Well, honestly... the population of the U.S. is increasing and the number of houses is increasing. Why shouldn't foreclosures increase also? It's like saying "record world population!" every month.
FHA is going to allow bridge financing for the First Time Home Buyer tax credit.. this will effectively allow 100% financing for homes under ~230k homes and signficantly reduce the barrier of entry for homes above that point:
Vonbek777 (profile) wrote on Tue, 5/12/2009 - 9:36 pm reply Ignore user
Wait lets call them licks instead of waves...How many licks does it take to get to the bottom of that tootsie roll pop known as Housing...
It is obvious that we need another foreclosure moratorium, and this time it needs to reach wider and be of a longer duration. Like, until the next election cycle.
A good friend of mine (military brat whose father was a Lutheran Chaplin in the army) went to India several years ago. His father started doing missionary work there after getting out. Anyway he tried to stay in the states but it drove him crazy, so he went to India with his dad. Loves it over there. Back then I couldn't understand that choice. I think he was ahead of the curve on that one.
And print more money. That's a sure fire way to restore the economy. Just let the Fed monetize all the bonds the states can no longer sell in the open market.
Not much room in that philosophy for the small government crowd.
Small gov't crowd is fish food unless they can think of a way to get big business small again WITHOUT using big gov't to do it for them... who else is 'big enough' to do it?
If all you do is remove big gov't and DON'T shrink big business... big business becomes gov't [big gov't at that]. The Law of Oligarchs. Mother of All Catch 22's.
mmckinl (profile) wrote on Tue, 5/12/2009 - 9:54 pm reply Ignore user
Too late for small government ....
society has become too complex ...
Be careful not to conflate cause and effect. Some of us "small government" types might actually believe smaller government might spawn a less complex society.
Shadow you must have missed all my previous currency debates here. My notion of the currency has no central bank. Governments of course retain their individual taxing powers. But all recorded trade is indexed to a weighted basket of liquid tangibles-- commodities, protein, gigabits, watts...--updated instantly by linked open-source computers (hence my interest in Linux) with a shared database. Counterfeiting and other fraud is immediately detected (regular hard copy backups) and enforced through credit cut-off.
I say the maintenance costs are far less than the costs of money changers, money printers, and the associated unreliable measure and store of value, to producers of value.
CR, many of those homes you videoed in CDM are short sales, even though their listings don't indicate as such (as indicated by the "Short Sale?" field in the Redfin lists). Also, one of the "bank-owned" homes (710 xxx) has a listing description which indicates a short sale ("lender approval...").
It seems to me it's hard to figure out WTH is going on with foreclosure activity, because it's all messed up. Defaulted properties that don't go to auction for years, short sales that are actually bank owned, REOs that never seem to get listed, etc. The bust is definitely not proceeding in an "orderly fashion". I think consumers are going to get more suspicious of listings as time goes on as the uncertain nature of the bust takes its toll on the psyche.
Seems like someone forgot to keep kicking the can... at some point won't banks realize they're loaning money to people to buy houses that they already loaned money to other people to buy at higher prices and start to wonder if this is actually a winning move?
at some point won't banks realize they're loaning money to people to buy houses that they already loaned money to other people to buy at higher prices and start to wonder if this is actually a winning move?
The beauty about servicing and securitization is that you don't have to worry about all that since it's OPM.
Be careful not to conflate cause and effect. Some of us "small government" types might actually believe smaller government might spawn a less complex society.
And some of us 'small gov't types' are liberal, REAL LIBERAL...
But again - how do you get there? Remove big gov't & big corp business BECOMES gov't [a big gov't at that]... but if big gov't busts trusts & makes business small again... does it 'unilaterally disarm'? Does Patriot go away automatically?
I've said here from the beginning - we've been in an 'organizational arms race' between big corporate business interests & big mostly federal gov't [though a few states are now almost 'that big' - see Cali & NY]... since Manhattan Project. They are like big plow horse jockeying for position and we are the little critters at their feet trying not to get flattened.
But you can't keep throwing straws on the back of the camel, either.
That complaint works either way & has nothing to do with the big gov't OR big business meme - they both would overload the camel just the same given the opportunity... both are bureaucratic as hell... both are inner looking & promote their own internal agendas at the expense of their own stakeholders & constituencies. They are two sides of the same coin yet 'at war' with the other in a phony 1984ish sort of a way.
That is why the current lib-con rhetoric is so empty [IMHO]... business IS gov't and reverse... both are now dangerously big & powerful. Dems justify gov't, GOP 'business'. Nothing changes. Yet how do you unravel one without the other abusing the opportunity and filling the void?
Since the end of WWII - that has been the problem - and even those who 'understood' it had no mechanism to unwind it [see Eisenhower's 'Military Industrial Complex' speech]... one thing to see the problem, a whole other thing to devise a way to defuse it.
Size begets complexity. Besides, imagine a "small" government. Wouldn't that put even more power into a smaller group of people? It would be correspondingly easier for power to corrupt. Any country ever manage to avoid Byzantine politics and freakish regulation?
Basel couldn't respond about Scalia got caught up. Can't say I've studied too many S. Ct. opinions in the last few years but strict construction never made much sense to me. Where does it say in the text that the Constitution is not to be liberally interpreted in favor of the themes that run through it? They kept it as short as possible.
I still like to think that there's something to the concept of "liberty" unique to this grand experiment known as the US of A.
I'm haunted by B Franklin's 'prediction' - we have been given a republic if we can keep it. I feel big corporate power is the catalyst and energy by which big gov't takes our republic away. With that our liberty.
I think you are seeing that happen now with the banks. But had we not had big gov't - what remained of our republic would have been gone already - it would have TOTALLY [not just partially] devolved into a republic of 'oligarchs' by now.
How do you walk that beast backward - tactical not conceptual or philosophical process - that is what I want to know.
"How do you walk that beast backward - tactical not conceptual or philosophical process - that is what I want to know."
~~~~
Control the money and especially the money creation ...
The US government should be printing its own money not borrowing ti from the privately owned and operated
Federal Reserve ... The colonies had their own money before the Revolution, Britain then outlawed this. Ben Franklin
said this was the real cause of the Revolutionary War !
wiki :
Colonial scrip was not backed by gold or silver and therefore the colonies could control its purchasing power. This was similar to the "tally stick" system used by the British Empire for over 700 years. It was different from the conventional European mercantilist system of money which required governments to borrow from banks and pay interest for those loans, as gold and silver were the only regarded forms of money. Colonial scrip, were "bills of credit" created by the government, based on the credit of that government, and this meant that there was no interest to pay for the introduction of money. This went a considerable way towards defraying the expense of the Colonial governments and in maintaining prosperity. The Governments charged low interest when it loaned out this paper money to its citizens, with land as collateral, and this interest income lowered the tax burden on the people, contributing to prosperity.
The currency was born when a lack of gold and silver in the Colonies made trade hard to conduct, and a barter system prevailed. One by one, the Colonies began to issue their own paper money to serve as a medium of exchange to make trade vibrant. The Governments could then retire excess notes out of circulation by taxing the people, helping some colonies generally avoid inflation. Each colony had its own currency and some were better managed than others. It was banned by English Parliament in the Currency Act after Benjamin Franklin had explained the benefits of this currency to the British Board of Trade. Outlawing the circulating medium caused a depression in the colonies, and Franklin and many others believed it to be the true cause of the American Revolution.
Vonbek777 (profile) wrote on Tue, 5/12/2009 - 9:54 pm reply Ignore user A good friend of mine (military brat whose father was a Lutheran Chaplin in the army) went to India several years ago. His father started doing missionary work there after getting out. Anyway he tried to stay in the states but it drove him crazy, so he went to India with his dad. Loves it over there. Back then I couldn't understand that choice. I think he was ahead of the curve on that one.
Vonbek,hillside looks pretty from a distance.India is not a safe country to stay for a foreigner.It has deep biases against white peoples.They might respect whites,but will not look back in looting them.Especially missionaries are deeply detested here.If you think USA has problems,multiply these problems by 100000 and imagine staying in such place. By the way i am indian
"May 13 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve considers the recent jump in Treasury yields more as a reflection of a better economic outlook than a signal it needs to step up purchases of U.S. government debt, according to central bank officials who declined to be identified. "
--Declined to be identified because they couldn't stop laughing long enough to say their own names.
With the full faith and credit of the US seemingly behind equity holders of too big to fail banks, no one wants to settle for less cheese.
After Franklin had explained…to the British Government as the real cause of prosperity, they immediately passed laws, forbidding the payment of taxes in that money. This produced such great inconvenience and misery to the people, that it was the principal cause of the Revolution. A far greater reason for a general uprising, than the Tea and Stamp Act, was the taking away of the paper money.
Adam Smith
Adam Smith wrote of the Pennsylvania currency in his famed 1776 work The Wealth of Nations:
The government of Pennsylvania, without amassing any [gold or silver], invented a method of lending, not money indeed, but what is equivalent to money to its subjects. [It advanced] to private people at interest, upon [land as collateral], paper bills of credit…made transferable from hand to hand like bank notes, and declared by act of assembly to be legal tender in all payments...[the system] went a considerable way toward defraying the annual expense…of that…government [low taxes]. [Pennsylvania’s] paper currency…is said never to have sunk below the value of gold and silver which was current in the colony before the…issue of paper money.
An interesting proposal from Neville Holmes from the University of Tasmania in the current ACM Computer: Limit artificial entities to two levels of ownership and limit representations of value such as money to two levels of abstraction.
The argument is that the simplification would lead to a more transparent and presumably smaller business and government.
It is a system design, the implementation details are left unspecified by Neville.
"Seems like someone forgot to keep kicking the can... at some point won't banks realize they're loaning money to people to buy houses that they already loaned money to other people to buy at higher prices and start to wonder if this is actually a winning move?"
Empires in the past were largely bigger models, not more complex
We're well beyond that now. We've grown larger and more diverse. We don't have the simple ruler, farmer, merchant, warrior options any more. Pick ten people at random in the US and tell me how many different rules it would take to cover their work, production, interactions within this society.
"I'm haunted by B Franklin's 'prediction' - we have been given a republic if we can keep it. I feel big corporate power is the catalyst and energy by which big gov't takes our republic away. With that our liberty."
Einstein predicted this back in 1949 in his essay:
"...Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights...."
dry, social inequality was actually greatly reduced by the first few years of the depression. all FDR did was create enough moral hazard for truly evil types like Joe Kennedy to reassemble the pieces into even worse fiefdoms.
i honestly don't think it needs to be a choice between one leviathan or another. mellon was right then, and is more right than ever now.
"The currency was born when a lack of gold and silver in the Colonies made trade hard to conduct, and a barter system prevailed. "
Harder for the absentee power to collect taxes without a hard currency. The currency was merely a symptom of the problem. The colonists saw no need to keep paying the Boss protection money, and why not get rid of inherited titles, which are stupid.
"Wouldn't that put even more power into a smaller group of people? It would be correspondingly easier for power to corrupt. Any country ever manage to avoid Byzantine politics and freakish regulation?"
Makes me think.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
"No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time."
