Financial Crisis

[12DrinkMore]

Abrak has already indicated that there is no solution to the rising number of jobless drones. Their jobs are being globalised to countries where it is far cheaper to create them. Although he has at times indicated that he does not think that this is a major shift in well being from the west to the east. It now looks to me as if the actions and statements from the government and associated partners in crime are merely palliative measures to give some level of hope to the sheeple. "we are recovering", "just give it another three months".

Maybe this is a series of carefully managed downward adjustments to the standards of living of the West. Nothing dramatic to upset the sheeple; but small gradual deteriorations (working until 70; no final salary pensions, tax rises etc).

The UK is expecting over 3 million unemployables and for Germany another !,000,000 are looking to lose their jobs.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/finance...dit-crunch.html

The latest surge reflects the general mood of optimism in the markets and the rebound in industrial production. The problem for Germany is that car scrappage schemes and pent-up orders for German goods built up during the freeze in global trade finance over the Winter may have disguised the underlying weakness of the economy. Unemployment is expected to rise by another million to 4.5m by late next year.

So, this is quite possibly the best the western governments can attain in the short term (say the next three years).

These statements are now beginning to get on my nerves.

Hans Redeker, currency chief at BNP Paribas, said the credit contraction was eclipsing recovery in Europe's bond market. "At the end of the day, there is not going to be any durable recovery until we see a revival in credit," he said.

This is nonsense. There will not be a durable recovery in the west until the debt has been reduced and the sheeple can afford to buy stuff with their salaries and not work to pay off the debt on their future earnings. But I suppose Hans was talking in self-interest about the bond market and not the real economy, which makes real stuff and employs people productively.

And I am utterly perplexed by this

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economi...IMF-claims.html

The continued strength of the CPI has taken the Bank of England by surprise. Governor Mervyn King said last week that despite the so-called "stickiness" shown by UK prices, the CPI rate was "more likely than not" to fall below 1pc in the coming months.

So <deleted> are all these ZIRPS and QEs supposed to do? I mean, they have smashed the interest rates to zero, cranked up the printing presses to issue vast quantities of GBPs; all in the name of fighting the GREAT EVIL deflation. And the GREAT EVIL does not show itself in the CPI. Well, MAYBE THE fuc_kING POLICIES HAVE WORKED? Eh Merv? If he is "surprised" over this, then <deleted> is he hoping to achieve? He should surely be proclaiming the policies as a MASSIVE SUCCESS?

Nope, we are being screwed again with the "it might yet happen". Why is he doing this?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/finance...to-economy.html

Mervyn King, the Governor of the Bank of England, was overruled in an attempt to increase the money injected into the British economy to a total of £200bn, it was revealed today.

Oh, and good luck Abrak. Although IMO the experience with "real Thai beauties" has always left me feeling disappointed, I prefer the average lookers who have a sense of motivation and try a little harder.

Edited August 19, 2009 by 12DrinkMore

[AlexLah]

I fully agree with you on the average looker is for us foreigners a better choice. On the other hand when I go out with some friends we all have very different opinions of beauty, in the end it is the inside that counts.

Sorry Abrak I did not realize you felt a bit upset.

Anyway I think that there are some solutions to some of the problems like for example the fed buying up those non performing toxic legacy assets. If they are non performing why not write them off?

Why not have a rule/law that a loan made by a bank stays at that bank and cannot be resold repacked, sliced, bundled and traded?

(By the way I think I have stumbled upon something related to mortgages that will astonish you but I need to check a few more things)

Why is the government not using all that money to invest in new technologies like some that have been invented in the US recently and are about ready for mass implementation which would reduce dependence on oil. This would create hundreds of thousands of new jobs. And greatly reduce energy bills for the people.

Why not go back to the use of hemp, it is a very versatile product and again can reduce cost enormously. Why not follow European style health care model (like Germany, Holland etc.) it is much cheaper and more efficient and better for the people as it tries to prevent people getting sick or at least tries to detect illness in an early stage.

I am sure the current system can be changed into a better one, but what is needed are leaders that not only promise change (for the better) but actually make that change.

