Will the Real Culprits of Euro Doom Stand Up?
The Telegraph has carried an article entitled "The Great Euro Swindle" by Peter Oborne and Frances Weaver who have written a book on the subject (Guilty Men) from which the article is excerpted. They ask a good question, which is why those who have backed the unraveling euro – especially Europe's and Britain's leaders – are not exposed to more criticism and professional and personal ramifications from what has occurred.
One might think, given the extent of the disaster and the chaos it is causing, that there would more of an outcry to examine who was really behind the thing. In fact, as the euro and perhaps the EU continue to crumble, there will be attempts made to hold people accountable. But I will state for the record that these attempts will not be complete. Somebody, or perhaps several, will "take the fall" for everyone else. Oborne and Weaver, despite their evident sincerity, are seemingly feeding into this meme.
Unfortunately, from what I can tell, as furious as they apparently are, they are not willing to extend the blame to those who truly need to be held accountable. Instead, they are focused on what might be termed the "enablers" – those who carried out EU and euro policies and backed them but were not responsible for the concept itself, or its realization.
This is an old game. The Anglosphere power elite – a group of impossibly wealthy families that controls the world's central banks – is evidently and obviously responsible for much of what has gone wrong. But as the Euro project continues its decline, we will no doubt find blame is being laid elsewhere ... on highly placed functionaries. Of course, it's important, nonetheless, and a contribution to how things work. So let's review them before returning to our main thesis.
The first example is the Financial Times. Oborne and Weaver state that something went wrong with this prestigious mainstream newspaper about 25 years ago when it was captured by a "clique of left-wing journalists." As a result, the FT "has been wrong on every single major economic judgment over the past quarter century."
The biggest error was the support of the EU project itself, support that Oborne and Weaver call "religious." They cite the paper's Lex column, circa January 2001, as an example of how wrongheaded the paper could be. "With Greece now trading in euros, few will mourn the death of the drachma. Membership of the eurozone offers the prospect of long-term economic stability."
The paper also attacked euro-skeptics directly, claiming that those who differed with the paper were "immature." When the euro and the EU began to become undone in 2008, and countries like Ireland were suddenly exposed as failing, the FT continued its defense of the union. "European monetary union is a bumble bee that has taken flight," asserted the newspaper's leader column. "However improbable the celestial design, it has succeeded in real life."
What's the verdict, according to Oborne and Weaver? "For a paper with pretensions to authority in financial matters, its coverage of the single currency can be regarded as nothing short of a disaster."
Then there's the high-profile lobbying group, the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), the mission of which is to help create and sustain the conditions in which businesses in the United Kingdom can compete and prosper for the benefit of all.
The CBI claims to represent a broad cross-section of businesses. But according to the article, "by the mid-1990s a small clique of large corporations were firmly in control, and they had the director general they wanted in Adair (now Lord) Turner, later to become chairman of the disastrous Financial Services Authority (FSA). [This clique] claimed an overwhelming majority of British businessmen backed the single currency – a vital propaganda tool for pro-euro campaigners."
The CBI lobbied hard for Britain to join the single currency, even though it soon became obvious that most of its smaller, entrepreneurial business members were opposed to the CBI's position on the euro. Apparently, not representing the majority of its members on the EU issue did not deter the CBI leadership.
The BBC, England's "progressive" monopoly media, is perhaps the largest culprit in Oborne and Weaver's view. "The BBC betrayed its charter commitment and became a partisan player in a great national debate – all the more insidious because of its pretence at neutrality. For example, in the nine weeks leading to July 21, 2000, when the argument over the euro was at its height, the Today programme featured 121 speakers on the topic. Some 87 were pro-euro compared with 34 who were anti. BBC broadcasters tended to present the pro-euro position itself as centre ground, thus defining even moderately Eurosceptic voices as extreme." Here's some more:
As Rod Liddle, then editor of the Radio 4's Today programme, said: "The whole ethos of the BBC and all the staff was that Eurosceptics were xenophobes." He recalls one meeting with a senior BBC figure over Eurosceptic complaints of bias. "Rod, the thing you have to understand is these people are mad. They are mad."
