Financial topics

Investments, gold, currencies, surviving after a financial meltdown
aedens
Posts: 4753
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 4:13 pm

Re: Max Keiser video

Post by aedens »

vincecate wrote:
gerald wrote: Your section on "Inflation & Taxes" is right on,[...]
Thanks!
It is really the Inflation vs Deflation part where the debate and confusion seems to be. Trying to get it all sorted out. Anyone else have any comments?

http://pair.offshore.ai/38yearcycle/#deflation

-- Vince
Given the complex nature of the question. http://mises.org/daily/3366
The relationship is all around you. A $160,000.00 house went for $40,000
Another was $110,000 went for 10,000 as the monetized process continues.
They feel thsy can kick the can far enough they can make to filter out
regional weakness zones to keep the ship floating. I guess your question conveys as to
what are you willing pay. This Utility "what puts you at ease" is as far as the left is from the right.
What we have found true:
http://mises.org/books/mises_money.pdf

What is necessary is to prevent government from destroying
the monetary system by inflating. therefore the quantity of money
shouldn’t be manipulated by the government, according to the wishes of
those people who want to enjoy a few minutes, a few hours, a few days, or
a few weeks of good life from increased government spending, for a very
long disastrous state of affairs.

We must say that what creates the inflation is the famous “remedy”
for the government’s problems, the “remedy” which people believed was
discovered some few years ago, but which was really discovered by the
Roman emperors—deficit spending. Deficit spending made it possible
for the government to spend more money than it had and that it collected
from the people. As everybody knows, deficit spending, that is spending
more than one’s income, is very bad for the individual. The great error is
that people believe that what is bad for the individual is not necessarily
also bad for all the individuals together. This is the great mistake.
It is when, not how.

Irony: Frustrated local and state officials were also waiting for the Army Corps of Engineers to issue permits so they can build sand berms in front of islands and wetlands to act as buffers between the advancing oil and the wetlands. I watched Black Blizzard on PBS on the struggle to survive in that region then as they do now in that current reality from practises. All politic's are local people so act as such. With those with a eye to see you can check to see what seal has been broken.

The states are moving to survive and may they do well.

richard5za
Posts: 893
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 10:29 am
Location: South Africa

Re: Financial topics

Post by richard5za »

As a chartist

As a chartist I am forecasting that we have now seen the end of the more than one year rally in world bourses, from 9 March 2009, and that the original bear market trend that started in Novemer 2007 will now take over again.

I am seeing a drop in the Dow to below 5000, with another 3 bear market rallies, over the next 18 months to 3 years. Its the rallies that are desiogned to maximise personal ruin - we get sucked back in when we should stay out.

My best estimate for the Dow bottom is between 3200 and 4800, but below 2000 is completely possible. Calculate the S&P or Dow index on a PE ratio of 6 for yourself to see just how easily things can tumble!

John
Posts: 11478
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Financial topics

Post by John »

Dear Richard,
richard5za wrote: > As a chartist I am forecasting that we have now seen the end of
> the more than one year rally in world bourses, from 9 March 2009,
> and that the original bear market trend that started in Novemer
> 2007 will now take over again.

> I am seeing a drop in the Dow to below 5000, with another 3 bear
> market rallies, over the next 18 months to 3 years. Its the
> rallies that are desiogned to maximise personal ruin - we get
> sucked back in when we should stay out.

> My best estimate for the Dow bottom is between 3200 and 4800, but
> below 2000 is completely possible. Calculate the S&P or Dow index
> on a PE ratio of 6 for yourself to see just how easily things can
> tumble!
There was a chartist [Jeff Weiss is a Chartered Market Technician and
Chief Technical Analyst at Jesup & Lamont] on CNBC this morning just
after 7 am ET. He was talking about various support levels around
1040 or 1050, but he was silent about what would happen if the bottom
support level failed, except that the market would keep falling.

He posted one interesting chart:

Image

This chart is an attempt to extrapolate forward from the 1990-94
period, up to the beginning of the dot-com bubble.

