Financial Crisis

[lannarebirth]

Chiang Mai, if you continue to believe discussing the war in this financial crisis is thread is off topic, I encourage you to read not only this article but also some of the comments written by readers after it. What America has done by saying this is to prove all along that they were intending to attack Syria and it has nothing whatsoever to do with humanitarian issues. It's all to do with money.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-25/syria-allow-inspection-alleged-chemical-weapons-attack-us-says-too-late

I continue to believe that war is a solution to the financial crisis, history proves that is so. But I don't do conspiracy theories and the good people at zero-hedge (and their followers) should get out more, take some walks at lunch time, do yoga, stuff like that!

Killing and maiming isn't nearly the fiscal cure all that it used to be. When whole economies had to "turn to" in prior eras it had the capability of turning whole economies around. Now it is only a small segment of the economy that benefits from warfare. Namely, the government and and the civilian contractors(lobbyists) that prosecute war endlessly.

But which is it, is it the game changing event with far reaching rafimifcations with an uncertain outcome, the likes of which terrifies you, if it is that then almost certainly it contains a fiscal cure. Or is it a local war that benefits governement/civillian contractors/lobbyists, the two sceanarios seem incompatible? It can be argued that only those events with a large dollop of the former have any real significance or benefit and that all military events contain elements of the latter.

I have participated in war previously, for great personal financial gain. While I could do it again any time I want, I won't. It is immoral. Having done so caused me so much consternation I had to give all proceeds from it away. Even now, I still don't feel clean from it. Not to mention I got to see up close how stupid the so called "leaders" of these wars are. War is not the solution to anything. Peace is the solution.

Edited August 26, 2013 by lannarebirth

[chiang mai]

Killing and maiming isn't nearly the fiscal cure all that it used to be. When whole economies had to "turn to" in prior eras it had the capability of turning whole economies around. Now it is only a small segment of the economy that benefits from warfare. Namely, the government and and the civilian contractors(lobbyists) that prosecute war endlessly.

But which is it, is it the game changing event with far reaching rafimifcations with an uncertain outcome, the likes of which terrifies you, if it is that then almost certainly it contains a fiscal cure. Or is it a local war that benefits governement/civillian contractors/lobbyists, the two sceanarios seem incompatible? It can be argued that only those events with a large dollop of the former have any real significance or benefit and that all military events contain elements of the latter.

I have just returned from a walk and yoga, so perhaps now you could clarify something?

Yesterday you were advocating a war on humanitarian grounds. Today, you are saying going to war will provide some kind of " miracle cure " for a $17 trillion debt?

Can you please explain how?

I need you to be a bit more precise with your verbage on this subject when you quote me, earlier you said I "encourage" whereas I said I "support", a big difference in meaning - now you're saying I "advocate war" and I don't, I support intervention, massive difference again!

As for war being of benefit to the fiancial crisis: it's been well demonstrated on a number of occaisions throughout the past hundred years that large scale miliatry conflict results in economic benefit in a number of ways, note: lesser conflicts such as the Iraq crisis and the Gulf war seeminglly have the opposite effect hence the emphaisis is on the size of the conflict, presumably this is because large scale wars involve increased production, employment and rebuilding whereas conflicts of a lesser scale involve more wastage as other countries work around the problem:

http://www.nber.org/digest/jan05/w10580.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/14/business/economy/from-world-war-ii-economic-lessons-for-today.html?_r=0

[Naam]

Yesterday you were advocating a war on humanitarian grounds. Today, you are saying going to war will provide some kind of " miracle cure " for a $17 trillion debt?

Can you please explain how?

what a question Midas!? the US participating in the Syria conflict will let its $17tr debt disappear and nobody will mention it again. you got till tomorrow morning to think about it and find out why.

[lannarebirth]

Yesterday you were advocating a war on humanitarian grounds. Today, you are saying going to war will provide some kind of " miracle cure " for a $17 trillion debt?

Can you please explain how?

what a question Midas!? the US participating in the Syria conflict will let its $17tr debt disappear and nobody will mention it again. you got till tomorrow morning to think about it and find out why.

Wag The Dog.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNDmDZi05dY&list=TLxsg767vz-sM

[midas]

Yesterday you were advocating a war on humanitarian grounds. Today, you are saying going to war will provide some kind of " miracle cure " for a $17 trillion debt?

Can you please explain how?

what a question Midas!? the US participating in the Syria conflict will let its $17tr debt disappear and nobody will mention it again. you got till tomorrow morning to think about it and find out why.

Because the creditors will be partially annihilated in the process?

[chiang mai]

I suspect the answer that Naam is looking for involves Israel or Saudi, most probably Israel?

[Naam]

I suspect the answer that Naam is looking for involves Israel or Saudi, most probably Israel?

none of the above.

correct anwer: nobody will talk or think about $17tr debt when the debt is $20tr.