[flying]

This is nonsense. There will not be a durable recovery in the west until the debt has been reduced and the sheeple can afford to buy stuff with their salaries and not work to pay off the debt on their future earnings. But I suppose Hans was talking in self-interest about the bond market and not the real economy, which makes real stuff and employs people productively.

And I am utterly perplexed by this

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economi...IMF-claims.html

The continued strength of the CPI has taken the Bank of England by surprise. Governor Mervyn King said last week that despite the so-called "stickiness" shown by UK prices, the CPI rate was "more likely than not" to fall below 1pc in the coming months.

So <deleted> are all these ZIRPS and QEs supposed to do? I mean, they have smashed the interest rates to zero, cranked up the printing presses to issue vast quantities of GBPs; all in the name of fighting the GREAT EVIL deflation. And the GREAT EVIL does not show itself in the CPI. Well, MAYBE THE fuc_kING POLICIES HAVE WORKED? Eh Merv? If he is "surprised" over this, then <deleted> is he hoping to achieve? He should surely be proclaiming the policies as a MASSIVE SUCCESS?

Nope, we are being screwed again with the "it might yet happen". Why is he doing this?

I have to admit it made me smile because that does seem to be the million...errrr tillions dollar question on both side of the great lake eh?

This is nonsense. There will not be a durable recovery in the west until the debt has been reduced

I agree & yet our sides idea is the continued plunge of future earnings.

Then they have other great ideas like cash for clunkers. Clunker the anti hunker as in hunker down. No instead trash the car/truck that was running quite fine & come on down as Uncle Sam has a deal for you. With the financing you would expect...No money down...No job as we know most of you are unemployed but hey no worries.

Consume....Consume....LOL

Sometimes like you I wonder ...But in the face of obvious facts I just dont get the idea behind what they think they will achieve. Hey maybe our job is truly just to consume. Maybe we are suppose to just buy buy buy on credit & not worry...Our govt does not. So why should we? Maybe we are doing the world a service by consuming & our gov will pick up the tab anyway with bailouts. The only real cost is ink or even just keybopard work in the long run. So hey........NOT Because unlike our govt some of us still have pride in our promise to honor our personal debt.

Is is comforting to see your CPI obviously works like ours though.

[lannarebirth]

China:

Yes, I'm following the index and some of the companies in it.....it's like the mountains in Le Tour de France, isn't it ?

What's your view LRB ?..where are we going ?

LaoPo

That IS my view, which is soon to be an Intermediate term negative view, though it may turn out to be wrong as the LT chart is showing signs it may have turned up.

Yep.

[flying]

CIT Group records $1.68 billion 2Q loss

Commercial lender CIT Group Inc. said Monday in a regulatory filing it lost $1.68 billion in the second quarter, and again warned it might have to file for bankruptcy protection if it fails to restructure its business.

[Naam]

Hans Redeker, currency chief at BNP Paribas, said the credit contraction was eclipsing recovery in Europe's bond market. "At the end of the day, there is not going to be any durable recovery until we see a revival in credit," he said.

This is nonsense. There will not be a durable recovery in the west until the debt has been reduced and the sheeple can afford to buy stuff with their salaries and not work to pay off the debt on their future earnings. But I suppose Hans was talking in self-interest about the bond market and not the real economy, which makes real stuff and employs people productively.

i don't think it's nonsense "12" as Redeker refers to companies and you refer to sheeple.

no credit = high refinancing rates. too high refinancing rates = companies go belly-up = jobs lost = no salaries to buy stuff. as simple as that.

[flying]

companies go belly-up = jobs lost = no salaries to buy stuff. as simple as that.

But that is what we have now after the cure....

[Naam]

companies go belly-up = jobs lost = no salaries to buy stuff. as simple as that.

But that is what we have now after the cure....

the system is not cured yet. the medicine prescribed has brought the disease to a halt. the condition of the patient seems to be not fatal anymore. a significant recovery can in my [not so] humble view be expected in about 3-4 years but for a year or even two people will still lose jobs as companies will close down. a vicious cycle which takes quite some time to break.

[Carmine6]

Abrak again I am asking you and others, where are the jobs going to come from in the US.

If they come, government sector most likely.

It's guaranteed they will be in the government sector. Much of the "stimulus" bill was to fill State budget gaps so they could retain and hire employees. In California, the public employee unions are so strong that instead of firing people to fix the budget gap, they reduced welfare benefits, medical care benefits for poor kids, and cut other public services.