This chart is the closest I've seen in the mainstream media that
begins to duplicate the long-term charts that I've posted before.
(See blow for an example.)

Weiss's chart is flawed because the straight lines have to be
extrapolated on a logarithmic scale, and because it should go back
much farther than 1990. But still, this is the best thing I've seen
in mainstream media to look at what's happening in the longer term.

Anyway, what's most interesting about this situation is there was
another guest on the set, Jeffrey Carter, Pointsandfigures.com .

Carter interrupted Weiss to say how ridiculous this all was. Charts
are pretty useless in today's market anyway, he said, and the market
in 1990 was so different that it's irrelevant to what's happening
today.

Weiss is the only person who seemed to have any idea what was going on
in the world. The various CNBC anchors just looked at each other,
wondering why this tiny little economy in Greece is causing the
futures to fall 2% this morning.

I'm trying to think of who I've seen or heard on the mainstream media
that has any sort of systemic grasp at all of the world financial
system. Even Roubini, with his babbling about U-shaped and W-shaped
recoveries, is possibly the best of the technical analysts on tv, but
he seems to have no idea what's coming, and has no grasp of the world
finances as any kind of system, let alone a system driven by
generational flows. Even a bear like David Tice has not convinced me
that he knows what's going on, although he is predicting something
like Dow 3000.

That leaves Niall Ferguson, who is really the only person I've seen in
the mainstream media who seems to have a good grasp. I'm sure there
are plenty of others, of course, including people in this forum, who
simply don't express their apocalyptic opinions publicly.

Meanwhile, CNBC's resident economist says that "Economists are
changing their forecasts because of concerns about contagion," and
visiting economist Rick Mishkin says that the falling stock market is
good news, because it will finally force the Europeans to face their
problems seriously and solve them.

John

P.S.: Here's a chart that I've posted in the past:

Image

** How to compute the 'real value' of the stock market.
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi ... anic070820

vincecate
Posts: 2371
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 7:11 am
Location: Anguilla
Contact:

Re: Financial topics

Post by vincecate »

John wrote: I'm trying to think of who I've seen or heard on the mainstream media that has any sort of systemic grasp at all of the world financial system.
I think Peter Schiff has the best grasp of the current situation, though I have not seen him talk about GD type cycles. However, he thinks we will get inflation, so I don't expect you agree with him.

Can anyone point out any mistakes/errors/typos in my inflation/deflation writeup? Any other substantial arguments I missed?

http://pair.offshore.ai/38yearcycle/#deflation

Thanks,

-- Vince

John
Posts: 11478
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Financial topics

Post by John »

Dear Vince,
vincecate wrote:
> Can anyone point out any mistakes/errors/typos in my
> inflation/deflation writeup? Any other substantial arguments I
> missed?

> http://pair.offshore.ai/38yearcycle/#deflation
> Imagine a government prints some money, loans it to someone, then
> gets paid back, and then burns the money. After this sequence
> there would be the same amount of money in existence that there
> was at the start.
Absolutely not true. A lot depends on what happened to the money in
the meantime. It might have been use to create a lot more money
through debt -- in fact, this is what happens in a bubble.

Furthermore, when you apply this situation to inflation/deflation, you
have to take into account the velocity of money -- something that your
article doesn't even mention except in the context of hyperinflation.
But the velocity of money is a generational trend variable. It's
extremely relevant today, and it's a major factor driving the
deflationary spiral.

Which makes me wonder: If you see a rise in the velocity of money as a
factor causing hyperinflation, then why don't you see a fall in the
velocity of money as a factor causing deflation? Because the velocity
of money HAS fallen very sharply, and IS a big factor in the current
deflationary spiral.

John

vincecate
Posts: 2371
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 7:11 am
Location: Anguilla
Contact:

Re: Financial topics

Post by vincecate »

John wrote: Which makes me wonder: If you see a rise in the velocity of money as a factor causing hyperinflation, then why don't you see a fall in the velocity of money as a factor causing deflation?
A very good point! I shall have to update the article.