[chiang mai]

Killing and maiming isn't nearly the fiscal cure all that it used to be. When whole economies had to "turn to" in prior eras it had the capability of turning whole economies around. Now it is only a small segment of the economy that benefits from warfare. Namely, the government and and the civilian contractors(lobbyists) that prosecute war endlessly.

But which is it, is it the game changing event with far reaching rafimifcations with an uncertain outcome, the likes of which terrifies you, if it is that then almost certainly it contains a fiscal cure. Or is it a local war that benefits governement/civillian contractors/lobbyists, the two sceanarios seem incompatible? It can be argued that only those events with a large dollop of the former have any real significance or benefit and that all military events contain elements of the latter.

I have participated in war previously, for great personal financial gain. While I could do it again any time I want, I won't. It is immoral. Having done so caused me so much consternation I had to give all proceeds from it away. Even now, I still don't feel clean from it. Not to mention I got to see up close how stupid the so called "leaders" of these wars are. War is not the solution to anything. Peace is the solution.

Your prefered solution is admirable if not idyllic, but I doubt that it's dooable so let's not fool ourselves, it may even be sensible to plan for it! I say that for a number of reasons not the least of which is the fact that the population of the planet is growing exponenially and at some point something has to give and war is a useful solution in that respect! Also, your desired solution involves man and historically man has never been able to live in peace for very long, it's the nature of the beast. So we may as well face up to it that war has a place in the process that involves mankind living on earth.

And before Midas jumps all over me, no, I'm not a warmonger and yes I loathe war, but I'm also a realist and past history shows us much of what's in our future.

[mania]

I suspect the answer that Naam is looking for involves Israel or Saudi, most probably Israel?

Israel may not be part of the financial answer but one would have to be

sleeping to not think Israel is not licking their lips hoping for this bombing & destabilization to happen.

That Iran might in anyway be involved would be a bonus & would be the excuse Israel has been looking for.

Not to forget Israel was itching to bomb Iran during Obama's presidential campaign. Suddenly that

went quiet & it was likely due to some future promise or deal.

This all smells bad.

[Cheapcharly]

OK, what we got?

War on Syria coming with usa and france, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Israël,... 17t debt, high unemployment in western countries, fiscal cliff, guantanamo jail., illegal immigration,fatca, Obama care...

What else? What is first on the agenda?

Edited August 27, 2013 by Cheapcharly

[yoshiwara]

More whining.

[Cheapcharly]

More whining.

Life would be good and peaceful If people were just whining.

[yoshiwara]

More whining.

Life would be good and peaceful If people were just whining.

So tell us about your troubles in Thailand.

[midas]

Somebody needs to buy Jim Rogers a drink because he warned many months ago this was going to start happening

Poland Confiscates Half Of Private Pension Funds To "Cut" Sovereign Debt Load

Funds say moves could be unconstitutional

Warnings that private pension funds could be wiped out

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/04/poland-pensions-idUSL6N0H02UV20130904

Edited September 7, 2013 by midas

[mccw]

Interesting development:

"""

On Monday, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said Syria could avoid an American attack by turning over "every single bit of his chemical weapons to the international community in the next week."

Russia immediately jumped on the offer, as Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Moscow will urge Syria to place its chemical weapons under international control in a bid to avert military intervention.

This is a deft political move on Russia's part, especially since the State Department immediately walked back Kerry's comments by saying that he "was making a rhetorical argument about the impossibility and unlikelihood of Assad turning over chemical weapons he has denied he used."

The Wall Street Journal's Tom Gara observes that Russia is capitalizing on a "silly Kerry mistake," since even though Assad would never turn over chemical weapons, beginning such a process would serve an ideal delay to any U.S. decision to attack Syria.

On Sunday, Assad denied using chemical weapons on his own people and would not confirm or deny that his government even has chemical-weapons stockpiles.

Russia's announcement further muddies the situation for an American administration that is struggling to convince Congress and the country to back a military strike on Syria.

And it seems to be having its intended effect: A bunch of news outlets are reporting Russia's move. WSJ called it "a rare sign of apparent agreement between Moscow and Washington."

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem said that Damascus welcomes Russia's proposal and is ready for "full cooperation with Russia to remove any pretext for aggression."

U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron said he welcomes the move but warned that the idea must not be used as a "distraction tactic." U.N. Chief Ban Ki-moon also backed the Russian proposal.

The U.S. State Department, meanwhile, now says it will "take a hard look" at Russsia proposal on remain skeptical.

Interpreter Magazine Editor-in-Chief Michael Weiss summed up the situation perfectly: "Kerry says give up CW. Assad says what CW? Russia says those CW, give em up but not really. Syria says oh, right--good one, bolshoe spasibo" (i.e., "Thank you very much").

Weiss and Eurasia Group President Ian Bremmer note that Russia's play is most likely aimed at scuttling the congressional vote altogether.