In truth the Eurosceptics were only too sane. Margaret Thatcher, John Redwood, David Owen, William Hague and Bill Cash were mocked. But they grasped the problems the euro would bring. Speaking in the House of Commons in 1936, Winston Churchill said: "The use of recriminating about the past is to enforce effective action at the present."
So what should we learn from the argument over the euro? First, we should cherish that British trait, eccentricity. Study of the public discourse at the height of the euro debate shows how often pro-euro propagandists isolated their critics by labelling them cranks. Take Observer columnist Andrew Rawnsley's column on January 31, 1999: "On the pro-euro side, a grand coalition of business, the unions and the substantial, sane, front rank political figures. On the other side, a menagerie of has-beens, never-havebeens and loony tunes."
Of course, given what's going on with the euro and the EU these days, the loony-tunes all seem to be located in Brussels, fighting a never-ending battle to save the euro from a default that is seemingly inevitable. In fact, the air of unreality is such that top euro-leaders are apparently moving ahead with a facility to allow Brussels to issue EU-wide euro bonds even though a German constitutional court in a recent ruling has made such issuance doubtful indeed.
All this is interesting but, nonetheless, the people at the very top of this flawed project are again escaping identification. The politicians, media and business leaders that want the EU to succeed are an important part of the mess, but they were not the founders.
Who were? Some have suggested the EU is an outgrowth of some sort of German/Nazi plan, but that doesn't seem very feasible. The Anglosphere elite was very evidently in charge of a post-war world, and the EU would not have come to fruition if the Anglo-American powers-that-be didn't want it to occur.
No, the EU is evidently and obviously a project of the Anglosphere power elite that seeks regional building blocks on the way to a one world government. The central banking economy initiated and implemented by this power elite is responsible for the current economic crisis; but the elite banking families have many enablers including the politicians clustered about Brussels.
If there is to be a movement aimed at holding people responsible for the euro disaster, I would hope for once that it would at least explain more fully how the pyramid of leadership actually works. The people at the very top are responsible for the ongoing economic crisis, just as in the 1930s the central banks they set up crashed the world's economy. At the time, the blame was shifted away from central banks and their controllers and toward the securities industry (Wall Street, etc.).
Now, the same meme shall be played out when it comes to the euro and the EU. Somebody will be made to pay, but it won't be the real elites, the impossibly wealthy central banking families. They never seem to get blamed.
Posted by josejoe on 09/26/11 03:44 PM
no discomfiting works well, dotti. check out the old dictionary.
Posted by mojo on 09/26/11 12:51 PM
This answers my question. So while a wealthier individual/small group can unbalance the cooperative system and have superior focused might (organized force/army), it is not sustainable in the long term due to the cost incurred for lack of cooperation, or outright dissent, by the victims and their supporters.
Posted by rossbcan on 09/26/11 07:19 AM
"I think that sometimes there is no peaceful way that an agreement can be reached."
So, to reach agreement (social consensus, peace, what western civilization once was)...
When confronted with overwhelming power, bear in mind that guns alone are insufficient to maintain power which has economic and subservient (political, terror) support components, without which, power withers and dies.
So, the key is defiance with both economic and political support attrition costs maximized. This is "asymmetrical warfare" and, it works because of the distributed infrastructure, far and wide of power's infrastructure, which is uneconomical to totally defend from ad-hoc, independent forces, united only by a common "servitude complaint", with ever shifting players and alliances (nowhere to strike a critical blow).
Similarly, power needs to lie regarding some sort of illusionary social contract which, if you peacefully defy them, they must either tolerate you or, prove themselves hypocrites and, lose support.
All is well, the grim reaper of "Mathematics of Rule" (reality) is on the job, smiting slavers both economically and, in political currency by the attrition costs (blowback) of their predations:
Click to view link
Posted by amanfromMars on 09/26/11 03:43 AM
Quite so, rossbcan, Houston has a problem which is quickly destroying a corrupt crazy world of fool minnows who thought they were untouchable sharks.
Regarding ... .. "@DB; FYI, Activist Post appears to have been taken down by Google, and, to boot they foolishly relied exclusively on Google for backups, which are also AWOL:
Click to view link " ... .. Posted by rossbcan on 09/24/11 11:35 AM
That is a sign of realisation of the new age sphere of universal influence, rbc ... .. Control Words Control Worlds. And that sort of discriminatory, unilateral action which censors freely and transparently shared opinion and/or actions, makes one an enemy of everyone brainwashed to believe in freedom and democracy and a future which is not carved up for the benefit and pleasure of old school Great Game Players. So for all of its pretensions at being different and smart and force for great good [Do no evil] are Google just puppets which gathers your information to sell out to third parties who are less gifted than they need to be, to try and stay in a dominant position whenever smarter sensitive information and intelligence is being selflessly shared in virtual networks programmed to provide that which is required to purge and cleanse infected toxic and dodgy sub-prime systems of operation ... .. or simply work around them/create a beta parallel system of virtual operation/digital manipulation with novel provision of future seeds and feeds and needs floated into and onto the mad money markets which fuel all fads and rad fab labs with a handle on the future. How IT presents the future without the perversions of the past being included in the scripted global soap, is that which is explosive and catastrophic knowledge and now freely being touted as readily available to any and all with a need for such a service. ... ... digital facility.
If you don't and can't control a flow of thoughts to render to you what is desired, then all monies spent in support of a lost cause and what is presented and not so desired, will be lost and spent on nothing of real value and cause crushing debt which destroys fiat currency banking systems ... ... . as we are all now witnessing around the world on the media shows.
If you have something of merit, server it yourself appears to be the most sensible answer, for then all are reliant on source rather than the hired help [Google in the cited case of Activist Post] hosting and feeding off the source lode/digital nodes.
And this is relevant ... ..
[blockquote]Seems like we were just in time to stop any third party nobbling of sensitive information and emerging novel intellectual property to the Internet via the removal of a database on a hosting server run and owned by the competition/opposition …… Click to view link
The Baywords/Pirate Bay server for the blog Click to view link appears to have given up the ghost, and in such a way does information disappear from public view ….. for private attention if it is a leading authority on sensitive issues …… Click to view link [/blockquote]
The old Power Elite system has a major, and increasingly obvious problem today ... ... It doesn't control thoughts or IT ... ... :-) but all is not lost if they can just find out what and/or whom they need to throw money at for full trilateral control, [Power Elite systems, thoughts and IT] for that is all that is truly necessary. And that is the only way in which they will stay in any way in remote control of Great Game plays, and even that courtesy will be subject to constant revision to determine the need for its inclusion in the future. After all, who needs parasitic passengers as partners.
Posted by dotti on 09/25/11 09:13 PM
I don't know. The way I read it you think the mere THREAT OF VIOLENCE is adequate. My experience is that even if threats work in the beginning, they do not work for long.
I was always told don't present a gun if you are not prepared to fire it.
I guess I'm in sort of the same boat as John. I think that sometimes there is no peaceful way that an agreement can be reached. We all like to think we are peaceful creatures, but some of us are bullies--and some of us have to stand up to them.
That's my two cents worth.
Posted by mojo on 09/25/11 09:11 PM
@DB - "NO COOPERATION? THAT'S WHAT VENDETTAS ARE FOR AND DUELS AND OTHER KINDS OF "PERSUASION". WORKED WELL FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS. THE THREAT OF VIOLENCE CONCENTRATES THE MIND CONSIDERABLY."
The way I see that play out is a far wealthier polluting landowner hires trained guards/security who don't take kindly to townsfolk causing damage. End result is akin to a feudal system of the 'lord' with the largest army being the effective king of the region, or 'might makes right'.
Of course, it would be -ideal- if people behaved themselves and respected each other, but history has shown that certain individuals will take power, and other people will follow them hoping to get perks for being on the 'winning team'.
My own thought is that for there to be a balance the entire cultural landscape and social thought process would have to be different from that seen in western culture.
A culture of followers without a leader invite someone to fill the vacuum. A culture of self-sufficient people practicing libertarian ideas have no vacuum to fill, unless allowed to be deceived and accepting of a central governance.
Posted by John Danforth on 09/25/11 06:51 PM
"Hey ... We've written numerous articles on private justice. it is the only way."
