sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

Wednesday's Top 10 with NZ Mint: The IMF's new orthodoxy; Spain's mortgage crisis spreads to the rich; China's fine art market and 'elegant bribery'; The big fiscal multipliers driving Europe's debt death spiral; Dilbert

Wednesday's Top 10 with NZ Mint: The IMF's new orthodoxy; Spain's mortgage crisis spreads to the rich; China's fine art market and 'elegant bribery'; The big fiscal multipliers driving Europe's debt death spiral; Dilbert

Here's my Top 10 links from around the Internet at 9.30 am today in association with NZ Mint.

As always, we welcome your additions in the comments below or via email to bernard.hickey@interest.co.nz.

See all previous Top 10s here.

My must read story is #7 on the debate over fiscal multipliers, which is crucial in the great debate between the Austerians (or should that be Austrians) and the Keynesians.

1. The changing face of the IMF - Bloomberg's leader writers have a nice summary of how the IMF has changed its thinking from hardline economic orthodoxy to something more pragmatic.

New Zealand's economic policy making elite are still stuck in the old IMF mode of always targeting smaller government, lower taxes, less regulated markets and free capital flows.

The new IMF is much more nuanced and sensible.

It says free movements of capital can be dangerous and counter productive for small open economies (ie New Zealand).

It also says austerity doesn't always work.

When is Treasury and the Reserve Bank (not to mention the cabinet) going to catch up with the change in the debate overseas?

Here's how the IMF has changed:

The IMF used to demand a severely conservative orthodoxy in fiscal and financial affairs. Its officials never saw a budget deficit that wasn’t too big or a financial restriction that wasn’t choking growth. As a dispenser of aid to governments under financial duress, the IMF could insist on its way or else, and rarely flinched from doing so.

In the past few years, through public statements and its many publications, the IMF has moved a great distance.

On fiscal affairs, its watchword is no longer “austerity now” but cautious pragmatism. It used to be more fiscally conservative than the average government. For the moment, it’s arguably less so, often emphasizing the dangers of too much fiscal tightening too soon.

On international capital flows, where it once deplored any and all restrictions, it’s coming around to judicious use of controls under certain circumstances.

Inflation was previously the spawn of the devil; the new view says it’s bad, but there can be worse things. When demand is deficient and fiscal restraint unavoidable, says the IMF’s new World Economic Outlook, adequate and possibly unorthodox “monetary accommodation” (which it might once have called gambling with inflation) is vital.

Even the editors of Bloomberg (which caters to bankers and fund managers) agrees:

The recession has thrown doubt on a lot of supposed certainties -- or should have. With interest rates pinned at zero, fiscal policy must shoulder a bigger role in countries where public debt isn’t so high as to rule out stimulus. In today’s accelerated financial markets, cross-border capital flows can be so disruptive (especially in developing or undiversified economies) that mild controls, intelligently applied, might sometimes be better for growth and stability than laissez faire.

2. Spreading to the core - Bloomberg reports on how mortgagee sales in Spain are spreading to the wealthier home owners.

It turns out the parents who guaranteed their kids to give them a lift up into a bubbly housing market are now being caught. Sound familiar? How many wealthier New Zealand families are doing the same for their kids here, particularly in Auckland?

Spanish business people, upper middle class families and their loan guarantors, typically parents of first-time buyers, now account for 60 percent of foreclosures in Madrid, according to AFES, an association that advises homeowners facing repossession. Three years ago, 80 percent of foreclosures were on the homes of immigrants, usually the first to lose jobs and fall behind on loan payments in a souring economy. They now comprise 40 percent of the total, according to AFES.

“Repossessions are encroaching further into the city centers, like an overflowing river,” said Emilio Miravet, head of real estate finance at the Spanish property unit of advisory and investment firm Catella AB. “At the beginning of the crisis, it was homes in the periphery areas belonging to the less affluent that were being foreclosed upon.”

Loan guarantors, often parents who used their houses as collateral to help their children become homeowners when real estate was booming, now represent a fifth of foreclosures, AFES data show.

3. Now it's close - Reuters reports Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are now even at 45% each in the latest opinion poll.