The atmosphere does not bode well for President Obama's Syria media blitz on Monday night, which will be flanked by an interview of Assad on PBS.

""""

- biz insider app.

I had a thought that maybe the US policy in Middle East is not actually to extracct the oil there but to limit the supply; east, but mainly to keep prices high enough for the US fracking technology to be economic as a means to swing the balance of trade for future decades and climb out of the debt / deficit hole.

[NeverToReturn]

^^

You credit them with actually having a plan, Obama and his poodle Camoron haven't a clue, they're just salesmen.

Have to say i loved the picture of the wannabee murderer John Kerry eating and drinking with friend Assad, kind of sums up all our recent wars, and no doubt most throughout history.

The UN ought to change the rules of future wars that at least 99% of politicians must go on the front line, then id most certainly be up more wars.

[mccw]

^^

You credit them with actually having a plan, Obama and his poodle Camoron haven't a clue, they're just salesmen.

Have to say i loved the picture of the wannabee murderer John Kerry eating and drinking with friend Assad, kind of sums up all our recent wars, and no doubt most throughout history.

The UN ought to change the rules of future wars that at least 99% of politicians must go on the front line, then id most certainly be up more wars.

I think certainly there are string pullers behind the scenes who do have a plan. That politicians flounder sometimes just shows how they're not fully briefed; mere pawns getting pushed around.

[NeverToReturn]

^^

You credit them with actually having a plan, Obama and his poodle Camoron haven't a clue, they're just salesmen.

Have to say i loved the picture of the wannabee murderer John Kerry eating and drinking with friend Assad, kind of sums up all our recent wars, and no doubt most throughout history.

The UN ought to change the rules of future wars that at least 99% of politicians must go on the front line, then id most certainly be up more wars.

I think certainly there are string pullers behind the scenes who do have a plan. That politicians flounder sometimes just shows how they're not fully briefed; mere pawns getting pushed around.

I think they had a plan to go in all guns blazing after pro Argentinian Obama thought his puppet Cameron would quickly get the war passed by parliament.

And for the first time i can remember the politicians in Westminster actually represented their constituents and most voted against.

Now it seems they can resolve this situation without a war and the Russians who represent the free world these days have made Obama, Cameron, Kerry and all the other war mongers look like the out of their depth little salesmen they are.

[yoshiwara]

^^

You credit them with actually having a plan, Obama and his poodle Camoron haven't a clue, they're just salesmen.

Have to say i loved the picture of the wannabee murderer John Kerry eating and drinking with friend Assad, kind of sums up all our recent wars, and no doubt most throughout history.

The UN ought to change the rules of future wars that at least 99% of politicians must go on the front line, then id most certainly be up more wars.

I think certainly there are string pullers behind the scenes who do have a plan. That politicians flounder sometimes just shows how they're not fully briefed; mere pawns getting pushed around.

I think they had a plan to go in all guns blazing after pro Argentinian Obama thought his puppet Cameron would quickly get the war passed by parliament.

And for the first time i can remember the politicians in Westminster actually represented their constituents and most voted against.

Now it seems they can resolve this situation without a war and the Russians who represent the free world these days have made Obama, Cameron, Kerry and all the other war mongers look like the out of their depth little salesmen they are.

Russia representing the Free World! First time I have heard that piece of nonsense.

Edited September 10, 2013 by yoshiwara

[Naam]

^^

You credit them with actually having a plan, Obama and his poodle Camoron haven't a clue, they're just salesmen.

Have to say i loved the picture of the wannabee murderer John Kerry eating and drinking with friend Assad, kind of sums up all our recent wars, and no doubt most throughout history.

The UN ought to change the rules of future wars that at least 99% of politicians must go on the front line, then id most certainly be up more wars.

I think certainly there are string pullers behind the scenes who do have a plan. That politicians flounder sometimes just shows how they're not fully briefed; mere pawns getting pushed around.

I think they had a plan to go in all guns blazing after pro Argentinian Obama thought his puppet Cameron would quickly get the war passed by parliament.

And for the first time i can remember the politicians in Westminster actually represented their constituents and most voted against.

Now it seems they can resolve this situation without a war and the Russians who represent the free world these days have made Obama, Cameron, Kerry and all the other war mongers look like the out of their depth little salesmen they are.

Russia representing the Free World! First time I have heard that piece of nonsense.

i don't think it's nonsense. as far as Syria and the usual war mongering is concerned Russia does indeed represent the thinking of the "free world's" citizens but not necessarily the opinions of the boot licking politicians of the "free world".

[NeverToReturn]

^^

You credit them with actually having a plan, Obama and his poodle Camoron haven't a clue, they're just salesmen.

Have to say i loved the picture of the wannabee murderer John Kerry eating and drinking with friend Assad, kind of sums up all our recent wars, and no doubt most throughout history.