An investigation was conducted by the FBI regarding the famous physicist because of his affiliation with the Communist Party. Einstein was a member, sponsor, or affiliated with thirty-four communist fronts between 1937 and 1954. He also served as honorary chairman for three communist organizations. '
Your first rule shouldn't be necessary. The Federal government was supposed to be small and only addressing issues interstate and international, not intrastate. There simply should not be a fraction of the power in DC that exists there now. Ultimately some states may actually challenge DC on that count; we'll see.
Interstate and international issues dwarf intrastate, unlike the 18th Century, when to get home from DC was a week's hazardous journey even for a Senator.
We're talking about boundaries
We're talking about foreclosures.
How long does it take to "process" a foreclosure?
The notices are all standardized, doesn't seem like it should take much time at all.
1 currency now -yogi, I could put in an editor, but the issue is really about managing paste - it was a bit of a quagmire with CRC.
I intend to do something along these lines, but want to do it properly, and there are a few things ahead of it in the queue. You may not see anything happening right now, but there's plumbing work going on behind the scenes. None of it translating to exciting features, I'm afraid.
"The purpose of this financial crisis is to take down the United States and the U.S. dollar as the stable datum of planetary finance and, in the midst of the resulting confusion, put in its place a Global Monetary Authority—a planetary financial control organization 'to ensure this never happens again.'"
Which of course means we Americans will be at the mercy of foreign bankers ...
There will be no place safe from outside influence ... "
You make no sense. Do you want a billion local currencies? Or do you want the right to cheat your trading partners by printing money to pay back what you borrowed. Are you drunk?
Late reports this evening are citing an anonymous source that says the FDIC is preparing some sort of superfund that could handle the failure of a large “systemically important financial institution.”
1 currency now -yogi (profile) wrote on Tue, 5/12/2009 - 11:41 pm
"Which of course means we Americans will be at the mercy of foreign bankers ... "
Mmckinl sleep it off, you're having trouble reading. Or is it a Mel Gibson moment?
~~~~~
LOL ... the old standby ... cheap fraudulent accusations ...
You have not addressed my points and can't without disclosing you're
Governments set and control tariffs and taxes, not central banks. Whatever the Fed can print, the Treasury can tax. If the Fed loses control of inflation, it is in neglect of its mandate. The best way to limit the power of central banks is through a single world currency backed by the faith and credit of the global community with no central authority. All currencies rely on faith. Currencies have no intrinsic value, only the promise of exchange value.
Fascinating discussion, folks. Especially the FOIA request on Einstein - thank you 1 currency.
Edifice removal is always a problem (queue Byzantine Ruins ). We built it up, crystalize it into cool buildings, and then go crazy. It reminds me of this science fiction story where, on a planet with 2+ suns, the orbital mechanics dictated that it would only get dark every few thousand years. And when it did, things ran amok.
"All currencies rely on faith. Currencies have no intrinsic value, only the promise of exchange value."
"Wrong ...
Fiat currencies rely for value on ... [blah blah blah]"
Wrong. Good luck with your wheelbarrow of paper. It doesn't matter if Lincoln rises up and prints it himself, the value you receive for it is dependent on what the guy who accepts it thinks he can get for it later.
I know you need a value vectoring component which can be localized by region, like an interest rate that is not and can not be globalized.
I have no idea how to fix the gunpowder problem, I only know it exists.
I exchanged a small amount of email with the guy that created the DMT, digital monetary trust.
Did you read why it eventually died?
"All currencies rely on faith. Currencies have no intrinsic value, only the promise of exchange value."
"Wrong ...
Fiat currencies rely for value on ... [blah blah blah]"
Wrong. Good luck with your wheelbarrow of paper. It doesn't matter if Lincoln rises up and prints it himself, the value you receive for it is dependent on what the guy who accepts it thinks he can get for it later.
~~~~
Again you omit my argument, that the value of fiat currency is the payment of taxes and the settlement of debt
under government law based on the productivity of the economy ...
That is what gives any money value ... the payment of taxes ... and relief of debt under law ...
Anything besides the recognized coin of the realm has no ability to do this ... so if you want to keep your property
or even your liberty you have to have the recognized currency, fiat or metal.
BH: "It consisted of a three-layered computer system. Its function was to abstract the identity of the account owner from the accounts."
Although anonymity of purchasers of medicine literature, etc. may be an important privacy goal to build in somehow, the currency I suggest is transparent and traceable, like the serial numbers on paper bills were originally intended.
Again you fail to see I'm referring to intrinsic value of the actual currency, not whether the use of a national currency has value to the system. Seashells work fine as a local currency, if no one chooses to cheat and find an external supply, either through fear of gunpowder or through faith in the value of maintaining an honest system, take your pick.
"How do you prevent a country / government from making your currency illegal? "
Ostracism as a trading partner.
This currency is coming, as soon as China demands payment linked to a more reliable index than the CPI. They don't care whether they get paid in dollars or doughnuts, as long as they can rely on the number to represent a reliable amount of purchasing power..
"This currency is coming, as soon as China demands payment linked to a more reliable index than the CPI"
The CPI is specific to a country. I doubt if a global CPI is doable, there's too much variation between countries, political influences in the calculation.
Do countries use the dollar because they fear ostracism?
Do they use the dollar internally?
Not specious. We're talking about 2 different things. Currency is a marker for value. The seashells have almost no use to those who have them other than their exchange for things of value, including protection money to the government. If you think the government is adding more seashells to the treasury every day you're going to demand more of them in exchange for your surplus corn. Grain can be used as a currency, but it has intrinsic value. You eat it. Gold is shiny.
i like utopia. never been there but it sounds nice.
the fed isn't going anywhere. the value of the dollar will eventually be closely tied to the value of their hoard of assets. they are creating an asset backed dollar.
don't tell the ostrich people
the real risk to currency schemes, actual and imagined, is that as you approach, say, 50% unemployment people will progressively drop out of using currency altogether.
there will be some need to facilitate trade, particularly internationally, which is why the IMF is pimping it's SDRs as the tool to settle cross border transactions. of course this need was well filled by letters of credit long long before scammers dreamed up the IMF debt slavery organization.
I'm not against the idea, Yogi. But I've watched it floating around for twenty years, seen a couple of schemes that came and went. It's harder than it looks. The # failure that I've seen over and over again in projects (and committed far too often myself)....
Failure to understand why the legacy system works as it does.
There's always a reason.
Sometimes it pops out halfway into the project and throws a monkey wrench into your plans.
"Do countries use the dollar because they fear ostracism?"
Countries currently using the dollar are either waking up to seignorage or fed up with it. I don't see us threatening every country that sells off its dollars with nuclear annihilation. The only mechanism for enforcing the global currency is the benefits of continued international trade and credit relations. It wouldn't be forced on any country and would coexist with national currencies, just as local scrip and barter systems exists within the US. You can screw your trading partner, but he will never trust you again.
any monetary unit with a serial number attached to individual transactions has so many overarching evil connotations for the destruction of personal freedom that honestly i just barfed a little in my mouth thinking about it.
electronically tracking work units is what your proposition sounds like to me yogi.
"there will be some need to facilitate trade, particularly internationally, which is why the IMF is pimping it's SDRs as the tool to settle cross border transactions"
And I say forget the pimps, just as Linux said fuck you to MS.
Of course it's hard, Broward. Getting people to pay attention to the 10 Commandments was hard. But eventually (in the myth) enough people saw it made a little more sense than praying to a golden calf. But only recently did it become commonplace for computers to be able to handle the workload. Like it or not, Forex and Comex are here to stay, and that's a lot of the work already.
"any monetary unit with a serial number attached to individual transactions ..."
Check your wallet. The bills are all numbered. No thousand dollar bills? That's to limit drug dealers, smugglers, thieves. Want to buy something for more than 10k? Probably has to be reported.
The black market will always be an alternative, with it's own currency (precious metal, barter, cocaine, paper dollars...). I recognize the need for privacy, and there are mechanisms which can achieve it. But I don't want my old mother carrying cash in her purse, or under her mattress. And the electronic money most people use every day is already fully traceable. You are grateful when your identity is stolen.
people will scream and yell while jealously guarding the dollars in their wallets.
the fed has a plan and it is out in the open. it is just not as advertised. i contend they notice the days of fiat coming to a close and are using freshly pixellated cash to get all the assets they can as fast as they can.
they aren't going to divest these assets and the price they overpay or underpay is irrelevant - presently they can make more money.
they find all the toxic assets to be quite tasty and are pleased that people are laying at their feet like offerings. they are buying these assets because they want them. they confer real power and real control over real assets.
central banks have always been in the business of controlling nations using debt. it is what they do. securitization of debt only makes their task easier since it groups large amounts of debt into tidy packages.
i think this idea will catch on with other nations and that perhaps an asset backed dollar would be preferable to fiat collapse.
it is fascinating to consider how an asset backed dollar would be valued with similar methodology as if it were a hedge fund / etf / index fund.
also, an asset backed dollar scheme like this has the best chance of preserving the market based ideology which isn't going anywhere either.
the market based ideology of compete in your self interest and let the invisible hand of the divine sort it out is the oligarchs cover. they aren't going to blow their cover.
i am quite cynical of the fed, their history, and their motives but if this is indeed their plan i wish them luck. i would like my country to stay in one piece.
Putting aside the issue of whether it will ever be accepted, first one must decide whether it would be beneficial to the system as a whole. Nobody believed the Franc and Deutschmark would disappear so fast. No one seems to miss them (except the downsized central bankers). There is still some nominal coexistence, but the benefits realized just by cutting out the time and expense of the exchange are clear to any European consumer or business. Electronic money has brought this cost down anyway, but the accounts would still have had to be balanced. The governments that are pissed are the ones who wanted to use the old tricks to hide spending from their taxpayers.
yes the bills are numbered but the number does not get attached to me at the ATM and then attached to the person who later takes them as payment from me.
A lot of the Fed's collateral isn't that strong. If you own a mortgage backed security, that doesn't necessarily confer the right to foreclose on the asset. Even if it did, some of the assets are worth less than the cost of foreclosure. And don't forget,if the Fed can't sell the asset, it must collect rent. Nothing in the Constitution prevents rent control, when the banks end up with all the property and there is mass dislocation. That's been tested.
"yes the bills are numbered but the number does not get attached to me "
I understand, but that was the idea when hand written paper money was first floated. That's why you see a signature. When they went to mass printing, the number stayed, although almost useless in counterfeit prevention. (Occasionally used to track bank robbers, even today) If someone chose, they could track the numbers of every bill you gave them as payment and make it public. They are already obligated to record the sale if it implicates a tax.
there would surely be headaches for the fed if had to become your local landlord but the indirect ownership of collateralized securities should insulate them from foreclosure costs.
besides, don't you think they have the influence to change laws to their favor?
You're lumping debit and credit cards together. I'm talking about the mechanism not the credit issue, which is distinct. If everyone demanded their savings in cash at once, they would realize it doesn't exist in paper. It could be printed easily enough; that's inflation. But that predates electronic cash transactions, and is an issue of the fractional reserve system, regardless whether there is electronic cash.
"If someone chose, they could track the numbers of every bill you gave them as payment and make it public"
well, i am not concerned with the actions of some one. i am concerned with the mass tracking of transactions. i know you can elect to utilize a payment method that is recorded, like credit, but i hardly think it is desirable for every transaction to be recorded just because some are.
there is an effort to force convergence into this horrifying idea but ii do not think it benefits anyone except those who wish to control others.
what i'm saying is not a new idea. someone even wrote it in the bible.