I think that the reduction in velocity so far is mild compared to the increase in velocity at times of hyperinflation. In hyperinflation people get paid daily and run to go shopping right after getting paid. Then they spend all their money, even buying things they don't need for awhile and would not normally buy so far ahead of time. So the money velocity change when going into hyperinflation is something like changing from money moving once per month to money changing hands twice per day. It is a huge change.

How much has money velocity slowed so far?

Also, I am not sure if money velocity is really a cause or just a symptom.

Thanks much!

-- Vince

PS Still thinking on other points...

John
Posts: 11478
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Money multiplier (destroyer) and velocity of money

Post by John »

-- Money multiplier (destroyer) and velocity of money

Image

Money multiplier (destroyer) and velocity of money

http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2010/05 ... he-market/

http://av.r.ftdata.co.uk/files/2010/05/global.pdf
Page 40

gerald
Posts: 1681
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 10:34 pm

Re: Financial topics

Post by gerald »

I have read some passing comments in other sites regarding " the velocity of debt" is this a different perspective or just a lot of hot air? any comments?

MarshAviator
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 3:40 pm

Re: Financial topics

Post by MarshAviator »

Again from ZeroHedge, quoting marketwatch.


http://www.marketwatch.com/story/crash- ... genumber=2
Paul Farrell's latest perspective: "Last March I wrote "6 reasons I'm calling a bottom and a new bull." Today it's time for a new call. We've had a good year. Net gains over 50% in 2009. But now: "Game over, head for the exits." Bears beating bulls. Dow sinking below 6,470...The clock's flashing. Huge point spread. Think bear, think crash, think end of capitalism, think Great Depression II ... This is no buying opportunity, this game's in the refrigerator, call it." So much for Paul's chances of ever getting invited on CNBC.
Now that the MSM is letting a little truth into the articles, we could be in for a real fun time.
Finally now "this time is different" is being seen for what a bunch of BS it is.

And yet of of this writing the DOW (market et al) is up. Fools buying the dip again or robots with low volume algos running amok.
The retail investor would at least get some sympathy from a con artist, none here, GS and the rest really are the "Vampiric squid on the face of humanity".

aedens
Posts: 4753
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 4:13 pm

Re: Financial topics

Post by aedens »

Update:
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exch ... d=10508770
Greece tries to renegotiate pensions with EU/IMF
Greece will provide visiting EU and IMF inspectors with an actuarial study on Friday.

Earlier:
"Van Rompuy gave no details of new sanctions because officials from the EU's 27 governments, the European Central Bank
and the European Commission are only starting work on changes to widely flouted EU budget rules.
EU leaders are due to decide on long-term reforms at an October summit."

endogeneity of the money supply exspansion

===============================================================

http://generationaldynamics.com/forum/v ... 2580#p5531
Fri May 14, 2010 "Events are truly unfolding indeed as the backwall nears. The economics stagnation will linger as ideological fantasy's crumble to the simple realism of chastisment. "

http://aei.pitt.edu/6935/01/gom%C3%A0_ricard.pdf

This article develops a policy-oriented, explanatory, meso-analysis of the configurative aspects of the Social Dimension of the European Union. It comprises six sections which fall into two wider parts. In the first part (sections one to three), the central elements of the analytical framework are outlined. Social policy is conceptualized in terms of its substantive boundaries and normative foundations. And the distinct structures, contents and policy types of the welfare systems.

Unsustainable Demographical trajectory's of net working capital. I am glad I am not on that panel.

And what they are up to depends on POV http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6444
The liberal bent of mind will spend whatever it takes to solve the historical problems.

http://blogs.worldwatch.org/transformingcultures/
"But the idea of driving consumer demand in new directions even if it is less profitable in the short-run appears to be an anathema to most corporations"


The market does not favor big business or even business in general; it favors consumers. By their choices in the marketplace, consumers decide whether a business can get big, stay big, or stay in business at all. Consumers are sovereign in a market economy: their spending determines what it produces; their saving determines how fast it grows. The choices of consumers also determine indirectly the wage rates of workers.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests