2015 And EU Future Economic Predictions
- Thread starter Joseph C.
- Start date
I don't buy any of it. It's all just too nice, neat and comforting. We all want to hear everything will be ok in the future and the future he's selling is all advantages and disadvantages.
I also don't think the invention of the 3D printer means I'll be making my car at home in 10 year's time and more than the invention of the lathe meant I made my own door knobs.
I also don't think the invention of the 3D printer means I'll be making my car at home in 10 year's time and more than the invention of the lathe meant I made my own door knobs.
He has a scatter-gun approach. Hit everything and some of it will be on target. He's not wrong about car ownership, nor the cost of energy production and storage.
The 3-D printing is difficult to predict. He will be correct if we have a printer that can produce objects from a whole load of different materials. I just foresee that as being a very difficult problem to solve.
The 3-D printing is difficult to predict. He will be correct if we have a printer that can produce objects from a whole load of different materials. I just foresee that as being a very difficult problem to solve.
Today's bit of book learning: "generational accounting" to assess the sustainability of current economic policy by calculating the debt/income of the next generation. Most countries have a projected future shortfall (thing like pension and healthcare funding gaps) exacerbated by the aging population in the West (increased "dependency ratio" [working taxpayers to children and pensioners]). The solution? Migrant workers, who force down unskilled labour wages but are, apparently, overall good for an economy.
The idea is that it's easy for politicians to tax future generations as the unborn don't vote. Reductions in pension or other social securities places the burden on those who ran up the current debt. Borrowing instead places the burden on those who didn't. Apparently this highlights an anomaly in voting behaviour in the population: young people tend to vote labour, who tend to increase pensions (funded by borrowing), pensioners tend to vote conservative, who tend to reduce pensions (to reduce borrowing). If voters were rational in this sense they would vote the other way.
The idea is that it's easy for politicians to tax future generations as the unborn don't vote. Reductions in pension or other social securities places the burden on those who ran up the current debt. Borrowing instead places the burden on those who didn't. Apparently this highlights an anomaly in voting behaviour in the population: young people tend to vote labour, who tend to increase pensions (funded by borrowing), pensioners tend to vote conservative, who tend to reduce pensions (to reduce borrowing). If voters were rational in this sense they would vote the other way.
arkmundi
10 MW
OpEdNews 5/21/2015 The Coming Crash By Mike Krauss
Bold highlight added for emphasis of what irks me most. A reminder of the hierarchy which has the extreme wealthy on top and ALL government underneath and the 99% of the rest of us crushed below that.
That book I'm reading claimed the U.S. Federal Reserve's actions during the Great Depression were contrary to the economy's needs as well as common sense and greatly worsened the recession. More recent examples do make me wonder whose interests, exactly, they serve. I'm sure similar charges could be levelled at central economic institutions in many of our countries.
It is a convincing argument: that the "quantitative easing" in the U.S. did nothing to help, only to store-up and worsen the existing problems, and that once stopped there would be another crash, which would invariably take much of the rest of the world with, dependent as we all are on the availability of U.S. capital. I'm not sure if the huge unfunded pension and healthcare liabilities in the U.S. will contribute to this, or whether they would only come into play further down the road?
I hope it doesn't happen, but I fear it might. The UK at least still has, I think, a bubble in the property market. It's being sustain by cheap lending due to record-low interest rates apparently resulting from all the money that has been injected into the banking system.
I suppose the whole system is only a house of cards at the best of times.
It is a convincing argument: that the "quantitative easing" in the U.S. did nothing to help, only to store-up and worsen the existing problems, and that once stopped there would be another crash, which would invariably take much of the rest of the world with, dependent as we all are on the availability of U.S. capital. I'm not sure if the huge unfunded pension and healthcare liabilities in the U.S. will contribute to this, or whether they would only come into play further down the road?
I hope it doesn't happen, but I fear it might. The UK at least still has, I think, a bubble in the property market. It's being sustain by cheap lending due to record-low interest rates apparently resulting from all the money that has been injected into the banking system.
I suppose the whole system is only a house of cards at the best of times.
dnmun
1 PW
no it is not. in a way we were lucky that ben bernanke was head of the federal reserve and had published many authoritative papers on the destructive effects of the previous mistakes during the great depression in the 1930's.
there was no reason for the recession in 2008 to be so severe except for the actions of congress that allowed them to grandstand on this public excoriation of how they would not bail out wall street as they liked to say because it sells so many papers to the illiterates. the stock market itself did not collapse until congress refused to pass the TARP legislation when it was first voted on and they did not pass it until after the stock market collapsed and many many people lost all of their life savings in the collapse.
then they finally passed the TARP and the markets recovered.
there was no reason for Lehman brothers to be forced into bankruptcy just because none of the other banks would buy them as BAC had bot up bear stearns. bernanke begged george bush to allow him to take lehman into the federal reserve to unwind the credit swaps over time so the commercial paper markets would not be destroyed but george bush decided that he would make an example of lehman.
his secretary of the treasury hank paulson was a lifelong enemy of fuld and hated him enuff to go along with bush even though he knew what bernanke wanted to do would be best for the country. lehman did not have to forced into bankruptcy, and it's collateral obligations could have been unwound over time without the huge $6 billion in losses forced on the economy because of it.
the guy who started this thread does not understand anything about how the world's economy works and just has simple stupid solutions which all involve how everyone in banking is a corrupt and how his economic theories of whatever is superior to the way the world has evolved as a market economy over the last 100 years.
there was no reason for the recession in 2008 to be so severe except for the actions of congress that allowed them to grandstand on this public excoriation of how they would not bail out wall street as they liked to say because it sells so many papers to the illiterates. the stock market itself did not collapse until congress refused to pass the TARP legislation when it was first voted on and they did not pass it until after the stock market collapsed and many many people lost all of their life savings in the collapse.
then they finally passed the TARP and the markets recovered.
there was no reason for Lehman brothers to be forced into bankruptcy just because none of the other banks would buy them as BAC had bot up bear stearns. bernanke begged george bush to allow him to take lehman into the federal reserve to unwind the credit swaps over time so the commercial paper markets would not be destroyed but george bush decided that he would make an example of lehman.
his secretary of the treasury hank paulson was a lifelong enemy of fuld and hated him enuff to go along with bush even though he knew what bernanke wanted to do would be best for the country. lehman did not have to forced into bankruptcy, and it's collateral obligations could have been unwound over time without the huge $6 billion in losses forced on the economy because of it.
the guy who started this thread does not understand anything about how the world's economy works and just has simple stupid solutions which all involve how everyone in banking is a corrupt and how his economic theories of whatever is superior to the way the world has evolved as a market economy over the last 100 years.
arkmundi
10 MW
There was some serious fallout from Lehman going under, be made an example of, being crushed. In particular, Evergreen Solar, an MIT rollout with incentives from the DOE and Massachusetts, a home-brew company of the best kind. After the fact at a share-holder meeting I asked why Lehman? Because that's where the the money was. It was banking hedge-funds that had accumulated capital assets. Really f*cked up your so called evolution of the capital markets - not the way it should have. With Lehman gone it was Barclays that picked up the stock guarantees and they then took the company out. Even the CFO of Evergreen does not know why, to this day. I was weighted at the time in Evergreen, for all the right reasons, so it was a significant part of my personal wealth "disappearance" during the crisis. And why to this day I am vehemently opposed to how the markets are structured. Ever since Clinton signed the legislation that ended Glass-Steagall we've been in trouble. And the Frank-Dodd Act did not fix things. So nothing to prevent the next financial crisis.
dnmun said:
What is not? The economic markets not a house of cards? If so, please explain how people defaulting on mortgages in the U.S. resulted in a world-wide recession.
dnmun said:
I just looked up that TARP thing: A change in the law to allow $700bn of tax payers money to be used to bail out private companies. Sure, the stock market had it all under control itself, save for the meddling of the government...
Arguably, this concept of private companies being "too big to fail" is a problem and a serious liability for society. It's not a new problem, either.
dnmun's appears to be a fundamentalist on two things on this forum one is fracking the other is the state of the financial system and in particular QE. You won't get through to him on either case - no amount of EPA or Bank of England reports will dispel his beliefs. Go against his ideas and you're a moronic loon in his eyes.
