perhaps u don't... is that a possibility? in any event, in this time & age and across the multiple type of indicators and ways of gathering and cross-checking the data, there is only so much in the way of manipulations etc one can do, and in how long one can 'hide the truth' from the myriad observing parties... your choice not to realize that... as for inflation assessments, thats a more complex issue than just looking at the CPI, ex or not... this is a good read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation inherent perhaps, but thats true of all things, without getting too philosophical. value is a relative concept, part individual, part consensus. to me gold is nothing, a gun with bullets or even a knife is more important, and if i need to get the gold from you some day because enough people believe it has 'value' and that'll make my life easier to get what has 'value' for me, i will... thats whats happening in countries where initially supportive people (and large int'l investors) have completely lost confidence in their government and institutions' integrity and/or competence, ability to handle, and things are beyond repair... collapse... has the US reached that stage or is any close to? doesn't seem so, v.far from, even... yeah well i happen to look at all that you see... u'll excuse me if i don't come to the same conclusions... but thks for trying to save me no, YOU are a smart guy me, am just a shareholder and as a business, i am still comfy with the level of gearing of my US toy thank u
i think that says everything we need to know about your bias, no offense of any kind, just a conspicuous expression of self interest you claim buddhist views in prev posts .. do you expect to gain anything meaningful at the expense of a whole people in this manner? i might sound naive, but i think you understand
that was just a joke... if u read my previous posts u will see that i do not disagree with the view that america is run as a business and that its not that great... http://elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1161489&highlight=solidarity#post1161489 ... simply, fiat, fed etc are not the real problems... if anything they are part of the solution... just my view separate stuff... if your familiar with some zen buddhist teachings, perhaps that one will make you smile as an anti-inflationary receipe... http://elitetrader.com/vb/search.ph...=1332038&sortby=lastpost&sortorder=descending
That pretty much sums it up about 2cents, so any attempt at a real discussion is kinda pointless. He starts laughing at my CC remarks, because he either does not want to research or is afraid to. I think I have asked at least 2 times, where does the money for the Consumer Credit Card line come from, in turns he laughs and calls me stupid. So maybe the correct response should be to laugh back, call him stupid and then follow up with a "yo momma" joke.
just food for thought matey -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote from Hydroblunt: That's how the major banks can afford to give out CCs to high credit risk individuals, it's never really a loss, just a write off at the worst case. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i thought THAT was your "yo momma" joke but... if u believe this statement makes any sense, why don't u give us 1 or 2 documented examples of this? particularly the "its never really a loss, just a write-off" bit... i am VERY interested champ'
Ok I have not thought this completely through, and not done proper research, but isnât privately owned central banks a safety net against socialization. If the central banks are owned by government, government could in theory confiscate all wealth by printing money fast enough and hyper inflate the economy. Privately owned central banks buy government bonds when they print money and earn interests on their bond holdings. If they print money too fast their holdings would loose value. That means that both economic incentives as well as regulations keeps privately owned central banks from printing money to fast. If government owned central banks on the other hand only the regulations they impose on themselves would keep them from hyper inflate. Is it possible to thrust government to resist the desire to spend more by destroying the value of their obligation and tax people with the hidden tax?
those are good questions. in terms of representation, i would personally rather place that trust in my democratic government, than a private banking institution on a related note, has anyone seen these? a friend told me that a trucker asked to spend them in her store last week http://www.libertydollar.org/ apparently silver backed Liberty Dollars are in relatively wide circulation for a private currency, and increasingly there are people transacting in them accross the country. there are a fair number of criticisms on wiki, but interesting to see private currency being used in the form of notes
Where do u get that info from? Just because The Fed chairman makes TV appearances, does not mean that they have to do anything the government tells them.
I assumed to much, In Norway the CB Norges Bank is state owned, and are instructed by the government to keep inflation at 2.5% over time. I assumed the Feds aim to keep inflation low in the US also came from government instructions and the main difference between the Fed and Norges Bank was in ownership only. From how stuff works: The Federal Reserve System was established in 1913 when Congress passed the Federal Reserve Act. Although the Fed is independent of the government, it is ultimately accountable to Congress because Congress can amend the Federal Reserve Act at any time. Its actions, however, do not require any kind of approval from the government. The Board of Governors: The Fed has a seven-member Board of Governors and 12 regional Reserve Banks. The U.S. president appoints (and the Senate confirms) the seven Governors, whose 14-year terms are staggered to prevent a single president from being able to appoint too many governors. The chairman of the Federal Reserve, who serves a four-year term, is also appointed by the president.
No on the surface it does not make any sense to a person that has little experience with financial statements & accounting of defaulted debt. But I assumed someone like you understands how write offs are used to protect profits against taxes. I mean, you almost pretend to be this super rich super expert so I'm sure you know how it works. A loss does not equal a write off in my book, not 100%. A write-off, while ideally should be a real loss, can also be financially manufactured or even bought for tax savings. Yes, there is a very very small market where tax shelters and write offs are traded. Call it a joke if u want, but it is there and I have even tried packaging smth like this with a certain Federal Tax Credit. A real loss means money out of the pocket that has been lost. I hope we can agree to that. So now think, how can a major CC company experience a REAL loss from a bad debtor when the money to fund that credit line came from....? It can't be its own assets because a bank's assets are its deposits and by law they cannot use someone else deposits to fund a credit card. It can't be from retained earnings put in as capital because if you simply look at the outstand CC debt, the numbers don't add up. Plus, consider all the capital expenditures, dividends, etc these banks do with their profits . You can check on this. A bank literally takes your promise to pay, which is the agreement you sign, and get money printed for it from the Fed Reserve system. Money out of thin air, lended to you at interest. How is there ever a real loss if you don't pay? But when u do default, the bank takes a write off on the outstanding debt (which is usually inflated to the max with penalties & interest), then sells it for 20% discount or so to a collection agency. What a business. Well if it's so easy, why don't they all do it? Well they DO. Have you seen consumer debt? Have you ever asked, how the hell does the system not collapse which so many maxed credit cards, BKs, late payments, etc. I think the video hints at it very well. Now when a smaller player, like Nextcard, tries to play the same game, they go BK. Nextcard operated on loans which they would relend. When the defaults went up, Nextcard couldn't handle it. Nextcard could not even last 2 years. Yet the big banks do the same and nothing bad ever happens, only profits. I mean, look at Capital One, a State Federal Reserve member, do you realize how loose their lending is? And these guys are rocking with profits.