Yes, and as you saw, I understand the principle. Just never saw it presented here that way, I don't think.
"THAT'S WHAT VENDETTAS ARE FOR AND DUELS AND OTHER KINDS OF "PERSUASION". WORKED WELL FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS. THE THREAT OF VIOLENCE CONCENTRATES THE MIND CONSIDERABLY."
When you put it this way, it could be interpreted in more than one way. I'm not saying that you need to restate the formulation every time the subject comes up, nor that I disagree, but ... it looks ... different.
Posted by dotti on 09/25/11 03:46 PM
Thanks for your reply, JOhn.
Yes. I know that GLD is supposed to hold the physical metal--"supposed to" being the operative phrase. If the dollar collapses, the stock market crashes--well, how will anyone collect their gold? That is assuming that they really do have the physical in their hands on site. I have a small amount of money in two Roth accounts. At the time they were set up, I was not aware that one could have physical metals in them. Now I'm not sure how to do it and I haven't taken the time to investigate because it's such a small amount of $$$. But thanks for the advice.
Volker's actions in the early 80's made him sort of a hero to me. Maybe I am wrong, but I thought that inflation was running away and he brought sanity back into the markets. The consumer was already getting squeezed--at least that's my recollection.
RE: I think the prices of gold and silver are likely to rebound, perhaps sharply, so it looks like a blue light special to me for physical accumulation. But I'm usually wrong, so...
It made me smile!!! I consider myself to be such a "contrary indicator" that I actually sold a few shares of GLD to see if my action alone could stem the decline!!! I sold when gold was at approximately $1,685, so we'll watch and see. It's not down much since then.
I'm sitting on Eldorado calls for October, January12 and Jan13. We'll see how that works out. For a while it was looking quite good. Then the past two weeks have been miserable. It's not a lot of money, but it hurts my pride!!! Bad thing about pride--it hurts when it gets bruised!!!
Re: Bottom line though, is that paper money is a con job and an instrument for stealing value out of the underlying economy.
So very true!!! I wish more people would understand that. Still most people think that the Federal Reserve is part of our government. So of course, we have to pay the money back. Somebody important needs to let them know.
Where is Paul Revere when we really need him?
Fiat is the ultimate way of getting something for nothing!
Thanks for your brotherly advice!
Posted by John Danforth on 09/25/11 01:48 PM
Hey, thanks for the mention!
I am actually quite surprised by DB's response (I thought we weren't supposed to advocate that avenue).
The standard minarchist response to the question (defensible or not) would be that in an ideal minarchist universe, property owners negatively affected would be able to use civil litigation to incur costs on polluters sufficient to make them desist or at least buy the other property owners out. In the real world with the way governments are instituted now, there probably aren't any good answers. (Good luck getting any justice in any court.)
In the absence of civil agreement or legal recourse, the response of "If you damage me, I'm going to damage you until you no longer damage me", is not Might Makes Right, it is privately enforced justice. Keeping that response and the ensuing melee within the bounds of justice is probably impossible, though. Your question goes to the root of the anarchist/minarchist quandary (and I'm not qualified to settle it).
Reply from The Daily Bell
Hey ... We've written numerous articles on private justice. it is the only way.
Posted by John Danforth on 09/25/11 01:38 PM
Be careful. GLD and SLV are paper, not metal. Just sayin'. If it's not in your hand...
Here are some nice complications that confuse the issue further;
If someone has the capacity to counterfeit currency in any amount (and they do), ask yourself whether it would be possible for them to manipulate the price of anything including alternatives to that currency, even if only for short-term volatility that would allow them to whipsaw investors while accumulating ever larger piles for themselves. Since the futures markets drive the spot price, and are all paper themselves, consider what you could do with such a power, then consider what it means to the little guy.
OBF's warnings are worth considering. Remember Volker. One time, the Fed actually did try to contract the currency. (Ended up squeezing the consumer, but oh well.) On the other hand, long term, money-printers never stop printing. Predicting how long a trend will last is impossible though, and they might be able to make the currency outlive you.