Anyway back to the present - Greece.
http://trueeconomics.blogspot.ie/2015/06/2615-greece-back-to-groundhog-day-future.html
Anyway back to the present - Greece.
http://trueeconomics.blogspot.ie/2015/06/2615-greece-back-to-groundhog-day-future.html
arkmundi
10 MW
With respect to our various national and global economic messes, we are all likely morons. Since the profession of solutions is the job of ... just another group of morons...Joseph C. said:
bigmoose
1 MW
arkmundi talk about examples and people being crushed... National City Bank here in Cleveland was the only bank refused TARP funds... then the feds arranged a shotgun marriage of them with PNC Bank. That one hurt me. I was expecting some lawsuits afterwards, but things clammed up rock solid. To this day I think "they" wanted something burried very deeply with NCB.
Up thread I mentioned about deflation. I think that is the real threat to TPTB. Inflation they will prosper under. Deflation will implode their pyramids.
I think we will continue to see the stock market propped up for a while.
I am hearing more and more rumors of war... limited war... but getting more direct and less with powerful proxies. This would not be good for us.
Up thread I mentioned about deflation. I think that is the real threat to TPTB. Inflation they will prosper under. Deflation will implode their pyramids.
I think we will continue to see the stock market propped up for a while.
I am hearing more and more rumors of war... limited war... but getting more direct and less with powerful proxies. This would not be good for us.
arkmundi
10 MW
Truthdig: Karl Marx Was Right by Chris Hedges, May 31, 2015
arkmundi
10 MW
The Guardian: G7 summit: Greek bailout, Ukraine and climate top agenda for Bavaria meeting discussing how the Greek debt situation will be part of the upcoming G7 summit meeting agenda. But also climate change and this:
But its the postulate that a $100bn Green Climate Fund, will some-how insure we achieve temperature limits of any degree that underpins global meetings of these sorts that is wrong-headed. In other words, that more of capitalism is the answer. While I like most people abhor human suffering, only an economic meltdown may loosen the foot from the accelerator of climate change. Meanwhile...
[youtube]0J1KCSkUMjc[/youtube]
First, politicians are still talking about limits to global warming to below two degrees. Which is not considered a "safe" limit by the climate science community. Not even one degree of global heating is "safe", never mind twice that. We have likely already passed the threshold where feedbacks like the the release of arctic methane and carbon kick in.
But its the postulate that a $100bn Green Climate Fund, will some-how insure we achieve temperature limits of any degree that underpins global meetings of these sorts that is wrong-headed. In other words, that more of capitalism is the answer. While I like most people abhor human suffering, only an economic meltdown may loosen the foot from the accelerator of climate change. Meanwhile...
[youtube]0J1KCSkUMjc[/youtube]
Russia Today isn't a reputable television channel so I'd be wary of anything emanating from them.
A relevant documentary on neoclassical economics and how the lobbying system works. It's not 100 per cent accurate but in general terms it's there or thereabouts.
[youtube]5fbvquHSPJU[/youtube]
A relevant documentary on neoclassical economics and how the lobbying system works. It's not 100 per cent accurate but in general terms it's there or thereabouts.
[youtube]5fbvquHSPJU[/youtube]
Greece has gone bankrupt five times already since 1826...
The Greek people have started withdrawing cash from their banks, their government is playing brinksmanship with the EU money-lenders while having no real plan for managing the country's finances. I can only think they're hoping for a huge write-off of their debt.
This isn't going to end well. The only question is whether Greece really is the "beginning of the end" for the EU.
As an European exchange-rate mechanism, it worked. As common-market, it worked. As an ideology of a United Federal States of Europe, it was doomed to fail.
The Greek people have started withdrawing cash from their banks, their government is playing brinksmanship with the EU money-lenders while having no real plan for managing the country's finances. I can only think they're hoping for a huge write-off of their debt.
This isn't going to end well. The only question is whether Greece really is the "beginning of the end" for the EU.
