always employed their own myth-making to explain (or rather 'justify') the status-quo, and the 'greed is good', 'survival of the fittest', pseudo-scientific Darwinian-distortions of our own time are no exception. <br /><br /><br />@Lemming<br /><br />re "It is this sort of question which suggests to me that the free market system will always be chaotic and ultimately self-destructive."<br /><br />Which 'free market system'? <br /><br />If you're refering to the one impossed on the developing world, then yes it is "chaotic and self-destructive" - but the powers that be know this, hence why it is used.<br /><br />If your reference is to some mythical "free market system" that exist in the Western world, then it is precisely that - a myth: existing in economic text books and Republican speeches, and nowhere else.<br /><br />I recently wrote a piece explaining this (well, referencing Chomsky's explanations) which you can read <A HREF="http://tiberiusleodis.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/cynicus-chomsky-us/" REL="nofollow">here </A>. Unfortunately, it hasn't received a reply from Cynicus so I am unsure what he would make of the arguement.<br /><br /><br />@Steve Tierney<br /><br /><br />re "One thing that people on the left and people on the right mostly agree on is the wish for Britain to succeed and prosper."<br /><br />At the risk of sounding like a candidate for Miss World, I want the whole world to succeed and prosper - of course this should include my own country Britain - but I do not wish to see it succeed and prosper at the expense of anywhere else. If I did I may as well start beating a war drum. <br /><br />re " the left like to increase taxation and regulation in order to 'enforce' what they hope will be the perfect state from the top down. That's what I'm against.<br /><br />Sometimes the right do their share of that too. And I'm against it then as well."<br /><br />I'm not convinced of the relevance of the old left-right dichotomy these days. Like many people I know, I am both anti-State power (or 'against big government' if you prefer) and anti-Corporate power ('against private tyranny'); so would you describe me as being on the left or right?<br /><br />re "Localism, power down to the lowest level, people able to make the decisions about things that affect them, rather than being dictated too from on high."<br /><br />I agree that localism: power dissolved to the lowest level possible, decisions to be made by the people most directly affected by them, is what is needed in the long term. The question is how does one get there?<br /><br />The mistake I think many on the Ron Paul-'Libertarian'-right make is to believe that removing the State appartus would level the playing field when, in reality, I think it would make things far far worse. <br /><br />On the other hand, the more radical "far-left" (anarchist, synicalists, etc,) if they remain idealistic could end up supporting a Ron Paul-like agenda which would leave most people with far less power and opportunity than they have even now.<br /><br />So, for example, you say you are against "increase taxation and regulation", does that mean to say you are against universal health care, minimum wage provision, income support, health and safety at work, anti-discrimination policies? <br /><br />If "yes", I can't see how this position is defensible in any humanitarian terms.<br /><br />The very rights that our ancestors fought for centuries to establish are the ones that will be threatened if we allow that kind of 'baby out with the bathwater' reasoning to continue to go unchecked. Life is just more complex than any simple left-right analysis would allow.<br /><br />NB, I said "<B>If</B> yes", I have no idea if that would be your position or not and am not trying to imply that I do. Just trying to avoid any potential misunderstandings!<br /><br />T.Tiberiushttp://tiberiusleodis.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-71551895262823542802009-05-24T00:50:03.432-07:002009-05-24T00:50:03.432-07:00'Civilisation makes liars of us all'
Me, 2006.
T...'Civilisation makes liars of us all' <br />Me, 2006.<br /><br />The real crisis? <A HREF="http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/barry_schwartz_on_our_loss_of_wisdom.html" REL="nofollow">We stopped being wise...</A>My predication?... As I said back in Jan/Feb, I think there's life in the old dog yet, and so, if the Dam does break this year or next, my guess is something out of left field which precipitates the collapse. The mutation of swine flu would be one such very real possibility. <br /><br />We'll see... There are certainly enough cracks now for it to happen sooner though, I do acknowledge that.<br /><br />Glad to see the old Dam analogy is back ;)Rednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-72185900317289380342009-05-23T06:45:04.846-07:002009-05-23T06:45:04.846-07:00@Matt
Thank you for your comments.
One thing tha...@Matt<br /><br />Thank you for your comments.<br /><br />One thing that people on the left and people on the right mostly agree on is the wish for Britain to succeed and prosper.<br /><br />What we disagree on is how you go about that. As you know, the left like to increase taxation and regulation in order to 'enforce' what they hope will be the perfect state from the top down. That's what I'm against. <br /><br />Sometimes the right do their share of that too. And I'm against it then as well. <br /><br />Localism, power down to the lowest level, people able to make the decisions about things that affect them, rather than being dictated too from on high. Politicians need (urgently) to be reminded they are the servants of the public, NOT the other way around<br /><br />Family values, common decency, neighbourhoods, are supported on all sides of the political spectrum.<br /><br />I don't mind a few brand names and some luxury goods. I don't want everybody to go back to Spam and Scratchy clothes. (Although I quite like Spam.) People should certainly be free to spend their own money on whatever they choose. It is THEIR money, after all.<br /><br />My point was that our country has forgotten some of the traditional values it once held dear and replaced them with false idols, like celebrity and easy credit. <br /><br />Some might argue some of that was Thatcher's fault. And I wouldn't entirely disagree. But the world is much more complicated than blaming figureheads from the past for everything. We were all on board the train and it was on the wrong track before Thatcher came along. She did some very valuable things too.<br /><br />What we need now is some careful, considered thinking about what we really want out of life and the best way to stimulate and afford it as a country.<br /><br />I could not agree more that this thinking needs to come from BOTH sides of the political coin. I hope we can do it. You could even argue that we are doing it right here, right now, in some small way.Steve Tierneyhttp://www.blog.steveterney.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-80609262809581614112009-05-23T01:39:23.236-07:002009-05-23T01:39:23.236-07:00"As such, for domestic purposes these policies may..."As such, for domestic purposes these policies may serve the politicians in the short term, but only at the price of destabilising their ability to raise finance in the future, and even greater general economic damage later. This is at the heart of the worries of overseas creditors."<br /><br />Are you sure about such perspicacity on the part of overseas creditors? <br /><br />Everywhere I look, I see people who base their judgements on 'evidence', and for everyone in the media and government there seems to be clear evidence that the government's policies are working; there are 'green shoots'; the worst is over so it's time to get back in the water. <br /><br />People do not judge the situation based on *ideas*, so they do not seem capable of understanding that "what works" today can wreak huge damage tomorrow. Why should the overseas investors be any different? These are the same investors, after all, who thought that the UK and US economies were rock solid until a couple of years ago.<br /><br />In the past you have discussed how limits on the availability of oil might stop future growth in the world economy, which I find to be a very persuasive argument. If you were an 'investor' (and yes, I do find myself instinctively hostile to the very notion of making a living that way), should you take that *idea* - for which there is no real evidence yet - into account, or should you simply rely on the available 'evidence' and therefore place your bets according to the immediate future? <br /><br />It is this sort of question which suggests to me that the free market system will always be chaotic and ultimately self-destructive. Instinctively it feels to me that there should be 'someone' who considers the bigger picture and uses long range information to influence the operation of the markets but I realise that this is an absolute no-no to free market adherents!Lemmingnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-25604661738605756272009-05-23T00:19:43.389-07:002009-05-23T00:19:43.389-07:00@ Steve Tierney
...Steve, that's so One Nation ev...@ Steve Tierney<br /><br />...Steve, that's so One Nation even this lefty might consider voting for you. Just consider, mind you ;o)<br /><br />I would add though that I'm not sure how capitalism works without people demanding the next luxury good or brand name. It's that materialism that has driven neo-liberalism and kept the profits rolling in.<br /><br />I think we need a new politics that moves away from 19th Century ideologies and takes account of the fact that our world is finite, regardless of climate change and recognises the competition we (Western Europe) face is unlike anything we have faced for centuries.<br /><br />Views like yours from Tories and similar realism from the left will hopefully be the order of the day.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05619808342670772745noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-57910415855720999032009-05-22T14:48:56.924-07:002009-05-22T14:48:56.924-07:00Cynicus,
You've said a lot about China recently, b...Cynicus,<br />You've said a lot about China recently, but I can't recall much about India. How do you see India featuring in the global picture?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-77475735206833171442009-05-22T11:56:05.470-07:002009-05-22T11:56:05.470-07:00Another great post, Mark!
Check out this article a...Another great post, Mark!<br />Check out this article about "green shoots" in the stock and bond markets:<br /><br />http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/KE23Dj02.htmlMattInShanghainoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-35629212864157196522009-05-22T09:05:30.486-07:002009-05-22T09:05:30.486-07:00Peter Schiff on the beginnings of the real economi...Peter Schiff on the beginnings of the real economic crisis<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMZVdNX5NUcAdamnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-47080918510317767752009-05-22T07:13:05.300-07:002009-05-22T07:13:05.300-07:00re above
Pretty sure the report was by Stephanie ...re above<br /><br />Pretty sure the report was by Stephanie Flanders:<br /><br />Here is her <A HREF="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/stephanieflanders/2009/05/going_to_the_country.html" REL="nofollow">latest piece </A> of Pravda-esque commentary:<br /><br />"we shouldn't get carried away with the news that Standard & Poor's has revised down its outlook for the UK. We are not about to lose our triple-A rating yet. And none of the other big ratings agencies have changed their view."Tiberiushttp://tiberiusleodis.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-42629451268915399032009-05-22T07:07:53.652-07:002009-05-22T07:07:53.652-07:00re S&P downgrade
Saw a piece on this on the B...re S&P downgrade<br /><br />Saw a piece on this on the BBC 10 o'clock news last night in which the reporter seemed to do her best to play it down. <br /><br />Unfortunately I cannot find it online. However, I do remember her saying something along the lines of "Of course, when it comes to the downgrading, by that time we'll have had an election and confidence may have been restored".<br /><br />The report also gave plenty of air time to one of the Treasury ministers saying that S&P were the only ratings agency to take this step.<br /><br />Similar sentiments expressed <A HREF="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8061019.stm" REL="nofollow">here </A>.Tiberiushttp://tiberiusleodis.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-10197586832436040002009-05-22T03:21:19.060-07:002009-05-22T03:21:19.060-07:00I think you're right about people believing what t...I think you're right about people believing what they want to believe rather than the truth.<br /><br />It seems that almost every day I talk to somebody who assures me the: "recession will end soon and everything will be like it was."<br /><br />The recession isn't showing any signs of ending soon and even if it does, what logic suggests everything will be as it was? None that is obvious to me.<br /><br />Some might argue that we've long crusaded to allow the developing world to share our wealth, to make a fairer world for everybody. By giving away our manufacturing and over-regulating industry we've allowed that to quietly happen to some degree. I wonder if this is a case of: "Be Careful What You Wish For?"<br /><br />Even if China dominates the world economy in the end, their reign will be limited. They will cease to be 'developing' and become 'developed'. Then South America, or Africa, or some other place will be the new up-and-comer.<br /><br />As I've said before, what I'd like to see is an effort to bring Britain back to reality. Encourage industry and agriculture through investment, deregulation and low taxation. Cut public spending dramatically to a level where money need not be borrowed to pay for our services, ie. live within our means. Then concentrate on reminding everybody that community and family are actually rather more important than luxury goods and brand names.<br /><br />A return to traditional values and common sense would work wonders. But many people will be dragged there kicking and screaming, so wedded are they to the world of bling! and easy credit.Steve Tierneyhttp://www.blog.stevetierney.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7820485130017459619.post-32440381602353077772009-05-22T02:20:47.827-07:002009-05-22T02:20:47.827-07:00Not only is the dam full of cracks, but it now see...Not only is the dam full of cracks, but it now seems there was a fault in the flow meter:<br /><br />[From RGE Monitor]"ONS gets sums wrong on retail sales [FT]<br /><br />One of Britain’s most closely watched economic indicators has heavily overstated the quantity of high street sales over the past two years, the Office for National Statistics admitted on Friday.<br /><br />Britain’s supplier of official statistics conceded that since the financial crisis began in August 2007, it has overstated the volume of retail sales growth by 56 per cent.<br /><br />Many economists have been worried for some time that the published retail sales figures were too strong and have always received a furious response from the ONS.<br /><br />Karen Dunnell, the national statistician, wrote to newspapers last October, insisting that “ONS retail statistics are the best available and are not inaccurate”.<br /><br />She stuck to the same theme in another article, saying economists who had expressed surprise at the strength of ONS retail figures were upset because “City analysts also have a vested interest in not being proved wrong”.<br /><br />Yet while the ONS head was defending the accuracy of the retail figures, industry experts knew the outdated nature of price measurement in the retail sales index was much more than a triviality.<br /><br />The ONS previously said that between August 2007 and March 2009 retail sales volume grew 3.6 per cent. The changes announced on Friday mean it will now say the real rise in sales volumes was only 2.3 per cent.<br /><br />Such a large difference in the one indicator that has persistently given a more positive account of Britain’s economy will cause red faces at the ONS, especially as it had insisted on the superiority of its retail data to unofficial estimates.<br /><br />So confident has the ONS been that it warns users of the CBI or the British Retail Consortium sales data every month that these figures might not be “fit for purpose”.<br /><br />The BRC on Friday welcomed the changes, saying they meant the official data would now be more in line with its figures.<br /><br />The ONS’s old methodology failed to take sufficient account of goods that had risen strongly in price and so under-estimated the true rate of inflation in calculating the headline retail sales volume figures.<br /><br />The ONS said on Friday it was changing the way it compiled its retail sales data to make sure it “more accurately captures recent trends in retail sales, including where consumers switch purchases to goods that have fallen in price’’.Ginanoreply@blogger.com