As the price of gold or silver zoom, the little guy who makes an hourly wage makes a lot less in terms of gold or silver. Since the price is both manipulated and subject to panics and swings, someone who sets their main goal as preserving savings for the future can always look to things that are tangible, will likely have trading value to others in the future, and which have not gone up as quickly. Nickels (google that), firearms, ammo, etc., might be a bargain relative to gold and silver at any given moment.
I know none of that helps. I think the prices of gold and silver are likely to rebound, perhaps sharply, so it looks like a blue light special to me for physical accumulation. But I'm usually wrong, so...
Bottom line though, is that paper money is a con job and an instrument for stealing value out of the underlying economy. It is not suitable for saving value.
Posted by John Danforth on 09/25/11 01:10 PM
Ha! Good to see I'm not the only one with the temptation to torture metaphors. "Love me, love my dog." (Me) - "No."
Posted by dotti on 09/25/11 10:53 AM
First of all, thanks for your thoughtful and thought-provoking reply.
Re: "For now, I ask, if I have $2000, would I be better off to put it into a good rifle and ammo, or into gold? In the short term, after a collapse, or in a transistion, it could take far more than an oz. of gold to purchase that gun and ammo. What about tools? Property with resources? Any items or means of food production? "
i totally agree. At the risk of sounding Buffetesque, I believe: "If I have the last ounce of gold in the world and you have the last bucket of beans, which is more valuable?"
But in a survival situation, you would probably need guns/ammo. then, unless you intended to use those things to steal from others, you would need basic necessities of life: food/water/shelter.
I don't think I could ever cover all the bases. Even though I am learning gardening and have enough land to have a nice garden, I will still have needs I cannot fill for myself. If I get chickens, that would help cover the food bases. But there will always be things I would need to purchase or barter. I think that people who acquire as many pre-1964 dimes (90% silver) as they can reasonably afford would be able--in the event of a currency collapse--to use those dimes to trade for goods needed. Maybe a dime for a dozen eggs. Who knows?
I agree with you that if such a collapse does materialize, it will be difficult to get anyone to give up firearms or ammunition. If things get that bad, guns/ammo will be primary needs for survival--regardless of what other items you have/don't have.
I don't agree that the monetary crisis is fabricated; although I do believe it was created, perhaps intentionally. I say not fabricated because I think it is a real crisis. I think that those who created it (perhaps intentionally) may have lost control of it--or not. There is too much momentum now to head it off.
However, I am--unfortunately--of the opinion tbat the very likely end result will be--in any event--greater power/riches for the PE.
As appealing as a "Bastille Day" sounds--only partially in jest!--I don't think anything of the sort will happen. They are just too powerful.
God can bring them down--but that will be in His timing, not ours.
Thanks much for your reply. Lots of stuff to think about.
Posted by mojo on 09/25/11 10:49 AM
Greetings from Canada!
I've been reading The Daily Bell since spring of this year and saving insightful articles for archiving since the summer. Many times the comments and discussions have been just as, if not more, insightful and thought-provoking than the writing they reply to.
My thanks goes out to Anthony Wile, the DB Elves, Gnomes, and other creatures that make The Daily Bell an excellent resource for alternate perspectives and analysis of events.
Special mention goes out to the following posters: rossbcan (We spoke via phone briefly), John Danforth, dotti, Bischoff, and a number of other posters who contribute their analysis and dialogue to the site.
Some of my contributions will be the alternate views and perspectives on various subjects. In prior comment reading there have been evidence cited and conclusions drawn when meaningful contradictory information existed. The 'coso artifact' cited some months ago is such an example.
I find the libertarian ideas on this website to be of great interest, but am still on the fence as regards various 'what ifs' and practical applications. What options exist for a town/group/person downwind/downriver of a factory or group producing pollution that refuses to change its ways or partake in talks or private legal system? Does it still boil down to 'might makes right'? Does the limited role of government to 'protect rights' include minor harm that is spread over a long period of time? Or is the solution to change locations for the impacted people?
As an aside, the user 'amanfrommars' was first seen on Click to view link back around 2005-2006. It was speculated to be a weak AI or algorithm that takes in the surrounding text and spits out a response.
Efforts to derive intelligent meaning from the posts are better spent listening to white noise. You will see numerous references to 'IT' (information technology) and artificial intelligence in its posts; the former of which was derived from TheRegister (A tech website).
I have also come across amanfrommars's blog site that traces back to a private individual in the Netherlands. Just FYI.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Ha! So AManfromMars is actually a digital facility.
Thanks for writing. Some suggestions ...
What options exist for a town/group/person downwind/downriver of a factory or group producing pollution that refuses to change its ways or partake in talks or private legal system? PRIVATE "CLAN" OR "TRIBAL" JUSTICE IS THE ANSWER. NO COOPERATION? THAT'S WHAT VENDETTAS ARE FOR AND DUELS AND OTHER KINDS OF "PERSUASION". WORKED WELL FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS. THE THREAT OF VIOLENCE CONCENTRATES THE MIND CONSIDERABLY.
Does it still boil down to 'might makes right'? ONLY IF THERE IS NO "GIVE" FROM THE OTHER SIDE.
Does the limited role of government to 'protect rights' include minor harm that is spread over a long period of time? Or is the solution to change locations for the impacted people? LIMITED GOVERNMENT, UNLESS AT A VERY LOCAL AND CONTROLLABLE LEVEL, ALWAYS SEEMS TO TURN INTO TOTALITARIANISM AT SOME POINT. PERHAPS LIMITED GOVERNMENT IS AN OXYMORON.
Posted by onebornfreeatyahoo on 09/25/11 10:43 AM
The fortunate [or unfortunate, depending on how you look at it], truth is that nobody can reliably, consistently predict future economic scenarios, [inflation, hyper-inflation, recession, deflation etc.]
So although I personally lean towards a possible real deflation and deflationary depression merely on instinct/gut feeling [deflation defined as a situation where the worldwide demand to hold US $'s and US treasury debt consistently outstrips the available supply of US $'s], I know that those predicting inflation , or even the imminent return of "good times" , have just as much chance being right, and that my own instincts could be way, way off track.
Of course, just like myself, they have as much chance of being wrong also :-) .
One thing's for sure- people who rely on charts that purport to show what happened before - and therefor what happens next [eg Elliot Wave theorists, Click to view link
,Kondratieff Wave theorists , Click to view link
, etc. etc., ] are no better at predicting the economic future than "economists", "investment advisors" , "portfolio managers" or your average tea leaf reader.
In light of the fundamental principles of human action, the belief that one can successfully and consistently predict an economic future based on "expert" interpretation of arbitrary figures, points and lines drawn on a chart or graph that supposedly represent the economic past is, to put it mildly, deeply flawed.
In my opinion, savings and investment wisdom starts from the assumption that no-one can reliably predict future economic events, and builds from that assumption. See: Click to view link
Posted by Dave Jr on 09/25/11 10:21 AM
I am struggling with this one, and wouldn't pretend to know what is going to happen or advocate what anyone else should do. A lot of things can happen. The whole system could come crashing down and a free market gold standard return. Government could pull through with a highly inflated fiat. A world wide manipulated gold standard could emerge.
Don't get me wrong, gold as a currency is superior to fiat, no contest. But to me, gold may or may not be the best way to preserve wealth.
All I am saying is that the current gold price has been driven up by fear of an uncertain future created by an irrational, manipulative elite. The question is, what will replace a collapsed government, that took its unsustainable fiat down with it? The value of gold could come down as everyone wants to exchange it for daily necessities.
For now, I ask, if I have $2000, would I be better off to put it into a good rifle and ammo, or into gold? In the short term, after a collapse, or in a transistion, it could take far more than an oz. of gold to purchase that gun and ammo. What about tools? Property with resources? Any items or means of food production?
I believe the real crises, the gutting of the middle class and free markets started a long time ago. It has been a long, slow and quiet process. The monetary crises is fabricated. The real crises is the fact that government regulation is still crushing what little is left of a free market. A fabricated crises will always exist in government, banking or the financial houses. As if not having enough to steal is a crises.
Deflation is what naturally occurs as people become more competitive or more efficient either by means of their labor or innovation or automation, but there is a bottom that is rooted in human labor and energy units. For instance, how much of your time and energy are you willing to give up for this item or that?