As an European exchange-rate mechanism, it worked. As common-market, it worked. As an ideology of a United Federal States of Europe, it was doomed to fail.
arkmundi
10 MW
Its the future of "global economies" that it would be good for everyone to take notice of. One nation defaulting on its debt is just another story to ignore, as most probably are. But what we're talking about goes far, far beyond that. Its widespread unsustainable debt that is a contagion to even more relatively healthy economies that is part of this on-going tragedy. What we're seeing is an unravelling of the bond markets, now going from bad to worse. Leading to the very likely scenario of another financial crisis, larger, more endemic than the last, that another round of "quantitative easing" is unlikely to solve. When the central banks no longer have any magic rabbits to pull out of their bag of tricks, the show is over.
arkmundi said:
Yes, the cascade effect in swing. The problem we have is that the timing of everything is uncertain. In a few weeks or months time you could wake up tomorrow and the Euro could be effectively dead. Of the financial crises the world has seen - they have a tendency to be catastrophic failures rather than gradual drawn out events.
It's is a formidable bag of tricks though. We have effectively lasted decades while accumulating more and more debt. It's not beyond the bounds of possibilities that the powers that be can buy more time before the crisis hits. The problem with that though is that they just appear to be making the debt worse.
Punx0r said:
Five times eh - that's basically once every 30 years when number six comes along. Greece would be okay if their economy wasn't so small and they produced so little. Nations that can batten down the hatches and practice self-sufficiency have a tendency to do better when they default.
Germany* and Spain though are by far Europe's worst defaulters with eight and nine defaults respectively (Germany and its various regional predecessors).
The UK is on four, Portugal is on six - the same as Austria-Hungary and Russia is on seven. More than half of Europe is carrying unsustainable debt, whether its government, household or financial debt.
Well, AFAIK the EU "no bailout clause" is still in effect. Also, Germany's economy was destroyed by war, the Greek by greed.
It's a valid argument to suggest the Greeks could be given similar leniency as Germany received after WW2, but that supposes that circumstances haven't changed since then and the action taken back then was correct. That's kinda asking that for previous actions to be taken as strict precedent for future ones.
Resorting to stereotypes never helps, but the charges of corruption and endemic tax avoidance in Greece appear to be at least mostly true.
It's a valid argument to suggest the Greeks could be given similar leniency as Germany received after WW2, but that supposes that circumstances haven't changed since then and the action taken back then was correct. That's kinda asking that for previous actions to be taken as strict precedent for future ones.
Resorting to stereotypes never helps, but the charges of corruption and endemic tax avoidance in Greece appear to be at least mostly true.
Punx0r said:
I'm torn on this issue. I can't make up my mind either way.
From what I have heard from people who have worked and lived in Greece your last point appears to be correct or at least in certain instances. I've probably mentioned this already but I still can't get over train drivers getting paid over 100,000 euro to ferry almost fully empty carriages.
Having said all that, I firmly maintain that Irish politicians should keep their opinions on Greece to themselves - especially when our Minister for Finance has the same qualifications as myself on economics - i.e. none.
That's fair enough. That could be considered just good diplomacy or good manners by not trying to make political capital out of Greece's plight.
My understanding is that successive Greek governments were elected on the promise of providing large numbers of well-paid public sector jobs, all complete with generous pensions and early retirement. That would be unaffordable to many countries, but especially one with few exports and low tax revenue. They shouldn't have borrowed so much and shrewd lenders wouldn't have lent so much - that's the lender's risk to bear.
I figure Greece wants to remain in the EU and Euro but have their debts written off. I suspect that won't happen and they'll be offered some repayment plan which will heavily burden the country for a generation. I have a suspicion they would be better off defaulting, leaving the EU and reinstating the Drachma. I think it would even boost their tourist industry by pushing down prices.
My understanding is that successive Greek governments were elected on the promise of providing large numbers of well-paid public sector jobs, all complete with generous pensions and early retirement. That would be unaffordable to many countries, but especially one with few exports and low tax revenue. They shouldn't have borrowed so much and shrewd lenders wouldn't have lent so much - that's the lender's risk to bear.
I figure Greece wants to remain in the EU and Euro but have their debts written off. I suspect that won't happen and they'll be offered some repayment plan which will heavily burden the country for a generation. I have a suspicion they would be better off defaulting, leaving the EU and reinstating the Drachma. I think it would even boost their tourist industry by pushing down prices.