"the indirect ownership of collateralized securities should insulate them from foreclosure costs. "
Can't be insulated from the costs and still retain the power. Foreclosure is not easy. Any court order to transfer land comes with centuries of common law procedural hurdles. There has historically been a shortage of cheap housing. Foreclosure or eviction often meant homelessness. Courts don't take that lightly, I worked in Housing Court. Some landlords shot their tenants out of frustration with the tedious legal process.
--- - .. ... .... . .-. - --.. (homepage, profile) wrote on Wed, 5/13/2009 - 2:02 am
"Nope , the groundwork is already being laid for the UST to buy these assets on the Fed's books at book value. "
a takeover of the fed by the treasury is entirely possible.
~~~~
That's not what I said ... I said that the Fed would dump their devalued assets into the Treasury at full book value
with the help of Treasury Timmay, at great cost to the tax payer ...
I can only hope that the UST takes over the privately owned and operated Federal Reserve ...
"As I said, debit cards could be used as a cash substitute whether or not the fractional reserve system was in place."
i don't see how debit cards have anything remotely to do with commercial loans for example, where most of the lending then borrowing reserves afterwards happened
see steve keen''s 'the roving cavaleirs of credit'
dryfly (profile) wrote on Wed, 5/13/2009 - 12:55 am
Small gov't crowd is fish food unless they can think of a way to get big business small again WITHOUT using big gov't to do it for them... who else is 'big enough' to do it?
Well they can't carry out good policy now. They will either get so weak they can't resist the impulse to reform, or they will get so weak, they stop working. Human nature being what it is, I imagine it'll take state failure to bring about reform, 'cause vested interests preserve their status at the expense of their mission pretty much every chance they get.
Rob Dawg (homepage, profile) wrote on Wed, 5/13/2009 - 12:58 am
Be careful not to conflate cause and effect. Some of us "small government" types might actually believe smaller government might spawn a less complex society.
Read about the Ming Dynasty if you haven't already. Historic miscarriage of an attempt to found a deliberately minarchist state. Well, it had a multi-century lifespan, so maybe it wasn't a strict miscarriage, just, not too well built. Lots to learn from.
dryfly (profile) wrote on Wed, 5/13/2009 - 1:07 am
And some of us 'small gov't types' are liberal, REAL LIBERAL...
But again - how do you get there? Remove big gov't & big corp business BECOMES gov't [a big gov't at that]
Oligarchs are not the state. The state is a function built into the human animal. You don't get to be the state until you replace the state. You need, short list, public works (roads, dikes, canals, agricultural efforts, operation of the post), disputes resolution (courts), protection of persons and property (army and / or police), establishment measures and other ceremonial orderings of the universe (establishes time, size, seasonality, national rites), charitable relief (hunger and disease, shelter provision, disaster remediation). If you don't do all these things enough that people come to expect them as a natural outgrowths of your presence, you are a warlord, not a king.
Oligarchs are generally warlords and if you look at the decay of states, the establishment of a solid oligarchy is a prelude to looting the state until it fails to function. You will not see people collude to operate the state because operating a state is a hella moneypit. It's either done for its own sake (like in founding a Republic, or the operation of the Chinese state) or to flatter the ego of the psychotic who fights his way to the top.
How sharp a break not only with the recent past but with the whole evolution of Western civilization the modern trend toward socialism means becomes clear if we consider it not merely against the background of the nineteenth century but in a longer historical perspective. We are rapidly abandoning not the views merely of Cobden and Bright, of Adam Smith and Hume, or even of Locke and Milton, but one of the salient characteristics of Western civilization as it has grown from the foundations laid by Christianity and the Greeks and Romans. Not merely nineteenth- and eighteenth-century liberalism, but the basic individualism inherited by us from Erasmus and Montaigne, form Cicero and Tacitus, Pericles and Thucydides, is progressively relinquished.
The Nazi leader who described the National Socialist revolution as a counter-Renaissance spoke more truly than he probably knew. It was the decisive step in the destruction of that civilization which modern man had built up from the age of the Renaissance and which was, above all, an individualist civilization. Individualism has a bad name today, and the term has come to be connected with egotism and selfishness. But the individualism of which we speak in contrast to socialism and all other forms of collectivism has no necessary connection with these. Only gradually in the course of this book shall we be able to make clear the contrast between the two opposing principles. But the essential features of that individualism which, from elements provided by Christianity and the philosophy of classical antiquity, was first fully developed during the Renaissance and has since grown and spread into what we know as Western civilization -- are the respect for the individual man qua man, that is, the recognition of of his own views and tastes as supreme in his own sphere, however narrowly that may be circumscribed, and the belief that it is desirable that men should develop their own individual gifts and bents. "Freedom" and "liberty" are now words so worn with use and abuse that one must hesitate to employ them to express the ideals for which they stood during that period. "Tolerance" is, perhaps, the only word which still preserves the full meaning of the principle which during the whole of this period was in the ascendant and which only in recent times has again been in decline, to disappear completely with the rise of the totalitarian state.
The gradual transformation of a rigidly organized hierarchic system into one where men could at least attempt to shape their own life, where man gained the opportunity of knowing and choosing between different forms of life, is closely associated with the growth of commerce.
--The Road to Serfdom, F.A. Hayek, 1944
Now is a great time to re-read The Road To Serfdom.
'i would add that a takeover of the fed by treasury is entirely possible'
i don't see the treasury buying out the fed at full face value, or at all. the us government has the power to just take the fed's assets if it so chose.
the fed is a private business that just expanded it's balance sheet by what, a factor of ten, with money made from mouse clicks. great deal for them.
i couldn't imagine them being any happier with the situation.
"What property has the Fed foreclosed on? If the underlying property is foreclosed, that doesn't necessarily mean the MBS gets paid a dime."
profit and loss from our perspective as people with limited resources does not apply to the fed. i assert that profit and loss are irrelevant to the fed. their perspective is diametrically opposed to that of the investing public.
sdtfs (profile) wrote (in reply to...) on Wed, 5/13/2009 - 1:52 am
Pick ten people at random in the US and tell me how many different rules it would take to cover their work, production, interactions within this society.
"thief", "gaoler", "make-work", "shoo-fly"? That's most of them. It's all a matter of perspective.
Tainter and Olson are right in that, the complexity comes from YOU. Not sdtfs, but, from the individual and the social forms they spawn. The world was just a full of complex challenges before as it is now. It was the EXACT SAME WORLD the whole time. The world has not changed one iota. What has changed is that the social order built on top of that world has gotten lusher and larger and more in love with itself, until it finds every little speck of itself to be indispensable, despite the fact that it's losing the ability to make even the most basic efforts toward fulfilling its mission of rule.
.......Value-Added of the Industrial Enterprises above Designated Size Expanded From January to April......from the industrial production point of view, they already recovered before the global crisis......
Byz: I would also posit that the velocity of information, some might even say the speed of new information creation, has been the most complicating factor. I am intrigued by your suggestion that things have always been the way they are. Who are Tainter and Olson? (no, I won't, you tell me, )
O! to have a name like Tainter, my life would be approaching perfect were it so.
I am intrigued by your suggestion that things have always been the way they are.
It's not a suggestion, it's an assertion. The components may change names, the process may speed up, but the underlying dynamic is visible in all societies.
Who are Tainter and Olson? (no, I won't, you tell me, )
Joseph Tainter, The Collapse of Complex Societies
Mancur Olson, The Rise and Decline of Nations: Economic Growth, Stagflation and Social Rigidities
Haven't had a chance to read Tainter yet, but have read plenty of summaries, and had gotten to his point myself.
The issue arises in hierarchies and the fact that they can only make one decision for everyone, so the controlling mechanism is the race to organize well enough to hijack the state and the battle to protect your hard-won victories in the face of a changeable world. No koyaanisqatsi needed, we're merely expanding the scope and speed of a process dictated by the nature of hierarchies.
We spend all day on the marshes
Arguing about where solid ground
can be found, and who owns it.
Slapping mosquitos and bitching about
when "they" will find a cure for dengue.
Watching the rich on their boats glide by.
Some of us have waders
Some of us have canoes
Some of us are clueless
Some of us have boats that we pretend
do not exist
in order to join those of us
searching for higher ground
until it gets boring
or scary
koyaanisqatsi--that's a mighty fine word, and most difficult to work into a conversation. Does it serve the language to any effect other than obscure, specific reference?
Can it be used interchangeably as a noun, verb adverb or adjective?
In following your various dribbles, I come away with the notion that you are a thinking man. Ah, thought: The essence of all which disturbs.
Still like that name--Tainter.
Would be interested to see the finished product of all this, should that ever have cause to become real.
..........yesterday I posted Krugman's visit in China , he was clueless , chinese were disappointed pretty much ......on the contrary Stiglitz gets the right point on the issue.........
"“China’s government has taken very rapid action to address the crisis,” Stiglitz said at a forum in Beijing today. High savings rates may help Asian economies “weather the financial crisis,” he said. "
What?!?! That was not a savings glut after all? Hoocoodanode? Economists really are good at predicting the weather of yesterday.
"on the contrary Stiglitz gets the right point on the issue........."
Jay D,
Why,exactly? He told the Chinese what they wanted to hear?
I am curious though about the demographics...the gap of male to female in the upcoming cohorts....isn't this inherently destabilizing for China,with millions of Chinese young men unable to find a wife, with no prospects of a family, excluding the 10%or so who are probably homosexual?
It is in the world's best interests to see to the success of China in developing a prosperous middle class. Keep them consuming and none will want to turn toward the very real possibility of dying for the state. As for the pressure of too many men v women, well there always has been and always will be a most excellent prostitution industry. In fact, when I come back, I hope to come back as a woman. I'm confident that my next life will be ever more prosperous as a result.
Let's get them all some new appliances, a recent vintage, low mileage auto, some naugahide furniture and well stocked groceries.
.......@fried......I am not quite sure that's what exactly Chinese wanted to hear or not......Stiglitz's statements are based on data , more reliable than Krugman .....esp. he confessed that he did not know much about China and east asian economies yesterday ......you made me laugh , thanx anyway.......
The problem with the one world currency argument is that its proponents always assert the existence of a "world community". No such community exists! The world is comprised of warring factions led by relatively primitive compulsions... different nations always trying to get a leg up on their competitor. Under such a regime, a globally equitable, single-planetary currency for international as well as intranational trade cannot exist.
Executive pay: The Obama administration reportedly is considering a major revamp of executive pay practices at financial firms that would apply to companies that haven't received government bailout funds. The Wall Street Journal and New York Times both said the administration has begun serious talks about the matter.
......I'm sure this idea will go over well. The things that irk the man will be his undoing. It's a shame.
The FedGov has created "one giant juggling act", continually picking up the latest two or three things that hit the floor . . . . .
"......now the stock market plunge has wiped out billions of dollars from already underfunded [pension] plans. The growing obligations raise the specter of higher taxes, diminished services, or even another round of costly federal bailouts." New Jersey makes a compelling case study."
.....Have you noticed that a lot of the YOY figures we receive now are from already previously decreased years due to the length of the this "recession"?