All prices are relative and would seek a degree of stability if it weren't for market manipulations. The feds say they want a steady 2-3% inflation in their fiat. I think they want a whole lot more. I think they use their fiat to cause default, forclousure and sell off. Their monetary crises benefits them, but I think they overestimate what they will be able to accomplish with it.
But it is anyones call. Each must do what is right for them.
Posted by alexsemen on 09/25/11 09:16 AM
Tank you Anthony Wile ! Great , all is great !
I ask my self sometime : why and how are you such a good one !!??
"European monetary union is a bumble bee that has taken flight," (FT)
Alex: of course the EU/Euro is a bumble bee, because it is one, no doubt, it's doing only noise: big noise, creasy noise, irritating, damaging noise and some kind of spectacular tricky acrobatic. Nothing more , nothing less !
The FT is too a bumble bee, because their excuses that they were kept prisoners of pretended and never was, left bull- s--t is just one absolutely moron irresponsible childish invented fancy and fantasy "excuses". To show irresponsibility as excuse , it is to blame your self as irresponsible and that with premeditation.
It is too much for me as an old immature man .
But anyhow I was right all from 20 years ago ! But to my surprise I was right. Now it is yours time DB to surprise me with exquisite( Nec plus ultra) perfect good ( immature !!!) idea and analysis
EU and Euro it is a gradomaniac fake of sick minded people !
Posted by dotti on 09/25/11 09:00 AM
I agree. I don't watch much of that stuff on TV, but I personally have not seen Herman Cain introduced as anything other than a private businessman.
With what we know here at DB, the whole pizza business thing could just be a setup to make him look appealing.
Posted by cosmos on 09/25/11 08:37 AM
"They never seem to get blamed", of course not, it's one of the fringe benefits of owning the media (Fox included). Somebody needs to tell the people of Florida that their newest savior Herman Cain was the Fed Chairman of the Kansas City branch of the Federal Reserve Bank all through the 1990's.
How about if Tim Geithner ran for president as a former CEO of a pizza parlor? These elites never get blamed because the voters won't follow the money. When did we as a nation forget that when there is a crime committed, "Follow the money" first and foremost always, "Follow the money"?
Posted by dotti on 09/25/11 08:34 AM
S/B Discomforting. That spelling error made me smile.
Posted by dotti on 09/25/11 08:30 AM
I am reassured by your post. Because of posts by delwyn, I started reading some Precter's Guide to Understanding Deflation.
My style is to always re-evaluate my views in response to new information, which is not always a good thing.
Anyway. It seemed very logical that as debt expands--credit is extended--a bubble forms and confidence is rampant. People purchase and consume; businesses expand, etc. Consequently, when the confidence erodes, borrowing slows down, the economy itself slows, money is removed from the economy--not purposefully, but as a natural outcome of loss of confidence.
Precter cited two previous great deflations/depressions--one from the early 1800s and the other the always-referenced Great Depression.
I puzzled as to why this time would be different--especially since I cast aspersions at those who said "This time is different" about the dotcom bubble. I did not come up with an "answer" per se, but something to consider. In the two previous examples, money was real money; this time we are dealing with fiat. We know that there is no limit to the amount of fiat that can be created--if they run out of paper and ink, they can continue to create it electronically.
I tried to continue that line of logic to test it out, but got stymied.
Meme, maybe you or someone else here can examine Precter's theory and tell me definitively why this time is different.
I turned down an extremely low-ball offer on my property that I'm trying to sell, and it is discomfiting to think that in the future that could look like a really good deal that i turned down.
Of course, none of us knows the future, but being able to make an educated guess is one of the reasons I hang out here.
I agree with you about the bubble in FRNs and I would stretch it across all paper. Seems the paper markets in gold and silver dwarf the physical market and I keep hearing rumors that soon there will be a problem with delivery--but I've heard that for years and years.
Sorry, guys, if I'm rambling. First post of the morning! Coffee will soon take effect--hopefully! And hopefully someone will keep this thread alive.
Reply from The Daily Bell
We don't believe much in such analysis. You can forecast cycles sometimes but rarely timing.