The US federal government spending this year is $1 trillion higher than 2008 (an increase from $3 trillion to $4 trillion.) About $700 billion of that increase is permanent per Obama's budget. How much are tax receipts? Around $2.4 - $2.5 trillion recently. Maybe $2.1 or $2.2 this year.

Take in 2.1, spend 4. Take in 2.4, spend 3.7. What's wrong with this picture?

[flying]

the system is not cured yet. the medicine prescribed has brought the disease to a halt. the condition of the patient seems to be not fatal anymore. a significant recovery can in my [not so] humble view be expected in about 3-4 years but for a year or even two people will still lose jobs as companies will close down. a vicious cycle which takes quite some time to break.

While I share you views on the time line I am not as optimistic of the outcome.

I cannot wrap my head around this supposed cure as it resembles the disease to closely

[midas]

Abrak again I am asking you and others, where are the jobs going to come from in the US.

If they come, government sector most likely.

YES ! but not just " government sector " but ObamaCare

In the UK- the National Health Service employs nearly 1.3 million people

(2 per cent of the 30 million people of working age ). — or the

combined populations of the cities of Birmingham and Coventry.

It's one of the world’s biggest employers. Just since 1997, the

number of NHS staff has risen by nearly 230,000.

Only the Chinese Red Army and the Indian State Railways are believed to employ more people than NHS—

with 2.3 million and 1.5 million staff respectively — but both workforces represent a much smaller

proportion of their national populations.

Uk’s population is about 60,944,000 million – America has about 300 million…………..so let us say

6 million of the 13.2 million people unemployed could be “ absorbed ”

in this proposed US federal health care monstrosity

Doesnt help produce anything but the Dow Jones will go up again I am sure

[AlexLah]

So that would be indeed a nice solution to solve at least part of the problem. Yet why are so many people against such a system as it shows it is less expensive and more efficient compared to a system where people have to buy health insurance. These insurance companies are for profit organizations so they will do everything to save costs by refusing people treatment and implement all kinds of crazy solutions to make statistics look better.

Here another 'Solution" http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/secret_of_china.php

Edited August 20, 2009 by AlexLah

[AlexLah]

And another article from that site that shows "The proof is in the pudding"

http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/public_option.php

[midas]

So that would be indeed a nice solution to solve at least part of the problem. Yet why are so many people against such a system as it shows it is less expensive and more efficient compared to a system where people have to buy health insurance. These insurance companies are for profit organizations so they will do everything to save costs by refusing people treatment and implement all kinds of crazy solutions to make statistics look better.

Alex Lah !!

After the myriads of conspiracy theories you have posted in this thread

I can only assume you are asking this question very much “ tongue in cheek ”

because this is one of the best conspiracies to date.

And how can you even imagine it would be “less expensive and more efficient “

Medicare/Medicaid is already broke which isnt a goof testimonial PLUS ............

1. The U.S. Postal Service has a fiscal year-to-date net loss of $1.13 billion

2. Amtrak lost more than $908 million on its 15 long distance routes in 2008

3. Fredie Mac/Fannie Mae- Fannie Mae announced a $23 billion loss for the first quarter of 2009 and Freddie Mac

announced a $10 billion loss.

And there are so many other aspects to this it’s hard to know where to begin although I am sure Flying as a US

citizen would know far more than me.

As an interested observer, I do know it is not about getting little Polly Muchenfuch medicine

for her elbow-warts and it is not about getting every chubby American lean and mean.

If this becomes law, the government would then control an additional one-sixth of the economy .

With the industries they’ve already gained control of i.e. banks and the auto industry and ones

they are trying to get hold of like the energy industry, you have something that looks nothing like America.

But you also have “ side shows “ such as how General Electric which would have an enormous part

in the whole thing ( some say too much )

“ In short, GE plans to get rich by being one of the government’s closest partners ”

which it has always been, thanks to its unmatched lobbying efforts.

And by owning CNBC they can and do use this tv channel to spread their own message.

