Recent comments by RE

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

I'm not so sure it's still the path of least resistance. Force is potentially a lot more oppressive, cheaper and more effective, a lot more deadly, and a lot easier to conceal from public spectacle. An overwhelming barbarian horde wouldn't get far against a drone army and professional soldiers armed with assault weapons.

I agree but it is extremely difficult to channel deep anger into a non-violent tactic.

Firemane wrote:

IMO - the rioting - while perhaps understandable (not condonable) - is ultimately self-defeating and only serves to encourage those in power to double down.

Peaceful protests leading to significant change are a rare and recent tactic that requires incredibly strong leadership.

Most big changes in history involved violence.

Belmont wrote:

These are not protestors. These are rioters. Let's not confuse

Protestors have an investment in society, rioters have lost theirs or never had any.

I've never seen rich folks riot in any country.

merchants of fear wrote:

Let's say a link doesn't work on HCN from someone posting it, just chuck all of HCN?

Post says:

Finally, for the first time EVER in Swiss history, 2 banks have gone bankrupt in Switzerland

Reality:

Numbers of bank bankruptcies per year:
2004 5
2005 13
2006 33
2007 62

merchants of fear wrote:

All the rest of the links did seem to work but yeah last two didn't.

He clearly lied egregiously about bankruptcies. Why listen at all?

sm_landlord wrote:

I heard that outfits like Societe Generale are in OK shape, and should do well once the economy bottoms in Europe.

I'm worried that Europe is years away from a bottom.

Pigged merchants of fear wrote:

Finally, for the first time EVER in Swiss history, 2 banks have gone bankrupt in Switzerland:

Even more.

http://www.finma.ch/archiv/ebk/e/aktuell/20080128/20080128_e.pdf

Numbers of bank bankruptcies per year:
2004 5
2005 13
2006 33
2007 62
.

merchants of fear wrote:

Finally, for the first time EVER in Swiss history, 2 banks have gone bankrupt in Switzerland:

Even more.

http://www.finma.ch/archiv/ebk/e/aktuell/20080128/20080128_e.pdf

Numbers of bank bankruptcies per year:
2004 5
2005 13
2006 33
2007 62
.

merchants of fear wrote:

Finally, for the first time EVER in Swiss history, 2 banks have gone bankrupt in Switzerland:

BS

Erinnerung an Bankenpleite - Schweiz aktuell - TV - SRF Player - Schweizer Radio und Fernsehen

sm_landlord wrote:

Well, as far as I know, there is no way to create a virtual world without physical inputs, at least of energy.

I contend that the more we move to virtual worlds we will actually use less energy.

sm_landlord wrote:

"Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist."

Why does the growth of virtual worlds necessarily involve finite resources?

sm_landlord wrote:

It's surprising because there is very little content. Pretty picture, but not much to watch.

I run my desktop monitor at 2560*1440. Well worth it.

JP wrote:

[I could talk about this stuff all day. In fact, I used to about 15 years ago. It took a decade to recover.]

In the early 2000s I setup Walmart's first VoIP implementation using Cisco CallManager.

sm_landlord wrote:

I imagine that the codecs at the Telco COs are high-quality units.

The device has to support the codec. I prefer G.711.

Here are the common ones.

Voip Think - Codecs : g711, g729, iLBC, gsm

Outsider wrote:

When it leaves the house, doesn't it travel via the telephone poles?

Your line obtains dial-tone from a wire center. From the wire center the call travels via IP.

edit: Quality depends on the CODEC used.

Outsider wrote:

When it leaves the house, doesn't it travel via the telephone poles?

Your line obtains dial-tone from a wire center. From the wire center the call travels via IP.

Outsider wrote:

Plus, I don't like the quality of VOIP.

Even your land line call uses VOIP as soon as it leaves the house.

Outsider wrote:

Yeah, I don't have one, spouse does. But when it replaces a landline, it can be cheaper. My landline is currently $75/mo. (unlimited long distance). The smart phone is $60/mo. I don't want to give up the landline tho.

If you want a land line use the cheapest one and use Google Voice for free long-distance calls.

Rajesh wrote:

If the bank provides $10.0 million in treasuries as collateral, the Reserve Bank will lend $9.99 million. The bank gets back its collateral when they pay back the $9.99 plus accrued interest.

Thanks.

Rajesh wrote:

It's just a haircut on the value of the collateral. The banks don't pay the 1%.

Don't they have to pay back 100% of the loan?

Actually, even treasuries incur an upfront penalty of 1% in addition to interest at the discount window.

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

Declare yourself a bank holding company seems to be the first step.

The discount window is an expensive place to borrow unless the borrower/bank
sits on treasuries or term deposits as collateral.

Why borrow there unless you are in trouble?

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

The day I realized you could borrow a few billion at the discount window instead of relying on a series of $400 payday loans at 250% interest...

I realize that they can exchange a dodgy asset at a penalty but how do you borrow at the discount window?

sm_landlord wrote:

I thought the mountains of old tires burned 24x7x365?

I spent a lot of time in Detroit on business. Great music town. I loved it.

Whiskey wrote:

You can't manage a trillion dollar economy with crude policies such as DROP ALL DEBT NOW!!! If you are concerned about debt, the sane course is to roll it off gradually and at more favorable interest rates, possibly increasing the impact through higher taxes. Based on the time series of debt to GDP, that is precisely what happened.

Exactly.

Rob Dawg wrote:

Wiemar Germany

Weimar.

BTW Germany defaulted.

poicv2.0 wrote:

Iceland 2009?

No.

Activation on 17 November 2008 of a $5.1bn sovereign debt package (of which $2.1bn came from IMF and the remaining $3.0bn from a group of Nordic countries) – to help finance budget deficits and the creation of domestic banks.

arthur_dent wrote:

Debt is only a concern relative to income. Conveniently the chart stopped in 1970, very near the closing of the gold window, the end of the US trade surplus and our rising debt to gdp ratio, which now stands close to 100%(depends a bit on whose counting), about 270% higher from where the chart stops..

Is 1980 more convenient?

ImageShack - U.S. Post War DebtThru1980.png

Can you point to a time when debt overhang was addressed successfully without more debt?

One of my favorites. "You can't heal a debt problem with more debt".

ImageShack - U.S. Post War Debt.png

One of my favorites. "You can't heal a debt problem with more debt".

ImageShack - U.S. Post War Debt.png

poicv2.0 wrote:

What would inflation rates in China have been if they weren't pegging the Yuan to the USD?

Difficult to say without actually floating.

One thing is pretty clear, the dollar value of oil was inflated by the China story. A significantly appreciated Yuan would have slowed China much earlier.

NateTG wrote:

And we keep exporting inflation to China...

Not really.

China Inflation Rate | 1986-2014 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast

Comrade Scott wrote:

Yeah, but what form does that take?

That will be a permanent future policy issue IMO as ever fewer humans qualify for reasonably paying jobs.

Wilberforce wrote:

anywhoo, the KEY (i.e. only) measure of inflation is wages...

With ever increasing levels of automation/robotics, redistribution better become a widely acceptable income source.

poicv2.0 wrote:

Actually he makes many different quips. That's why they're called quips. You just seem to be zeroing in on certain one's that run counter to your ideology

So assertions packaged as quips are not assertions?

Also, asking for a scenario to validate an assertion is a statement of ideology? Interesting...

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

Nearly as pitiful as attempting to carry a non-argument from over 24 hours ago into this thread. And at least as valuable.

You make the same point several times a day, day after day.

Why not actually complete your scenario. I promise that you will be surprised by what you learn.

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

bless your heart.

So empty but opinionated quips are valuable? Pitiful.

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

:moose: Hey, Rocky, watch me turn this bag of dawgsh!t into a bag of dollar bills!

Did you do an update of your scenario not using frat dollars? Should be trivial, no?

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

:moose: Hey, Rocky, watch me turn this bag of dawgsh!t into a bag of dollar bills!

Did you do an update of your scenario not using frat dollars? Should be trivial, no?

Rickkk wrote:

Ferguson Area Gun Store Sees 700 Percent Spike In Sales Ahead Of Jury Verdict

Darren Wilson's radio calls show fatal encounter was brief : stltoday.com

If his smartphone’s clock, or Twitter’s, agreed with the clock on dispatch records, Brown was killed less than 61 seconds after the dispatcher acknowledged that Wilson had stopped two men.

josap wrote:

Sure, it's real.
And I pump my own gas and to the store myself. And the price of pencils goes up, but fees for property management does not.

Which part of the economy then is not real?

josap wrote:

People who pump their own gas and buy their own food at the store.

So when your S-Corp buys a pencil that is not real?

Cinco-X wrote:

We get richer riding this merry-go-round, but the money never touches the real economy.

I am confused. What is the definition of this "real economy"?

Seems a populist/political construct to me.

Mike_PNW wrote:

so in a situation where you have a phone which costs $200 to assemble (overseas..but made up of a combo of foreign and domestic parts)..and sold for $600 in the US..what would the net contribution to GDP be?? $200, $400 or $600?? Would it be different if that phone was sold (retail) in China??

Assuming the importer values the purchased import item @ $200 and sells it for $600 then it would be $400.

Mike_PNW wrote:

Imports are a deduction from GDP I believe...does a freighter full of I phones arriving in LA reduce GDP??

Imports do not lower GDP. The accounting identity subtracts imports because C, I, and G include domestic expenditures on foreign goods, and GDP is the value of domestic production.