"It's almost as if someone engineered a stock-market rally to entice private investors to fund the banks rather than taxpayers. Can you see why I believe this is a sucker's rally? The stock market still has big hurdles to clear. You can have a jobless recovery, but you can't have a profitless recovery."
According to advance retail sales data, April total retail sales decreased 0.4%, and decreased 0.5% when excluding autos. The April figures failed to meet economists' expectations; the consensus forecast falled for total sales to be flat and sales excluding autos to increase 0.2%. Still, while sales turned lower, their decline isn't as sharp as what was seen in March, when total sales slid 1.3%, and sales less autos declined 1.2%.
Fed Views Jump in Yields as Sign of Better Outlook (Update1)
By Scott Lanman and Steve Matthews
May 13 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve considers the recent jump in Treasury yields more as a reflection of a better economic outlook than a signal it needs to step up purchases of U.S. government debt, according to central bank officials who declined to be identified.
It’s too early to judge the effectiveness of the Fed’s $300 billion plan to buy Treasuries even after 10-year yields climbed 0.65 percentage point since the initiative began in March, the officials said. They added that the goal is to stimulate private lending, rather than to target government-bond rates.
The Fed officials’ stance contradicts the view of firms including BlackRock Inc. that have predicted the rise in yields will prompt the central bank to announce an increase in the size of the program as soon as next month.
“It would be very different if the economy still appeared to be in freefall and yields were backing up, but it’s not,” said John Ryding, founder of RDQ Economics LLC in New York and a former Fed researcher. Increasing Treasury purchases would “fight against what is in my opinion a recovery signal, or a signal that the recession is drawing to a close.” Fed Views Jump in Yields as Sign of Better Outlook (Update1) - Bloomberg.com
Isn't the Fed is responsible for promoting a healthy economy which includes job growth? But when a right wing government takes over and promotes job destruction and lower wages, that's OK! It means higher corporate earnings . When a democratic administration wants to control exploding corporate bonuses, those that benefited most complain about "socialism". Workers don't complain, they are too busy trying to find or keep their jobs.
ghost, I have had four friends move, three to asia(macao, beijing, shanghai, one to Chile) in the last year or two to either work or set us new businesses. They claim that they actually get to keep most of what they earn. What will they think of next.
"The problem with the one world currency argument is that its proponents always assert the existence of a "world community". No such community exists!"
Never said it exists. Some ideas make it around the world faster than daylight. The first person who proposed that everyone would be better off if we stopped raiding each other's farms and burning their crops was told the same thing. "Those people only understand force..."
Yeah but what about the second derivative?
The rate of increase is decreasing....
It's a great time to foreclose or to be foreclosed on.
P.S. "Moratoria" is a great word.
i can't take someone whose first name is "Shaun" seriously...
That phrase terminal velocity comes to mind again...
.
deleted
.
nevermind
.
there is no thread vigilante
This is best referred to as "first wave foreclosures" just so we can keep trac.
y punto
"you don't stop considering earnings when they turn negative."
~~~~
TPTB do ... bad for business ...
The facts and truth need not apply unless they fit the agenda ...
edit base money (M-1) again
x2
<3 h8ter
S&P test of the 200 day into OPEX. your balls are not squozen hard enuf.
Well, honestly... the population of the U.S. is increasing and the number of houses is increasing. Why shouldn't foreclosures increase also? It's like saying "record world population!" every month.
Wait lets call them licks instead of waves...How many licks does it take to get to the bottom of that tootsie roll pop known as Housing...
Let's make it simple:
Bears: believe the economy is still broken and nothing has been done to fix it.
Bulls: believe the government can solve all problems.
FHA is going to allow bridge financing for the First Time Home Buyer tax credit.. this will effectively allow 100% financing for homes under ~230k homes and signficantly reduce the barrier of entry for homes above that point:
Effective Demand: 100% financing is back...
Old Bears: Housing Bubble
New Bears: Dollar Bubble
Old Peak oil: Aint no more
New Peak Oil: Cars are dead
Old Earnings: werk
New Earnings: Hard Werk
wanna haiku?
*edit +1 damn yu Ken Cooper !!!! didja see that?
Vonbek777 (profile) wrote on Tue, 5/12/2009 - 9:36 pm reply Ignore user
Wait lets call them licks instead of waves...How many licks does it take to get to the bottom of that tootsie roll pop known as Housing...
One... two... three [crunch]. Three.
We are just wrapping up "one."
FHA activity at the low end is gonna drive median prices down, especially in areas where foreclosures were being excluded...
Rob Dawg,
I knew you were a wise old owl.
"Let's make it simple:
Bears: believe the economy is still broken and nothing has been done to fix it.
Bulls: believe the government can solve all problems."
Not much room in that philosophy for the small government crowd.
Not sure if this was posted, saw it earlier today, just read it.
Yahoo! 404 - Page Not Found
At least it gives a realistic option to Americans today - move to a country with a better economic future.
It is obvious that we need another foreclosure moratorium, and this time it needs to reach wider and be of a longer duration. Like, until the next election cycle.
That ought to fix our foreclosure problems.
Not much room in that philosophy for the small government crowd.
Philosphy? More like prophecy.
"At least it gives a realistic option to Americans today -
move to a country with a better economic future."
~~~~
India is in deep doodoo ...
They import 80% of their energy
and their water tables are dropping precipitously ...
"Not much room in that philosophy for the small government crowd."
~~~~
Too late for small government ....
society has become too complex ...
A good friend of mine (military brat whose father was a Lutheran Chaplin in the army) went to India several years ago. His father started doing missionary work there after getting out. Anyway he tried to stay in the states but it drove him crazy, so he went to India with his dad. Loves it over there. Back then I couldn't understand that choice. I think he was ahead of the curve on that one.
And print more money. That's a sure fire way to restore the economy. Just let the Fed monetize all the bonds the states can no longer sell in the open market.
Not much room in that philosophy for the small government crowd.
Small gov't crowd is fish food unless they can think of a way to get big business small again WITHOUT using big gov't to do it for them... who else is 'big enough' to do it?
If all you do is remove big gov't and DON'T shrink big business... big business becomes gov't [big gov't at that]. The Law of Oligarchs. Mother of All Catch 22's.
mmckinl (profile) wrote on Tue, 5/12/2009 - 9:54 pm reply Ignore user
Too late for small government ....
society has become too complex ...
Be careful not to conflate cause and effect. Some of us "small government" types might actually believe smaller government might spawn a less complex society.
Shadow you must have missed all my previous currency debates here. My notion of the currency has no central bank. Governments of course retain their individual taxing powers. But all recorded trade is indexed to a weighted basket of liquid tangibles-- commodities, protein, gigabits, watts...--updated instantly by linked open-source computers (hence my interest in Linux) with a shared database. Counterfeiting and other fraud is immediately detected (regular hard copy backups) and enforced through credit cut-off.
I say the maintenance costs are far less than the costs of money changers, money printers, and the associated unreliable measure and store of value, to producers of value.
CR, many of those homes you videoed in CDM are short sales, even though their listings don't indicate as such (as indicated by the "Short Sale?" field in the Redfin lists). Also, one of the "bank-owned" homes (710 xxx) has a listing description which indicates a short sale ("lender approval...").
It seems to me it's hard to figure out WTH is going on with foreclosure activity, because it's all messed up. Defaulted properties that don't go to auction for years, short sales that are actually bank owned, REOs that never seem to get listed, etc. The bust is definitely not proceeding in an "orderly fashion". I think consumers are going to get more suspicious of listings as time goes on as the uncertain nature of the bust takes its toll on the psyche.
Seems like someone forgot to keep kicking the can... at some point won't banks realize they're loaning money to people to buy houses that they already loaned money to other people to buy at higher prices and start to wonder if this is actually a winning move?
I asked this a long time ago, and I ask it again: can we trust realty trac's numbers?
Otis. It happens. It isn't you.
at some point won't banks realize they're loaning money to people to buy houses that they already loaned money to other people to buy at higher prices and start to wonder if this is actually a winning move?
The beauty about servicing and securitization is that you don't have to worry about all that since it's OPM.
Depends upon your definition of "big government". I prefer the more precise term "limited government".
"Some of us "small government" types might actually believe smaller government might spawn a less complex society."
~~~~
And that may happen ... but it will be at great cost in lives and standard of living ...
The most likely culprit will be peak oil ...
Be careful not to conflate cause and effect. Some of us "small government" types might actually believe smaller government might spawn a less complex society.
And some of us 'small gov't types' are liberal, REAL LIBERAL...
But again - how do you get there? Remove big gov't & big corp business BECOMES gov't [a big gov't at that]... but if big gov't busts trusts & makes business small again... does it 'unilaterally disarm'? Does Patriot go away automatically?
I've said here from the beginning - we've been in an 'organizational arms race' between big corporate business interests & big mostly federal gov't [though a few states are now almost 'that big' - see Cali & NY]... since Manhattan Project. They are like big plow horse jockeying for position and we are the little critters at their feet trying not to get flattened.
Depends upon your definition of "big government". I prefer the more precise term "limited government".
A big gov't can't be a limited gov't or at least not for long. Size provides power & power corrupts.
I'll grant you that power corrupts.
But you can't keep throwing straws on the back of the camel, either.
Nancy Pelosi: Et tu Steny Hoyer?
Another distraction brewing. Wonder how many news cycles will pass before she is vindicated or crucified...
Good night everyone. Thanks for the education. I learn more here than anywhere else lately.
commodities are bright green tonight. yay.
tza + dba have been a nice hand recently, we'll see how that holds.
But you can't keep throwing straws on the back of the camel, either.
That complaint works either way & has nothing to do with the big gov't OR big business meme - they both would overload the camel just the same given the opportunity... both are bureaucratic as hell... both are inner looking & promote their own internal agendas at the expense of their own stakeholders & constituencies. They are two sides of the same coin yet 'at war' with the other in a phony 1984ish sort of a way.
That is why the current lib-con rhetoric is so empty [IMHO]... business IS gov't and reverse... both are now dangerously big & powerful. Dems justify gov't, GOP 'business'. Nothing changes. Yet how do you unravel one without the other abusing the opportunity and filling the void?
Since the end of WWII - that has been the problem - and even those who 'understood' it had no mechanism to unwind it [see Eisenhower's 'Military Industrial Complex' speech]... one thing to see the problem, a whole other thing to devise a way to defuse it.
Too late for small government ....
society has become too complex ...
Size begets complexity. Besides, imagine a "small" government. Wouldn't that put even more power into a smaller group of people? It would be correspondingly easier for power to corrupt. Any country ever manage to avoid Byzantine politics and freakish regulation?
Basel couldn't respond about Scalia got caught up. Can't say I've studied too many S. Ct. opinions in the last few years but strict construction never made much sense to me. Where does it say in the text that the Constitution is not to be liberally interpreted in favor of the themes that run through it? They kept it as short as possible.
That is why the current lib-con rhetoric is so empty [IMHO]... business IS gov't and reverse
Amen to that.
I still like to think that there's something to the concept of "liberty" unique to this grand experiment known as the US of A.
Size begets complexity.
~~~~
Not necessarily ...
The complexity I refer to is the supply chain and mechanization ... and the energy needed to run it
Empires in the past were largely bigger models, not more complex ... There was trade
however most states in the Empire were self sufficient to a very large degree ... most trade existed before
the imposition of empire ...
I still like to think that there's something to the concept of "liberty" unique to this grand experiment known as the US of A.
I'm haunted by B Franklin's 'prediction' - we have been given a republic if we can keep it. I feel big corporate power is the catalyst and energy by which big gov't takes our republic away. With that our liberty.
I think you are seeing that happen now with the banks. But had we not had big gov't - what remained of our republic would have been gone already - it would have TOTALLY [not just partially] devolved into a republic of 'oligarchs' by now.
How do you walk that beast backward - tactical not conceptual or philosophical process - that is what I want to know.
"How do you walk that beast backward - tactical not conceptual or philosophical process - that is what I want to know."
~~~~
Control the money and especially the money creation ...
The US government should be printing its own money not borrowing ti from the privately owned and operated
Federal Reserve ... The colonies had their own money before the Revolution, Britain then outlawed this. Ben Franklin
said this was the real cause of the Revolutionary War !
wiki :
Colonial scrip was not backed by gold or silver and therefore the colonies could control its purchasing power. This was similar to the "tally stick" system used by the British Empire for over 700 years. It was different from the conventional European mercantilist system of money which required governments to borrow from banks and pay interest for those loans, as gold and silver were the only regarded forms of money. Colonial scrip, were "bills of credit" created by the government, based on the credit of that government, and this meant that there was no interest to pay for the introduction of money. This went a considerable way towards defraying the expense of the Colonial governments and in maintaining prosperity. The Governments charged low interest when it loaned out this paper money to its citizens, with land as collateral, and this interest income lowered the tax burden on the people, contributing to prosperity.
The currency was born when a lack of gold and silver in the Colonies made trade hard to conduct, and a barter system prevailed. One by one, the Colonies began to issue their own paper money to serve as a medium of exchange to make trade vibrant. The Governments could then retire excess notes out of circulation by taxing the people, helping some colonies generally avoid inflation. Each colony had its own currency and some were better managed than others. It was banned by English Parliament in the Currency Act after Benjamin Franklin had explained the benefits of this currency to the British Board of Trade. Outlawing the circulating medium caused a depression in the colonies, and Franklin and many others believed it to be the true cause of the American Revolution.
Vonbek777 (profile) wrote on Tue, 5/12/2009 - 9:54 pm reply Ignore user A good friend of mine (military brat whose father was a Lutheran Chaplin in the army) went to India several years ago. His father started doing missionary work there after getting out. Anyway he tried to stay in the states but it drove him crazy, so he went to India with his dad. Loves it over there. Back then I couldn't understand that choice. I think he was ahead of the curve on that one.
Vonbek,hillside looks pretty from a distance.India is not a safe country to stay for a foreigner.It has deep biases against white peoples.They might respect whites,but will not look back in looting them.Especially missionaries are deeply detested here.If you think USA has problems,multiply these problems by 100000 and imagine staying in such place. By the way i am indian
"May 13 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve considers the recent jump in Treasury yields more as a reflection of a better economic outlook than a signal it needs to step up purchases of U.S. government debt, according to central bank officials who declined to be identified. "
--Declined to be identified because they couldn't stop laughing long enough to say their own names.
With the full faith and credit of the US seemingly behind equity holders of too big to fail banks, no one wants to settle for less cheese.
more on colonial script :
After Franklin had explained…to the British Government as the real cause of prosperity, they immediately passed laws, forbidding the payment of taxes in that money. This produced such great inconvenience and misery to the people, that it was the principal cause of the Revolution. A far greater reason for a general uprising, than the Tea and Stamp Act, was the taking away of the paper money.
Adam Smith
Adam Smith wrote of the Pennsylvania currency in his famed 1776 work The Wealth of Nations:
The government of Pennsylvania, without amassing any [gold or silver], invented a method of lending, not money indeed, but what is equivalent to money to its subjects. [It advanced] to private people at interest, upon [land as collateral], paper bills of credit…made transferable from hand to hand like bank notes, and declared by act of assembly to be legal tender in all payments...[the system] went a considerable way toward defraying the annual expense…of that…government [low taxes]. [Pennsylvania’s] paper currency…is said never to have sunk below the value of gold and silver which was current in the colony before the…issue of paper money.
An interesting proposal from Neville Holmes from the University of Tasmania in the current ACM Computer: Limit artificial entities to two levels of ownership and limit representations of value such as money to two levels of abstraction.
The argument is that the simplification would lead to a more transparent and presumably smaller business and government.
It is a system design, the implementation details are left unspecified by Neville.
"Seems like someone forgot to keep kicking the can... at some point won't banks realize they're loaning money to people to buy houses that they already loaned money to other people to buy at higher prices and start to wonder if this is actually a winning move?"
Uncle O' has their back. What could go wrong?
Empires in the past were largely bigger models, not more complex
We're well beyond that now. We've grown larger and more diverse. We don't have the simple ruler, farmer, merchant, warrior options any more. Pick ten people at random in the US and tell me how many different rules it would take to cover their work, production, interactions within this society.
We really need a herd of camels.
yogi,
Yeah, that's hilarious. Of course even if they're losing control they can't possibly let people know that.
"I'm haunted by B Franklin's 'prediction' - we have been given a republic if we can keep it. I feel big corporate power is the catalyst and energy by which big gov't takes our republic away. With that our liberty."
Einstein predicted this back in 1949 in his essay:
"...Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights...."
Why Socialism? Albert Einstein - Monthly Review
dry, social inequality was actually greatly reduced by the first few years of the depression. all FDR did was create enough moral hazard for truly evil types like Joe Kennedy to reassemble the pieces into even worse fiefdoms.
i honestly don't think it needs to be a choice between one leviathan or another. mellon was right then, and is more right than ever now.
"The currency was born when a lack of gold and silver in the Colonies made trade hard to conduct, and a barter system prevailed. "
Harder for the absentee power to collect taxes without a hard currency. The currency was merely a symptom of the problem. The colonists saw no need to keep paying the Boss protection money, and why not get rid of inherited titles, which are stupid.
"Wouldn't that put even more power into a smaller group of people? It would be correspondingly easier for power to corrupt. Any country ever manage to avoid Byzantine politics and freakish regulation?"
Makes me think.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
"No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time."
bANK fAILURE, no I didn't see whatever 'that' is.
Otis, how quickly did the edit lock you out?
One solution might be fixed sum democracy. The rules would be simple:
This way everybody could participate, not just the rich elite, pockets full of money.
Einstein was watched very closely, not just because he turned against the Bomb. Smart, liberal, Jewish= trouble.
FROM:
Federal Bureau of Investigation - Freedom of Information Privacy Act
" 1,427 pages
An investigation was conducted by the FBI regarding the famous physicist because of his affiliation with the Communist Party. Einstein was a member, sponsor, or affiliated with thirty-four communist fronts between 1937 and 1954. He also served as honorary chairman for three communist organizations. '
"Every candidate will receive fixed sum of election money from government, no donations, sponsoring or third party ads allowed."
Not without some activist judges on the bench. Removing corporate person-hood would be required.
timmyone,
Your first rule shouldn't be necessary. The Federal government was supposed to be small and only addressing issues interstate and international, not intrastate. There simply should not be a fraction of the power in DC that exists there now. Ultimately some states may actually challenge DC on that count; we'll see.
Hey KCoop: how about 30 bucks for an HTML buttons (esp. italics)?
Who'll match it?
Interstate and international issues dwarf intrastate, unlike the 18th Century, when to get home from DC was a week's hazardous journey even for a Senator.
1 currency now
Screw one currency ...
This is just part and parcel of the banksters plan to control the entire money supply of the world ...
If we think we have got a corrupt, greedy banking system now, just wait until they get their hands
on every countries money supply ...
"The currency was merely a symptom of the problem."
Wrong ... the currency was the problem, fractional reserve currency
controlled by the private Bank of England ... debt money whereby most of
money in circulation was the product of borrowing at interest from the banks ...
The only people who paid no interest were the owners of the gold which was
over time almost exclusively the banks.
Interstate and international issues dwarf intrastate
Irrelevant. We're talking about boundaries, not size. The clowns in DC stick their noses in places they shouldn't be.
One thing people forget is issues that are national in scope do not make them federal in jurisdiction.
We're talking about boundaries
We're talking about foreclosures.
How long does it take to "process" a foreclosure?
The notices are all standardized, doesn't seem like it should take much time at all.
TJ and The Bear
Just wait until we get a one currency world ...
There will be no place safe from outside influence ...
1 currency now -yogi, I could put in an editor, but the issue is really about managing paste - it was a bit of a quagmire with CRC.
I intend to do something along these lines, but want to do it properly, and there are a few things ahead of it in the queue. You may not see anything happening right now, but there's plumbing work going on behind the scenes. None of it translating to exciting features, I'm afraid.
Good night, all.
mmckinl see my 12:59 above before you rant. The one world currency has no need for a central bank.
So the Colonies would have happily paid protection money to the King, if only they used a hard currency.
Bullshit.
There will be no place safe from outside influence ...
Then again, if it isn't a "one government world", we may have a fighting chance.
Here is your bankster agent :
1 currency now -yogi
Advocating for a one currency world that would be controlled by the
Bank of International Settlements in Basil Switzerland ...
Hitler's Bank Goes Global May 2009 - The Purpose of the Financial Crisis
"The purpose of this financial crisis is to take down the United States and the U.S. dollar as the stable datum of planetary finance and, in the midst of the resulting confusion, put in its place a Global Monetary Authority—a planetary financial control organization 'to ensure this never happens again.'"
Which of course means we Americans will be at the mercy of foreign bankers ...
"Just wait until we get a one currency world ...
There will be no place safe from outside influence ... "
You make no sense. Do you want a billion local currencies? Or do you want the right to cheat your trading partners by printing money to pay back what you borrowed. Are you drunk?
mmckinl see my 12:59 above before you rant.
~~~~
I already saw it ...
What you fail to realize is that it is Not governments that control money
and money creation .... but
privately owned and operated central banks ...
There is practically no sovereign money in the world, fractional reserve banking has over 90%
of the worlds GDP in its grasp ... and all that money is created out of thin air by banksters.
"Which of course means we Americans will be at the mercy of foreign bankers ... "
Mmckinl sleep it off, you're having trouble reading. Or is it a Mel Gibson moment?
1 currency now -yogi
I want a sovereign currency as we had when Lincoln created the "Greenback" ...
There is no reason that we, the people of the United States should have to borrow our own money
from the privately owned and operated Federal Reserve which is neither Federal and contains no reserves.
seems at least somebody has a plan B.
Late reports this evening are citing an anonymous source that says the FDIC is preparing some sort of superfund that could handle the failure of a large “systemically important financial institution.”
THE PRAGMATIC CAPITALIST » » FDIC PLANNING FOR HUGE BANK FAILURE?
How long does it take to "process" a foreclosure? . . .
How long does it take to get married?
. . . The notices are all standardized, doesn't seem like it should take much time at all.
It ain't the process that's slow.
1 currency now -yogi (profile) wrote on Tue, 5/12/2009 - 11:41 pm
"Which of course means we Americans will be at the mercy of foreign bankers ... "
Mmckinl sleep it off, you're having trouble reading. Or is it a Mel Gibson moment?
~~~~~
LOL ... the old standby ... cheap fraudulent accusations ...
You have not addressed my points and can't without disclosing you're
real benefactors ... the banksters ...
Governments set and control tariffs and taxes, not central banks. Whatever the Fed can print, the Treasury can tax. If the Fed loses control of inflation, it is in neglect of its mandate. The best way to limit the power of central banks is through a single world currency backed by the faith and credit of the global community with no central authority. All currencies rely on faith. Currencies have no intrinsic value, only the promise of exchange value.
Fascinating discussion, folks. Especially the FOIA request on Einstein - thank you 1 currency.
Edifice removal is always a problem (queue Byzantine Ruins
). We built it up, crystalize it into cool buildings, and then go crazy. It reminds me of this science fiction story where, on a planet with 2+ suns, the orbital mechanics dictated that it would only get dark every few thousand years. And when it did, things ran amok.
Nightfall by Asimov, Google says.
To the light, I say.
"All currencies rely on faith. Currencies have no intrinsic value, only the promise of exchange value."
~~~~
Wrong ...
Fiat currencies rely for value on their ability to pay taxes and participate in commerce ... The amount of money printed
or credit granted in relation to the productivity of the economy is that perceived value ... We don't need to borrow it
from the privately owned and operated Federal reserve for money to have value ...
"All currencies rely on faith."
They rely on gunpowder.
You have no gunpowder.
"... cheap fraudulent accusations ...[indeed]
You have not addressed my points and can't without disclosing you're
real benefactors ... the banksters ... "
How does eliminating all central banks help these "banksters"?
I say you're a Ponzi finance shill trying to discredit the single world currency to help your real benefactors, the money changers and printers.
That's right, faith that the gunpowder will back it up. And here we are. Mutual assured destruction. What's your solution Broward? More seignorage?
The Bankruptcy of the United States
The Bankruptcy of The United States
"All currencies rely on faith. Currencies have no intrinsic value, only the promise of exchange value."
"Wrong ...
Fiat currencies rely for value on ... [blah blah blah]"
Wrong. Good luck with your wheelbarrow of paper. It doesn't matter if Lincoln rises up and prints it himself, the value you receive for it is dependent on what the guy who accepts it thinks he can get for it later.
1 currency now -yogi
It is NO coincidence that the Federal Income Tax was established at the same time the
Federal Reserve Act was implemented, that was the backing for the fiat currency they were about to print
and the large sums they were to borrow for WWI .
And the banksters have been at it ever since, roiling the currency and credit structure of the United States
and the world to maximize their profits ...
"What's your solution Broward? More seignorage?"
I know you need a value vectoring component which can be localized by region, like an interest rate that is not and can not be globalized.
I have no idea how to fix the gunpowder problem, I only know it exists.
I exchanged a small amount of email with the guy that created the DMT, digital monetary trust.
Did you read why it eventually died?
Digital Monetary Trust - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
1 currency now -yogi
"All currencies rely on faith. Currencies have no intrinsic value, only the promise of exchange value."
"Wrong ...
Fiat currencies rely for value on ... [blah blah blah]"
Wrong. Good luck with your wheelbarrow of paper. It doesn't matter if Lincoln rises up and prints it himself, the value you receive for it is dependent on what the guy who accepts it thinks he can get for it later.
~~~~
Again you omit my argument, that the value of fiat currency is the payment of taxes and the settlement of debt
under government law based on the productivity of the economy ...
That is what gives any money value ... the payment of taxes ... and relief of debt under law ...
Anything besides the recognized coin of the realm has no ability to do this ... so if you want to keep your property
or even your liberty you have to have the recognized currency, fiat or metal.
BH: "It consisted of a three-layered computer system. Its function was to abstract the identity of the account owner from the accounts."
Although anonymity of purchasers of medicine literature, etc. may be an important privacy goal to build in somehow, the currency I suggest is transparent and traceable, like the serial numbers on paper bills were originally intended.
Mmckinl
Again you fail to see I'm referring to intrinsic value of the actual currency, not whether the use of a national currency has value to the system. Seashells work fine as a local currency, if no one chooses to cheat and find an external supply, either through fear of gunpowder or through faith in the value of maintaining an honest system, take your pick.
" the currency I suggest is transparent and traceable, like the serial numbers on paper bills were originally intended"
You still need a mechanism to either project force or neutralize force.
How do you prevent a country / government from making your currency illegal?
1 currency now -yogi (profile) wrote on Wed, 5/13/2009 - 12:27 am
~~~~
Specious argument ... the fact is fiat currency has the value of government backing through taxes, commerce
and the underlying productivity of the economy ... You can't separate the currency from the government or entity
that issues it ... Even shells have to have an imputed value or they are not currency ... Your argument is that nothing has
intrinsic value means tat you are not discussing currency ...
"How do you prevent a country / government from making your currency illegal? "
Ostracism as a trading partner.
This currency is coming, as soon as China demands payment linked to a more reliable index than the CPI. They don't care whether they get paid in dollars or doughnuts, as long as they can rely on the number to represent a reliable amount of purchasing power..
broward (homepage, profile) wrote on Wed, 5/13/2009 - 12:32 am
reply
Ignore user
" the currency I suggest is transparent and traceable, like the serial numbers on paper bills were originally intended"
You still need a mechanism to either project force or neutralize force.
How do you prevent a country / government from making your currency illegal?
~~~~~
This is exactly right ... you need force of law ... you don't pay your property taxes, they take your property.
You don't pay your income taxes ... they can take your liberty ... Taxes and debt payment give currency its utility
in a court of law, through law by force ...
Without force no currency is binding ... is is only a personally enforceable agreement ...
"This currency is coming, as soon as China demands payment linked to a more reliable index than the CPI"
The CPI is specific to a country. I doubt if a global CPI is doable, there's too much variation between countries, political influences in the calculation.
Do countries use the dollar because they fear ostracism?
Do they use the dollar internally?
Not specious. We're talking about 2 different things. Currency is a marker for value. The seashells have almost no use to those who have them other than their exchange for things of value, including protection money to the government. If you think the government is adding more seashells to the treasury every day you're going to demand more of them in exchange for your surplus corn. Grain can be used as a currency, but it has intrinsic value. You eat it. Gold is shiny.
i like utopia. never been there but it sounds nice.
the fed isn't going anywhere. the value of the dollar will eventually be closely tied to the value of their hoard of assets. they are creating an asset backed dollar.
don't tell the ostrich people
the real risk to currency schemes, actual and imagined, is that as you approach, say, 50% unemployment people will progressively drop out of using currency altogether.
there will be some need to facilitate trade, particularly internationally, which is why the IMF is pimping it's SDRs as the tool to settle cross border transactions. of course this need was well filled by letters of credit long long before scammers dreamed up the IMF debt slavery organization.
I'm not against the idea, Yogi. But I've watched it floating around for twenty years, seen a couple of schemes that came and went. It's harder than it looks. The # failure that I've seen over and over again in projects (and committed far too often myself)....
Failure to understand why the legacy system works as it does.
There's always a reason.
Sometimes it pops out halfway into the project and throws a monkey wrench into your plans.
"Do countries use the dollar because they fear ostracism?"
Countries currently using the dollar are either waking up to seignorage or fed up with it. I don't see us threatening every country that sells off its dollars with nuclear annihilation. The only mechanism for enforcing the global currency is the benefits of continued international trade and credit relations. It wouldn't be forced on any country and would coexist with national currencies, just as local scrip and barter systems exists within the US. You can screw your trading partner, but he will never trust you again.
any monetary unit with a serial number attached to individual transactions has so many overarching evil connotations for the destruction of personal freedom that honestly i just barfed a little in my mouth thinking about it.
electronically tracking work units is what your proposition sounds like to me yogi.
no cash, no freedom.
that, and
privacy felt good.
"This currency is coming, as soon as China demands payment linked to a more reliable index than the CPI. "
~~~~
Wrong because China is not offering any substitute ... China or the EU are no where near capability
to become the reserve currency ... This is not to say that this will not happen years down the road ...
What could happen is the blow up of the dollar in which case countries would revert to barter and
direct trade. This would also usher in a world depression the likes of which no one has ever seen.
"there will be some need to facilitate trade, particularly internationally, which is why the IMF is pimping it's SDRs as the tool to settle cross border transactions"
And I say forget the pimps, just as Linux said fuck you to MS.
Of course it's hard, Broward. Getting people to pay attention to the 10 Commandments was hard. But eventually (in the myth) enough people saw it made a little more sense than praying to a golden calf. But only recently did it become commonplace for computers to be able to handle the workload. Like it or not, Forex and Comex are here to stay, and that's a lot of the work already.
china has already chosen yuan for settling it's transactions. anyone surprised?
in order for your scheme to work, yogi, nations must first give up their sovereignty and the delicious prerogative of owning your own money supply.
this doesn't seem likely, considering human nature and shit
"the fed isn't going anywhere."
~~~
yet ...
The American public has just about had it ... They won't be cheering
for the institutions that got us in this mess and that makes the Fed a prime target.
china has already chosen yuan for settling it's transactions. anyone surprised?
~~~~
No ... this is expected ... and TPTB aren't too thrilled either ... but China is about ready
to join the rest of the world in recession unless they can get their domestic consumption up.
"any monetary unit with a serial number attached to individual transactions ..."
Check your wallet. The bills are all numbered. No thousand dollar bills? That's to limit drug dealers, smugglers, thieves. Want to buy something for more than 10k? Probably has to be reported.
The black market will always be an alternative, with it's own currency (precious metal, barter, cocaine, paper dollars...). I recognize the need for privacy, and there are mechanisms which can achieve it. But I don't want my old mother carrying cash in her purse, or under her mattress. And the electronic money most people use every day is already fully traceable. You are grateful when your identity is stolen.
"the fed isn't going anywhere."
~~~
yet ...""""
people will scream and yell while jealously guarding the dollars in their wallets.
the fed has a plan and it is out in the open. it is just not as advertised. i contend they notice the days of fiat coming to a close and are using freshly pixellated cash to get all the assets they can as fast as they can.
they aren't going to divest these assets and the price they overpay or underpay is irrelevant - presently they can make more money.
they find all the toxic assets to be quite tasty and are pleased that people are laying at their feet like offerings. they are buying these assets because they want them. they confer real power and real control over real assets.
central banks have always been in the business of controlling nations using debt. it is what they do. securitization of debt only makes their task easier since it groups large amounts of debt into tidy packages.
i think this idea will catch on with other nations and that perhaps an asset backed dollar would be preferable to fiat collapse.
it is fascinating to consider how an asset backed dollar would be valued with similar methodology as if it were a hedge fund / etf / index fund.
also, an asset backed dollar scheme like this has the best chance of preserving the market based ideology which isn't going anywhere either.
the market based ideology of compete in your self interest and let the invisible hand of the divine sort it out is the oligarchs cover. they aren't going to blow their cover.
i am quite cynical of the fed, their history, and their motives but if this is indeed their plan i wish them luck. i would like my country to stay in one piece.
Putting aside the issue of whether it will ever be accepted, first one must decide whether it would be beneficial to the system as a whole. Nobody believed the Franc and Deutschmark would disappear so fast. No one seems to miss them (except the downsized central bankers). There is still some nominal coexistence, but the benefits realized just by cutting out the time and expense of the exchange are clear to any European consumer or business. Electronic money has brought this cost down anyway, but the accounts would still have had to be balanced. The governments that are pissed are the ones who wanted to use the old tricks to hide spending from their taxpayers.
"Check your wallet. The bills are all numbered. "
yes the bills are numbered but the number does not get attached to me at the ATM and then attached to the person who later takes them as payment from me.
there is the difference.
--- - .. ... .... . .-. - --.. (homepage, profile) wrote on Wed, 5/13/2009 - 1:36 am
~~~~
Nope , the groundwork is already being laid for the UST to buy these assets on the Fed's books at book value.
Bankster agent extraordinaire Treasury Timmay will make sure the Fed is made whole at tax payer expense.
The losses, in the trillions, will be dribbled out over many years and underwritten by quantitative easing ...
This is of course besides the hundreds of billions perhaps trillions of losses at Fannie, Freddie, other government agencies
and the 12 Federal Home Loan Banks ...
They have spread the losses throughout the financial system.... The TARP Money is a Red Herring tat will probably be repaid sooner rather than later.
They will probably offer up one TBTF bank like CITI or BAC, maybe both, for bankruptcy, to add confusion and to cover their tracks.
A lot of the Fed's collateral isn't that strong. If you own a mortgage backed security, that doesn't necessarily confer the right to foreclose on the asset. Even if it did, some of the assets are worth less than the cost of foreclosure. And don't forget,if the Fed can't sell the asset, it must collect rent. Nothing in the Constitution prevents rent control, when the banks end up with all the property and there is mass dislocation. That's been tested.
"Electronic money has brought this cost down anyway, but the accounts would still have had to be balanced."
electronic money has enormous costs. witness the credit bubble brought on by lending without having the reserves on hand beforehand.
banks all over would lend then borrow the required reserves afterwards.
there is a huge cost to electronic money and it is counted in millions of lives destroyed.
as to safety on the streets with money, well, you could get a man sized bulletproof hamster wheel.
"Nope , the groundwork is already being laid for the UST to buy these assets on the Fed's books at book value. "
a takeover of the fed by the treasury is entirely possible.
"yes the bills are numbered but the number does not get attached to me "
I understand, but that was the idea when hand written paper money was first floated. That's why you see a signature. When they went to mass printing, the number stayed, although almost useless in counterfeit prevention. (Occasionally used to track bank robbers, even today) If someone chose, they could track the numbers of every bill you gave them as payment and make it public. They are already obligated to record the sale if it implicates a tax.
there would surely be headaches for the fed if had to become your local landlord but the indirect ownership of collateralized securities should insulate them from foreclosure costs.
besides, don't you think they have the influence to change laws to their favor?
You're lumping debit and credit cards together. I'm talking about the mechanism not the credit issue, which is distinct. If everyone demanded their savings in cash at once, they would realize it doesn't exist in paper. It could be printed easily enough; that's inflation. But that predates electronic cash transactions, and is an issue of the fractional reserve system, regardless whether there is electronic cash.
"If someone chose, they could track the numbers of every bill you gave them as payment and make it public"
well, i am not concerned with the actions of some one. i am concerned with the mass tracking of transactions. i know you can elect to utilize a payment method that is recorded, like credit, but i hardly think it is desirable for every transaction to be recorded just because some are.
there is an effort to force convergence into this horrifying idea but ii do not think it benefits anyone except those who wish to control others.
what i'm saying is not a new idea. someone even wrote it in the bible.
"You're lumping debit and credit cards together. "
i am? how?
The 'I can always move to India' meme is about a million times more retarded than the 'I can always move to Dubai' meme.
i know, if you want to live in a third world country just stick around. at least here you know the lay of the land.
"the indirect ownership of collateralized securities should insulate them from foreclosure costs. "
Can't be insulated from the costs and still retain the power. Foreclosure is not easy. Any court order to transfer land comes with centuries of common law procedural hurdles. There has historically been a shortage of cheap housing. Foreclosure or eviction often meant homelessness. Courts don't take that lightly, I worked in Housing Court. Some landlords shot their tenants out of frustration with the tedious legal process.
yogi, can your proposition stand without attaching an id to every person's transactions?
"Can't be insulated from the costs and still retain the power. Foreclosure is not easy."
is the fed being billed for forclosure costs on the MBS it owns?
"electronic money has enormous costs. witness the credit bubble brought on by lending without having the reserves on hand beforehand."
As I said, debit cards could be used as a cash substitute whether or not the fractional reserve system was in place. Two separate issues.
What property has the Fed foreclosed on? If the underlying property is foreclosed, that doesn't necessarily mean the MBS gets paid a dime.
--- - .. ... .... . .-. - --.. (homepage, profile) wrote on Wed, 5/13/2009 - 2:02 am
"Nope , the groundwork is already being laid for the UST to buy these assets on the Fed's books at book value. "
a takeover of the fed by the treasury is entirely possible.
~~~~
That's not what I said ... I said that the Fed would dump their devalued assets into the Treasury at full book value
with the help of Treasury Timmay, at great cost to the tax payer ...
I can only hope that the UST takes over the privately owned and operated Federal Reserve ...
"As I said, debit cards could be used as a cash substitute whether or not the fractional reserve system was in place."
i don't see how debit cards have anything remotely to do with commercial loans for example, where most of the lending then borrowing reserves afterwards happened
see steve keen''s 'the roving cavaleirs of credit'
The Roving Cavaliers of Credit
"Two separate issues"
yeh, i know...
dryfly (profile) wrote on Wed, 5/13/2009 - 12:55 am
Small gov't crowd is fish food unless they can think of a way to get big business small again WITHOUT using big gov't to do it for them... who else is 'big enough' to do it?
Well they can't carry out good policy now. They will either get so weak they can't resist the impulse to reform, or they will get so weak, they stop working. Human nature being what it is, I imagine it'll take state failure to bring about reform, 'cause vested interests preserve their status at the expense of their mission pretty much every chance they get.
Rob Dawg (homepage, profile) wrote on Wed, 5/13/2009 - 12:58 am
Be careful not to conflate cause and effect. Some of us "small government" types might actually believe smaller government might spawn a less complex society.
Read about the Ming Dynasty if you haven't already. Historic miscarriage of an attempt to found a deliberately minarchist state. Well, it had a multi-century lifespan, so maybe it wasn't a strict miscarriage, just, not too well built. Lots to learn from.
dryfly (profile) wrote on Wed, 5/13/2009 - 1:07 am
And some of us 'small gov't types' are liberal, REAL LIBERAL...
But again - how do you get there? Remove big gov't & big corp business BECOMES gov't [a big gov't at that]
Oligarchs are not the state. The state is a function built into the human animal. You don't get to be the state until you replace the state. You need, short list, public works (roads, dikes, canals, agricultural efforts, operation of the post), disputes resolution (courts), protection of persons and property (army and / or police), establishment measures and other ceremonial orderings of the universe (establishes time, size, seasonality, national rites), charitable relief (hunger and disease, shelter provision, disaster remediation). If you don't do all these things enough that people come to expect them as a natural outgrowths of your presence, you are a warlord, not a king.
Oligarchs are generally warlords and if you look at the decay of states, the establishment of a solid oligarchy is a prelude to looting the state until it fails to function. You will not see people collude to operate the state because operating a state is a hella moneypit. It's either done for its own sake (like in founding a Republic, or the operation of the Chinese state) or to flatter the ego of the psychotic who fights his way to the top.
You can't foreclose with a security, you need the mortgage itself. It's a piece of paper, signed by the borrower.
How sharp a break not only with the recent past but with the whole evolution of Western civilization the modern trend toward socialism means becomes clear if we consider it not merely against the background of the nineteenth century but in a longer historical perspective. We are rapidly abandoning not the views merely of Cobden and Bright, of Adam Smith and Hume, or even of Locke and Milton, but one of the salient characteristics of Western civilization as it has grown from the foundations laid by Christianity and the Greeks and Romans. Not merely nineteenth- and eighteenth-century liberalism, but the basic individualism inherited by us from Erasmus and Montaigne, form Cicero and Tacitus, Pericles and Thucydides, is progressively relinquished.
The Nazi leader who described the National Socialist revolution as a counter-Renaissance spoke more truly than he probably knew. It was the decisive step in the destruction of that civilization which modern man had built up from the age of the Renaissance and which was, above all, an individualist civilization. Individualism has a bad name today, and the term has come to be connected with egotism and selfishness. But the individualism of which we speak in contrast to socialism and all other forms of collectivism has no necessary connection with these. Only gradually in the course of this book shall we be able to make clear the contrast between the two opposing principles. But the essential features of that individualism which, from elements provided by Christianity and the philosophy of classical antiquity, was first fully developed during the Renaissance and has since grown and spread into what we know as Western civilization -- are the respect for the individual man qua man, that is, the recognition of of his own views and tastes as supreme in his own sphere, however narrowly that may be circumscribed, and the belief that it is desirable that men should develop their own individual gifts and bents. "Freedom" and "liberty" are now words so worn with use and abuse that one must hesitate to employ them to express the ideals for which they stood during that period. "Tolerance" is, perhaps, the only word which still preserves the full meaning of the principle which during the whole of this period was in the ascendant and which only in recent times has again been in decline, to disappear completely with the rise of the totalitarian state.
The gradual transformation of a rigidly organized hierarchic system into one where men could at least attempt to shape their own life, where man gained the opportunity of knowing and choosing between different forms of life, is closely associated with the growth of commerce.
--The Road to Serfdom, F.A. Hayek, 1944
Now is a great time to re-read The Road To Serfdom.
Hey yogi,
I'm not normally a Bradley Burston fan but thought this column / blog entry was good:
How would Israel look if its left finally died? - Haaretz - Israel News
mm, i realize that's not what you said.
my bad, i should have said it like:
'i would add that a takeover of the fed by treasury is entirely possible'
i don't see the treasury buying out the fed at full face value, or at all. the us government has the power to just take the fed's assets if it so chose.
the fed is a private business that just expanded it's balance sheet by what, a factor of ten, with money made from mouse clicks. great deal for them.
i couldn't imagine them being any happier with the situation.
"What property has the Fed foreclosed on? If the underlying property is foreclosed, that doesn't necessarily mean the MBS gets paid a dime."
profit and loss from our perspective as people with limited resources does not apply to the fed. i assert that profit and loss are irrelevant to the fed. their perspective is diametrically opposed to that of the investing public.
they can make more money with zero marginal cost.
sdtfs (profile) wrote (in reply to...) on Wed, 5/13/2009 - 1:52 am
Pick ten people at random in the US and tell me how many different rules it would take to cover their work, production, interactions within this society.
"thief", "gaoler", "make-work", "shoo-fly"? That's most of them. It's all a matter of perspective.
Tainter and Olson are right in that, the complexity comes from YOU. Not sdtfs, but, from the individual and the social forms they spawn. The world was just a full of complex challenges before as it is now. It was the EXACT SAME WORLD the whole time. The world has not changed one iota. What has changed is that the social order built on top of that world has gotten lusher and larger and more in love with itself, until it finds every little speck of itself to be indispensable, despite the fact that it's losing the ability to make even the most basic efforts toward fulfilling its mission of rule.
"They will probably offer up one TBTF bank like CITI or BAC, maybe both, for bankruptcy, to add confusion and to cover their tracks."
Someone should notify Turbo Timmy that their excellent and evil plan has been compromised.
"No ... this is expected ... and TPTB aren't too thrilled either ... but China is about ready
to join the rest of the world in recession unless they can get their domestic consumption up. "
................................................................................................
.......Value-Added of the Industrial Enterprises above Designated Size Expanded From January to April......from the industrial production point of view, they already recovered before the global crisis......
Value-Added of the Industrial Enterprises above Designated Size Expanded in April
.........Total Retail Sales of Consumer Goods Shot up in April.............
Total Retail Sales of Consumer Goods Shot up in April
Byz: I would also posit that the velocity of information, some might even say the speed of new information creation, has been the most complicating factor. I am intrigued by your suggestion that things have always been the way they are. Who are Tainter and Olson? (no, I won't, you tell me, )
O! to have a name like Tainter, my life would be approaching perfect were it so.
sdtfs: Byz, does this mean stupid dumbass Timmy the fuck stick? I'm lost...
You can't foreclose with a security, you need the mortgage itself. It's a piece of paper, signed by the borrower.
A piece of paper? Barbarous relic!
I am intrigued by your suggestion that things have always been the way they are.
It's not a suggestion, it's an assertion. The components may change names, the process may speed up, but the underlying dynamic is visible in all societies.
Who are Tainter and Olson? (no, I won't, you tell me, )
Joseph Tainter, The Collapse of Complex Societies
Mancur Olson, The Rise and Decline of Nations: Economic Growth, Stagflation and Social Rigidities
Haven't had a chance to read Tainter yet, but have read plenty of summaries, and had gotten to his point myself.
The issue arises in hierarchies and the fact that they can only make one decision for everyone, so the controlling mechanism is the race to organize well enough to hijack the state and the battle to protect your hard-won victories in the face of a changeable world. No koyaanisqatsi needed, we're merely expanding the scope and speed of a process dictated by the nature of hierarchies.
We spend all day on the marshes
Arguing about where solid ground
can be found, and who owns it.
Slapping mosquitos and bitching about
when "they" will find a cure for dengue.
Watching the rich on their boats glide by.
Some of us have waders
Some of us have canoes
Some of us are clueless
Some of us have boats that we pretend
do not exist
in order to join those of us
searching for higher ground
until it gets boring
or scary
koyaanisqatsi--that's a mighty fine word, and most difficult to work into a conversation. Does it serve the language to any effect other than obscure, specific reference?
Can it be used interchangeably as a noun, verb adverb or adjective?
In following your various dribbles, I come away with the notion that you are a thinking man. Ah, thought: The essence of all which disturbs.
Still like that name--Tainter.
Would be interested to see the finished product of all this, should that ever have cause to become real.
Thought you might enjoy this google search:
sdtfs - Google Search
..........Stiglitz : China May Emerge a Winner From Crisis........
Stiglitz Says China May Emerge a Winner From Crisis (Update1) - Bloomberg.com
..........yesterday I posted Krugman's visit in China , he was clueless , chinese were disappointed pretty much ......on the contrary Stiglitz gets the right point on the issue.........
In following your various dribbles, I come away with the notion that you are a thinking man. Ah, thought: The essence of all which disturbs.
"The logo I sport
is the face of the monkey."
More Great Sage Equal to Heaven than Great Sage.
mmckinl (profile) wrote on Wed, 5/13/2009 - 4:54 am
Too late for small government ....
society has become too complex ...
Too late for society.
Government has become too complex.
"“China’s government has taken very rapid action to address the crisis,” Stiglitz said at a forum in Beijing today. High savings rates may help Asian economies “weather the financial crisis,” he said. "
What?!?! That was not a savings glut after all? Hoocoodanode? Economists really are good at predicting the weather of yesterday.
"on the contrary Stiglitz gets the right point on the issue........."
Jay D,
Why,exactly? He told the Chinese what they wanted to hear?
I am curious though about the demographics...the gap of male to female in the upcoming cohorts....isn't this inherently destabilizing for China,with millions of Chinese young men unable to find a wife, with no prospects of a family, excluding the 10%or so who are probably homosexual?
face of a monkey as logo
I have no response to that.
RE: China and the imbalance of the sexes
It is in the world's best interests to see to the success of China in developing a prosperous middle class. Keep them consuming and none will want to turn toward the very real possibility of dying for the state. As for the pressure of too many men v women, well there always has been and always will be a most excellent prostitution industry. In fact, when I come back, I hope to come back as a woman. I'm confident that my next life will be ever more prosperous as a result.
Let's get them all some new appliances, a recent vintage, low mileage auto, some naugahide furniture and well stocked groceries.
Kalifornia is toast.
.......@fried......I am not quite sure that's what exactly Chinese wanted to hear or not......Stiglitz's statements are based on data , more reliable than Krugman .....esp. he confessed that he did not know much about China and east asian economies yesterday ......you made me laugh , thanx anyway.......
The problem with the one world currency argument is that its proponents always assert the existence of a "world community". No such community exists! The world is comprised of warring factions led by relatively primitive compulsions... different nations always trying to get a leg up on their competitor. Under such a regime, a globally equitable, single-planetary currency for international as well as intranational trade cannot exist.
Executive pay: The Obama administration reportedly is considering a major revamp of executive pay practices at financial firms that would apply to companies that haven't received government bailout funds. The Wall Street Journal and New York Times both said the administration has begun serious talks about the matter.
......I'm sure this idea will go over well. The things that irk the man will be his undoing. It's a shame.
Read the Bloomberg China link. Seems to me it's all headline and no Stiglitz.
BSR writes: "......I'm sure this idea will go over well."
Like a turd in a punch bowl.
...............a lot of china commentators nowadays.........people are pretty uncomfortable with new master with new rules ....................
"Cargo Ships Treading Water Off Singapore, Waiting for Work"
Cargo Ships Treading Water Off Singapore, Waiting for Work - NY Times
"China’s Factory Output Grows Less-Than-Estimated 7.3%"
China’s Factory Output Grows Less-Than-Estimated 7.3% (Update3) - Bloomberg.com
U.S. April retail sales fall 0.4%
8:30am Today
U.S. April import prices up 1.6% vs 1% expected
8:30am Today
Another "ouch" (sales & prices)
The FedGov has created "one giant juggling act", continually picking up the latest two or three things that hit the floor . . . . .
"......now the stock market plunge has wiped out billions of dollars from already underfunded [pension] plans. The growing obligations raise the specter of higher taxes, diminished services, or even another round of costly federal bailouts." New Jersey makes a compelling case study."
New Jersey's public pension bomb - May. 12, 2009
Apologies for the bluntness, Jay.D.. , it wasn't directed your way.
Stiglitz is often extremely interesting, so I was looking forward to getting his views at first hand. No such luck.
U.S. retail sales down 10.1% in past year. Ouch! That has got to hurt!
U.S. April import prices up 1.6% vs 1% expected?
devaluation...
Excluding the 0.2% increase in autos, retail sales fell 0.5%. This is the eighth decline in the past 10 months.
.....Have you noticed that a lot of the YOY figures we receive now are from already previously decreased years due to the length of the this "recession"?
Basel,
Naw, they're pretty sure were a bunch of turnips.
Looks like somebody sprayed the green shoots.
"It's almost as if someone engineered a stock-market rally to entice private investors to fund the banks rather than taxpayers. Can you see why I believe this is a sucker's rally? The stock market still has big hurdles to clear. You can have a jobless recovery, but you can't have a profitless recovery."
Was It a Sucker's Rally?
BSR, yeah, I noticed that too...
According to advance retail sales data, April total retail sales decreased 0.4%, and decreased 0.5% when excluding autos. The April figures failed to meet economists' expectations; the consensus forecast falled for total sales to be flat and sales excluding autos to increase 0.2%. Still, while sales turned lower, their decline isn't as sharp as what was seen in March, when total sales slid 1.3%, and sales less autos declined 1.2%.
Briefing.com: Stock Market Update
So, since it did not decline as much, then this is a good thing, right? Right?
...crickets chirping...
Fed Views Jump in Yields as Sign of Better Outlook (Update1)
By Scott Lanman and Steve Matthews
May 13 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve considers the recent jump in Treasury yields more as a reflection of a better economic outlook than a signal it needs to step up purchases of U.S. government debt, according to central bank officials who declined to be identified.
It’s too early to judge the effectiveness of the Fed’s $300 billion plan to buy Treasuries even after 10-year yields climbed 0.65 percentage point since the initiative began in March, the officials said. They added that the goal is to stimulate private lending, rather than to target government-bond rates.
The Fed officials’ stance contradicts the view of firms including BlackRock Inc. that have predicted the rise in yields will prompt the central bank to announce an increase in the size of the program as soon as next month.
“It would be very different if the economy still appeared to be in freefall and yields were backing up, but it’s not,” said John Ryding, founder of RDQ Economics LLC in New York and a former Fed researcher. Increasing Treasury purchases would “fight against what is in my opinion a recovery signal, or a signal that the recession is drawing to a close.”
Fed Views Jump in Yields as Sign of Better Outlook (Update1) - Bloomberg.com
Retail sales: Actual -0.4%, consensus 0.0%, prior --1.3% (revised from -1.3%)
Retail sales ex-auto: Actual -0.5%, consensus 0.2%, prior -1.2% (revised from -1.0%)
Export prices ex-ag: Actual 0.3, prior 0.1%
Import prices ex-oil: Acctual -0.4%, prior -0.6%
Briefing.com: Bond Market Update
Hey! Who trampled the green shoots??
I think the industrial production number on Friday will also be worse than expected, rail traffic points to another big drop.
Well, it was euphoric while it lasted...
this is absolutely hilarious. Q1 numbers were met on the basis of massive labor costs. Hoocoodanode?
Retail Sales in U.S. Unexpectedly Drop as Unemployment Cuts Into Purchases
......Things are just getting "worser", slower......
"dum luk wrote on Wed, 5/13/2009 - 8:30 am U.S. April retail sales fall 0.4%"
I guess Meredith was right. (Smart and hawt; always a nice combo.)
Just keeping ya company, dum luk.
ETA: man I can sure hit a dead thread. (Must. Learn. To use. F5)
Isn't the Fed is responsible for promoting a healthy economy which includes job growth? But when a right wing government takes over and promotes job destruction and lower wages, that's OK! It means higher corporate earnings . When a democratic administration wants to control exploding corporate bonuses, those that benefited most complain about "socialism". Workers don't complain, they are too busy trying to find or keep their jobs.
ghost, I have had four friends move, three to asia(macao, beijing, shanghai, one to Chile) in the last year or two to either work or set us new businesses. They claim that they actually get to keep most of what they earn. What will they think of next.
"The problem with the one world currency argument is that its proponents always assert the existence of a "world community". No such community exists!"
Never said it exists. Some ideas make it around the world faster than daylight. The first person who proposed that everyone would be better off if we stopped raiding each other's farms and burning their crops was told the same thing. "Those people only understand force..."