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=123067.0

[AlexLah]

With cheaper, German health care cost is something around 8-9 % of GDP. Us health care spending is about 17% of GDP

Snip: National health spending is expected to reach $2.5 trillion in 2009, accounting for 17.6 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP). By 2018, national health care expenditures are expected to reach $4.4 trillion—more than double 2007 spending

In fact there is a healthy mix of government and private insurance just like in some other parts of Europe.

Have a read about Gemany here where most citizens have chosen for government health care, it is very similar to my home country where government care is really top quality I would say. I think one of the problems in the US is that there is an estimated 60 Billion Dollars in fraudulent claims made.

http://www.howtogermany.com/pages/healthinsurance.html

It is a very fair system I believe where everyone sort of donates a % of income and can enjoy equal care.

[midas]

If Obama does push through healthcare with waht they call the " nuclear option"............the next step will be a

challenge in the US Supreme Court because it may not even be consitutional

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08...stitutional.php

[Abrak]

The fact is that the ability to taKe care of health is increasing and people are living longer. So healthcare costs are increasing as a percentage of GDP and in actual terms everywhere as these 2 charts show...

The US never comes off looKing too good....

[12DrinkMore]

Then they have other great ideas like cash for clunkers. Clunker the anti hunker as in hunker down. No instead trash the car/truck that was running quite fine & come on down as Uncle Sam has a deal for you. With the financing you would expect...No money down...No job as we know most of you are unemployed but hey no worries.

Consume....Consume....LOL

Sometimes like you I wonder ...But in the face of obvious facts I just dont get the idea behind what they think they will achieve. Hey maybe our job is truly just to consume. Maybe we are suppose to just buy buy buy on credit & not worry...Our govt does not.

That is surely what has driven the economies over the last two decades. But this is a system that can only work if inflation is kept positive. Wages go up, old debt becomes payable and new debt can be taken on because we "earn more". So sheeple are led to consume far more far sooner than they actually need to, or indeed, can afford at the current level of income.

Presumably some clever guys have somehow worked out that the magic 2% inflation rate (Bernanke's Goldilocks) provides the sustainable "write off" of old debts and "affordability" of taking on new debts.

And consider the HORROR picture presented to us is that we might enter a Japanese style "Lost Decade". But hey, slow down here, what did that, or indeed does that mean? It is now a lost two decades. But what did it mean to the ordinary peeps?

http://www.japan-101.com/history/history_lost_decade.htm

Overall, this has led to the phenomenon known as the "lost decade"; economic expansion came to a total halt in Japan during the 1990s. The impact on everyday life has been rather muted, however. Unemployment runs reasonably high, but not at crisis levels (the official figure is a little under 5%, but this is a considerable underestimate - the real level is probably around twice that). This has combined with the traditional Japanese emphasis on frugality and saving (saving money is a cultural habit in Japan) to produce a quite limited impact on the average Japanese family, which continues much as it did in the period of the miracle.

Now that sounds OK. So they have attained a sustainable level of living. Living within their means and saving for their retirement. I would guess that the vast majority of the peeps would like to be in that situation.

So why are we being hit everyday about "growth"? Why do economic things have to "grow" constantly? Why is the goal of reaching a sustainable and comfortable level not acceptable? Why are sheeple being coerced into buying stuff on credit they don't really need?

I wonder what the effect would be if, instead of "cash for clunkers" the government propaganda came out with "Repair the Wrecks"? Surely that would be a far more economically sound idea? Running cars would not be simply destroyed, but a whole industry could be developed around repairing and renovating old cars. If unconvinced, then search for the "broken window paradox".

So why should we? Maybe we are doing the world a service by consuming & our gov will pick up the tab anyway with bailouts. The only real cost is ink or even just keybopard work in the long run. So hey........NOT Because unlike our govt some of us still have pride in our promise to honor our personal debt.

But YOU don't get bailed out. YOU get bankrupted. And, in the end, the bill for the bailouts is heading straight back into YOUR post box.

And, even though I can see a sort of perverted logic in playing the system and taking out loads of debt and not paying it off. In the end it is not the sheeple who get bailed out, quite the opposite they get to pay for it.

So, despite of massive attempts to force me back into the system (in particular ZIRP) I will continue to hear the echo of my grandmother, and be a miser, saving and spending only on what is necessary. And with ZIRP I will consume less, I certainly do not intend to be sucked back into the game of "borrow because rates are low". What a con.

[12DrinkMore]

i don't think it's nonsense "12" as Redeker refers to companies and you refer to sheeple.

Firstly from their website

BNP Paribas is a European leader in global banking and financial services and one of the six strongest banks in the world according to Standard & Poor's. Present across Europe through all its business lines, the Group has four domestic retail banking markets in France, Italy, Belgium and Luxembourg. It has one of the largest international networks with operations in 84 countries and 205,000 employees, including 162,500 in Europe, 15,600 in North America and 10,300 in Asia. (06/30/2009)

So maybe charity should begin at home and BNP Paribas should be dishing out debt to companies that need it?

But anyway, I can't disagree with

no credit = high refinancing rates. too high refinancing rates = companies go belly-up = jobs lost = no salaries to buy stuff. as simple as that.

if that is true across the board AND the companies have customer demand AND the banks are refusing to issue finance on the basis of a sound business proposal.

But a lot of companies are contracting because the debt based demand is contracting. Maybe I have been overlooking the reports, but I read about demand going down, employees being laid off or put on short time, but not too many complaints about viable companies being starved for cash. Just a few high profile non viable companies like GM asking for bailouts. They should and must go to the wall so that efficient competitors can step in and take over the market.

[Abrak]

But YOU don't get bailed out. YOU get bankrupted. And, in the end, the bill for the bailouts is heading straight back into YOUR post box.

And, even though I can see a sort of perverted logic in playing the system and taking out loads of debt and not paying it off. In the end it is not the sheeple who get bailed out, quite the opposite they get to pay for it.

So, despite of massive attempts to force me back into the system (in particular ZIRP) I will continue to hear the echo of my grandmother, and be a miser, saving and spending only on what is necessary. And with ZIRP I will consume less, I certainly do not intend to be sucked back into the game of "borrow because rates are low". What a con.

Are you sure this is how things will workout?

In my experience the prudent simply end up subsidizing the imprudent.

You dont spend and sit on cash with ZIRP and bail out both the banks and the bankrupt.

[sokal]

The fact is that the ability to taKe care of health is increasing and people are living longer. So healthcare costs are increasing as a percentage of GDP and in actual terms everywhere as these 2 charts show...

The US never comes off looKing too good....

Thats all BS man. The reason the US is higher is because these numbers include all the foreign people that come to the US for healthcare.

[AlexLah]

Actually they are interesting charts and if my internet connection wasn't so slow I could add some other interesting ones.

But about life expectancy rate the following numbers: It's expected and then male and last female

30 Netherlands 79.37 76.8 82.14

32 Germany 79.26 76.26 82.42

36 United Kingdom 79.01 76.52 81.63

50 United States 78.11 75.65 80.69

110 Thailand 73.1 70.77 75.55

This is an increase from 75.8 years in 1995 and 69.6 years in 1955. (US)

So with all this increased health care (cost) we only added about 6 extra years? The Netherlands on top (of the few nationalities that post here I believe) with HC cost from 7 to 9% and the US from 5 to 17% and life expectancy less than that and some reports say it is lowering again in the US.

Something ain't right here. I believe if you get rid of all those lobbyists and place some good management and change to EU model HC, there is about a Trillion Dollar a year that could be saved.

What I wanted to look at is the death rate and causes and stuff to see if there are any significant differences as to why people die and some other numbers like population growth between 1960 and now.

12 you mention the Japanese peeps now on a sustainable level of living, do you have an idea how that looks like for the average Japanese?

Look this docu and tell me that that is what you would like:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNWFHGT8Iq

The working class is now called the new poor......

[Abrak]

Alex,

unfortunately my internet is too slow to watch youtube videos.

However you must realize the cost of healthcare as a percentage of GDP is not simply a function of the rise in the age of people who die.

It will tend to rise far more than that because of the difference between 'working' and 'non working' labour. In other words a 6 year increase in life span might not seem significant but it might double the percentage of those who are working to support retirees. This will have a very significant impact on costs to GDP.

By some estimations in Japan the number of 'workers' will be one sixth of the number of 'non workers' by 2050. On that basis healthcare costs could increase to over 40% of GDP simply as a result of demographics.