The UN ought to change the rules of future wars that at least 99% of politicians must go on the front line, then id most certainly be up more wars.

I think certainly there are string pullers behind the scenes who do have a plan. That politicians flounder sometimes just shows how they're not fully briefed; mere pawns getting pushed around.

I think they had a plan to go in all guns blazing after pro Argentinian Obama thought his puppet Cameron would quickly get the war passed by parliament.

And for the first time i can remember the politicians in Westminster actually represented their constituents and most voted against.

Now it seems they can resolve this situation without a war and the Russians who represent the free world these days have made Obama, Cameron, Kerry and all the other war mongers look like the out of their depth little salesmen they are.

Russia representing the Free World! First time I have heard that piece of nonsense.

On this and on the guy who blew the whistle on America and its poodle Britain spying on its citizens it most certainly is.

Besides Russia has extremely low tax rates, what better way to free the people then to let them spend their own money.

[yoshiwara]

On this and on the guy who blew the whistle on America and its poodle Britain spying on its citizens it most certainly is.

Besides Russia has extremely low tax rates, what better way to free the people then to let them spend their own money.

And beat up gays and imprison businessmen and murder news reporters. This is not pick 'n mix.

[yoshiwara]

Russia representing the Free World! First time I have heard that piece of nonsense.

i don't think it's nonsense. as far as Syria and the usual war mongering is concerned Russia does indeed represent the thinking of the "free world's" citizens but not necessarily the opinions of the boot licking politicians of the "free world".

Good to know that the free world is thinking in favour of Russia arming the Syrian state.

[mccw]

Russia representing the Free World! First time I have heard that piece of nonsense.

i don't think it's nonsense. as far as Syria and the usual war mongering is concerned Russia does indeed represent the thinking of the "free world's" citizens but not necessarily the opinions of the boot licking politicians of the "free world".

Good to know that the free world is thinking in favour of Russia arming the Syrian state.

Personally is rather arm the Syrian state than to have jihadi terrorist take over and access all its weaponry and chemicals / unleash a horde of worse lunatics and chaos right on Europe's door step.

[mccw]

Relevant to everybody:

http://danielamerman.com/course/nsFOURTEENb23.html

[yoshiwara]

Relevant to everybody:

http://danielamerman.com/course/nsFOURTEENb23.html

Its a long wind-up article with the pay-off a link to try and sell you something, so just a marketing blurb really.

[mccw]

Relevant to everybody:

http://danielamerman.com/course/nsFOURTEENb23.html

Its a long wind-up article with the pay-off a link to try and sell you something, so just a marketing blurb really.

No ; actually its to sign up a friend up for the free course; this is week 11 or so , moving on to the stock market after already dealing with property.

Can you show me how his maths is not correct?

[yoshiwara]

Relevant to everybody:

http://danielamerman.com/course/nsFOURTEENb23.html

Its a long wind-up article with the pay-off a link to try and sell you something, so just a marketing blurb really.

No ; actually its to sign up a friend up for the free course; this is week 11 or so , moving on to the stock market after already dealing with property.

Can you show me how his maths is not correct?

Easy. The whole 'world is ending' school has since 2008 put all its predictions on the runaway inflation story. And that story just hasn't happened.

It blows itself up and that is why there is no solution/action plan/ at the end.

Probably the coy link will have you buy gold or some equivalent fund. yes?

[yoshiwara]

Personally is rather arm the Syrian state than to have jihadi terrorist take over and access all its weaponry and chemicals / unleash a horde of worse lunatics and chaos right on Europe's door step.

That would presumably be the Syrian State actively supported by Iran. Actually your objection to terrorism appears to be a feint. Anti-Sunni and pro-Shiite.

[mccw]

Relevant to everybody:

http://danielamerman.com/course/nsFOURTEENb23.html

Its a long wind-up article with the pay-off a link to try and sell you something, so just a marketing blurb really.

No ; actually its to sign up a friend up for the free course; this is week 11 or so , moving on to the stock market after already dealing with property.

Can you show me how his maths is not correct?

Easy. The whole 'world is ending' school has since 2008 put all its predictions on the runaway inflation story. And that story just hasn't happened.

It blows itself up and that is why there is no solution/action plan/ at the end.

Probably the coy link will have you buy gold or some equivalent fund. yes?

Wrong again.

I posted part of the last part s few weeks ago, on the property topic. It explained how using mortgage turns what would have been a stagnation of value or even loss in to a good profit because the value of the cash loaned x number of years ago decreased leaving less value to pay off in today's terms.

Its not selling anything so far and I've been reading for weeks already.

Just good analysis.

You say inflation hasn't bla bla bla but the text explains how inflation and deflation can and do run together he then explains way to profit by your own understanding, not by selling periodic products. There has been no mention of PMs to date either.