[AlexLah]

Thanks Abrak, I have to do some more research on this and come up with some statistics and comparisons.

I know what to look for but it is just my slow connection that stops me from looking into that, but it is on my agenda.

[flying]

1. The U.S. Postal Service has a fiscal year-to-date net loss of $1.13 billion

Funny you mention this....I was just yesterday telling a woman that I did not want govt health care. for various reasons. The lady said but they could run it so much more cheaply & efficiently. I mentioned how they obviously could not even manage their own government but....looking at a business I choose the Postal Service. I said never could their be such a win win situation how do the loose so much? She said no..no...they do a great job & she was quite sure they were profitable as now they charge 44 cents a letter. I mentioned they will lose perhaps 7 billion this year.

She could not believe that was possible.

I guess terminology has really changed...Billion is the old million & Trillion is the old billion & it is Business as usual.

http://www.usps.com/communications/newsroo...09/pr09_066.htm

Despite cost reductions against the fiscal 2009 plan of more than $6 billion and actions to grow revenue, the Postal Service (USPS) projects a net loss of more than $7 billion at fiscal year-end.

The Postal Service has incurred net losses in 11 of the last 12 fiscal quarters. The fiscal 2009 year-to-date net loss is $4.7 billion,

Edited August 20, 2009 by flying

[Abrak]

Alex,

In my view demographics is by far the most significant economic shift over the next 50 years.

Here is a fairly random link about Japan. It estimates that the number of workers to retirees will fall from 3.9 to 1.5 over the next few years. How can a country grow its GDP/head with that statistic. You have falling income and multipliers.

Worst still take a look at a country like Russia, their demographics are far worse.

And demographics are key to growth. A country like Thailand did not grow so fast relative to others because its population was becoming increasingly productive or that returns on capital were increasing, but because their working population was increasing faster.

http://www.ipss.go.jp/pp-newest/e/ppfj02/suikei_g_e.html

Edited August 20, 2009 by Abrak

[Naam]

But about life expectancy rate the following numbers: It's expected and then male and last female

Alex, life expectancy is not the result of only measuring the average age at death of oldies. the final result is achieved by a complicated formula which also takes other factors into consideration such as death of babies, fatal accidents of teenagers and a bunch of others.

[flying]

US Sen Bunning: FDIC's Bair Said Up To 500 More Banks Could Fail

By Jessica Holzer, Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Chairman Sheila Bair believes up to 500 more banks could fail, a U.S. senator said Bair told him in a recent meeting.

"She told us that unless something dramatic happens, we could lose up to 500 more banks," Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., said Thursday at a hearing of the Senate Banking Committee on the foreclosure crisis.

Bunning said Bair made the remarks in a recent meeting.

"That means that people who make mortgages in local places .... people that could really help in a foreclosure will not be there," Bunning said.

http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-ne...anks-could-fail

Also

http://www.economicpopulist.org/content/fd...k-failures-come

Edited August 20, 2009 by flying

[Datsun240Z]

That's still a pretty dam_n high life expectancy for Thai folks. Would have thought they got average to about 65.

[flying]

Warren Buffett going bearish?

http://finance.yahoo.com/techticker/articl...ountain-of-Debt

Buffett: We're Going to Be Crushed Under Mountain of Debt

A highly influential American has finally hit the panic button about the tremendous mountain of debt the country is piling up.

Last year, Warren Buffett says, we were justified in using any means necessary to stave off another Great Depression. Now that the economy is beginning to recover, however, we need to curtail our out-of-control spending, or we'll destroy the value of the dollar and many Americans' life savings.

Some not-so-fun facts from Buffett's editorial today in the New York Times:

• Congress is now spending 185% of what it takes in
  
• Our deficit is a post WWII record of 13% of GDP
  
• Our debt is growing by 1% a month
  
• We are borrowing $1.8 trillion a year
  

$1.8 trillion is a lot of money. Even if the Chinese lend us $400 billion a year and Americans save a remarkable $500 billion and lend it to the government, we'll still need another $900 billion.

So, where's it going to come from? Most likely the printing press. And, ultimately, Buffett says, that will destroy the value of the dollar.

Edited August 21, 2009 by flying