Romney and Ryan are austerians. If they get in, be ready for a U.S. slump.

4. A very short honeymoon - Wolf Richter writes at Naked Capitalism about the political situation in Spain. Remember, it's politics rather than economics that will drive the ultimate results in Europe and America.

The public are becoming disillusioned with politicians in general. Spain was a dictatorship until 1979.

Disillusioned and disappointed, they have taken to the streets with near daily waves of protests, demonstrations, and occasional street battles. Ignore them, Rajoy told a business audience in New York, and instead count on the “silent majority.” Turns out, that silent majority must be rather smallish as 77% of the people support the protesters.

5. The logic of pauperisation - Companies in Europe are starting to readjust their marketing strategies to deal with the poverty sweeping the continent.

They're looking at using the strategies they use in places like India, selling single sachets and the like.

Here's Testosterone Pit:

“Poverty is returning to Europe,” said Jan Zijderveld, head of Unilever’s European operations, in an interview. The British–Dutch consumer products company, third largest in the world, was adjusting its commercial strategy to this new reality, he said, by redeploying to Europe what worked in poor countries of the developing world. Now the stars of the industry are affirming it. “The logic of pauperization,” L’Oréal CEO Jean-Paul Agon called it on Wednesday.

“If Spaniards are down to spending on average €17 per shopping trip, I can’t sell him detergent for half of his budget,” Zijderveld explained. “In Indonesia we sell individual packages of shampoo for 2 to 3 cents and still earn a fair amount.”

6. A curious type of inflation - A Columbia University paper on China's amazingly lucrative art market gives a fantastic insight into how China's officials are bribed.

It's called 'elegant bribery'.

We explore the impact of corruption on the Chinese art auction market. More specifically, the Chinese have coined the term “elegant bribery” to describe bribery cases that involve cultural objects. The most common scenario of such transactions is as follows: The briber first presents a forged artwork as a gift to the official being bribed, which does not violate the Chinese anti-corruption laws since such artworks have very low monetary value. Then, the official auctions the painting via an auction house.

Finally, the briber attends the auction and purchases the artwork back for a very high price, as if he mistook the work for an original. Since bribery, rather than investment or personal appreciation, is the purpose of such purchases, “elegant bribery” is a significant source of inelastic demand for works of art in the Chinese auction market, driving prices beyond what can be explained by observable characteristics.

7. Fiscal multipliers - INSEAD Economics Professors Antonio Fatas and Ilian Mihov point in their blog to an interesting discussion in the latest IMF forecasts about fiscal multipliers.

The austerians have, it turns out, been underestimating the multiplier effects of government spending, which means the austerity programmes they are demanding are contracting economies more than expected...

The worrying thing is the actual academic research shows multipliers of over 1, while the Austerians have just assumed it's much less than 1 or even zero. The Austerians assume the private sector will always pick up the slack, but that's not happening as household sectors deleverage and the income share shifts to the upper end of the spectrum.

Here's Fatas and Mihov:

These new (and old) academic results have simply be displaced by the ideological debate that followed the fiscal policy stimulus of the 2008-2009 period, which somehow led to the conclusion that those policies did not work and that what we now needed was more austerity. And when over the last two years we forecasted GDP growth rates in the face of coordinated austerity by many governments we somehow forgot to consider that multipliers can be large.

This is what the IMF suggests now in their analysis, which, by the way, is also self critical. They look at their recent forecasts for global growth and they suggest that their model was implicitly using fiscal policy multipliers around 0.5 when measuring the impact of fiscal consolidation. Given that their GDP growth forecast has been overestimating growth, the IMF now wonders whether multipliers are higher than 0.5. The analysis in the current World Economic Outlook suggests that multipliers might be within the range 0.9 to 1.7.

8. Ultimately debt forgiveness is the only solution - As the screws tighten in Europe, it's clear the only sustainable way to restart these indebted economies is to forgive or destroy debt. The other solution is to inflate away the debt, but let's not talk about that too much...

Here's CNBC looking at Ireland's proposed new laws to encourage debt forgiveness:

Most countries that have suffered housing busts, including the United States, have made limited use of so-called mortgage write-downs, the process of forgiving a portion of the principal on the loan. The worry has been that some borrowers who can afford their mortgages will stop making payments to take advantage of a bailout. Banks have also been reluctant since they could face unexpected losses.

Ireland is different from the United States and most countries. During the financial crisis, Ireland bailed out the banks, and the government still has large ownership stakes in some of the biggest mortgage lenders. So taxpayers are already responsible for mortgage losses. In other countries, the burden of principal forgiveness would largely fall on privately owned banks.

But the debate is the same: whether to push lenders to take losses now, in hopes that things will get better faster, or wait for the housing market to heal on its own, which could cloud the economy for years to come.

Countries suffering from a housing hangover will most likely be watching Ireland closely to see how the law works. Spain, swamped with mortgage defaults, introduced a measure in March that allows for debt forgiveness, though under strict conditions.

9.  Spain's growing black hole - Bloomberg reports on the growing black hole that is Spain's budget. It highlights the fundamental problem in Europe. Further to the fiscal multipliers discussion at #7, the austerity contracts the economy, which makes the budget deficit worse, which triggers more austerity, which contracts the economy...

You get the picture.

Rinse and repeat.

The fiscal and political consequences of demanding austerity in a shrinking economy highlight the dilemma facing Rajoy. To trigger a European financial lifeline, he may have to impose yet more cuts, repeating the pattern seen in Greece, Portugal and Ireland.

Spain’s economy probably contracted for a fifth quarter between July and September, according to the central bank. Output won’t return to the 2008 level until at least 2017, the International Monetary Fund forecasts. As a result, the program of budget consolidation the EU first set out for Spain in 2009 is going backward.

“Even as you cut, the gap between spending and revenue collection keeps getting larger,” said Jonathan Tepper, a partner at research firm Variant Perception in London.

10. Totally Jon Stewart on Sesame Street. Big Bird is going to get his comeuppance if Romney gets in.

 

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

55 Comments

Yes, "affordability" of whatever means will only last as long as it will last.

If at any point there is an increase in interest rates, job downsizing, loss, etc, not only will the mortgager be in deep trouble but also their parents (ref #2) might also have to loose their own home.  At lot of current home loan is backed not only by the house being mortgaged, but also being guaranteed by the borrowers parents who have to caveat their own "mortgage free" home as security.

 

Talking about dominoes !!

Up
0

Hugh - re - banking negligence. I'd rather point the finger at the those who write the legislation and Policy the banks have to comply with. 

 

Too much regulation makes everything far too complex. Simplicity is the key.

 

Have to agree with Volker on the ATM invention and that innovation could be surpassed with this new phone system of payment (haven't taken part in it yet I'm being a bit of dinosaur so not not even sure what you call it).

Up
0

Snippy - this happens in NZ also ! 

Up
0

C'mon snippy - it must be obvious to all that NZ has been captured by government gangsters collaborating with their cohorts in the corporate sector.

 

The general public is just expected to pay and pay and pay some more, no questions asked.  Mussolini type fascism has engulfed what used to pass for democracy in this country - surely we cannot be missing the obvious - how many snubs of public opinion, non-tendered contracts signed, etc does it take to get the message?

Up
0

Snippy - You'd end up with an ankle bracelet and being monitored by GPS and the GCSB and the person in charge of you would probably have PMT.  Ahh the smell of rotten eggs on expensive suits would be rather funny though. And just remember if those eggs float they're ripe for the job.

Up
0

Snippy - I fully agree. The problems are pretty much the same the world over and NZ is no exception.

 

I don't think we will see cheaper housing in NZ for a while. Young people can still buy a house, they just have to do things a little differently and maybe delay having a family until the can afford to have one.  It was pretty tough in the 1980's buying a house and interest rates and inflation were high but people still purchased. 

 

This whole housing fiasco started quite a few years back and I can still remember Helen Clark telling NZ'ers that their house were worth more and so they were doing better. But hey people believed her and then she gave some of them a reprieve with the WFF.

 

Nothing will change until a Government starts deregulating.  None of the mainstream parties entertain this concept as they want to look after themselves and their friends so I don't see this happening. The current strong support for the Greens is also an impediment as they think everything is environmentally dangerous and therefore should be controlled. Unfortunately the Environment is the thing we live in so we are all screwed by this philosophy regardless of whether there is an environmental impact or not.

 

If the young one's want change then they are going to have to get political and so far they are not doing that and I think the reason maybe that they don't know what the changes should be. This new minimum wage on the young may well end up being the catalist to motivate a generation to get involved. Nothing like a bit of fire in the belly and hardship directly caused by legislation, targeted at one specific group, this could well light a fuse.

 

In the meantime I would suggest that people must be doing OK as they are not getting up in arms they are only moaning. 

 

 

 

 

Up
0

IMF also admits it got fiscal multipliers wrong,

http://fatasmihov.blogspot.com.au/2012/10/underestimating-fiscal-policy…

regards

Up
0

#3, afraid Bernard has rather under-estimated the Ryan, Romney ticket there. If they get in you will actually find they are not fiscally conservative. It's pretty clear Romneys big plan is military spending, probably investment in high tech weapons systems, and they probably won't do anything to stop the Fed from being independent.

 

Up
0

However Romney has said he will curb the Fed, I'd also expect him to replace Bernankie...if he does then we are in for a very nasty time IMHO....full tilt into a depression.

regards

Up
0

Umm, who cares what he said?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABAZ1saI3Kk

Though I do think these guys are only committed to saving part of the US economy. Guess what, the holes in their budget plans are US government deficits waiting to happen.

 

Up
0

Great piece....however what that means is really we are not going to do it as long as others pay that price, meanwhile "we'll make sure we dont"...

Sure I think they are commited, or maybe its commitable....

;]

What they do want to do is save themselves while throwing everyone else off the fiscal cliff.....except they dont seem to think they and those are chained together. They are of course bt then their voodoo economics beliefe means they dont recognise that as possible....

Whats amazing and highlighted by that piece is even when caught out lieing they still survive...mind boggling

regards

Up
0

Your dead wrong about this, I am telling you a bunch of politicians will say literally anything to get votes, will play literally any character, and you don't believe it for some reason. The funny thing is many of their voters probably care more about the government deficit than they do.

Look the Kock brothers are giving them a hell of a lot of money, do you think that they are unaware where their energy subsidies come from and that they want the government to run a lean ship? Hardly, pretty soon thats going to bite into their slice.

 

 

Up
0

I dont understand how anyone can think either side will make much difference either way... they are just show ponies - neither has any real plan or even intention to reduce the deficit a material amount... neither will change the end outcome for the US... They say what they say to get elected then 'the establishment' takes over....

Up
0

Yep. Democrats and Republicans. Two factions of the same party. Ditto National/Labour, Conservatives/Labour, Liberals/Labour....

Up
0

Well if what I said is correct, then the Romney ticket pushes the US government further into the hands of the military industrial complex. That's a visible difference, and if one part of the economy is left to rot, I don't like the looks of that.

I think its a miss characterisation to say that the establishment takes over, they are the ones selecting the actual policies for these guys, the establishment of the democratic party has a marginally better record  on domestic policy as far as I can observe.

If the US defaults on its government debt, it will be 100% voluntary.

 

Up
0

The US government is already in the hands of the military industrial complex and has been for years. Obama's record is just as bad as Bush, and a second Obama term will probably see them have a go at Iran (or a first Mitt term) - take your pick - makes no difference...

Yes the establishment never let go as you point out, as they are the ones who picked the candidates in the first place, so it makes no material difference, which was my point. If the Americans believe that polititians will solve their problems they are just plain stupid. Its the polititians that are making it worse.

 

The US will not default - they will just keep printing (although in a way that is a soft default). No one wants the consequences of an all out default.

 

 

Up
0

Very true economist. The US is basically a military dictatorship with a puppet spokesman and the pretence of democracy. It makes very little difference which one gets elected - they have been bought by big business and will basically do as they agreed to do in return for the donations.

The Koch brothers alone raised/donated over $400,000,000 towards Romneys election campaign - you can just imagine what he has promised them and their petrochem buddies in return for that much money.

I think for a while back in 2008 after Obama's "yes we can" speech people thought things might actually be different. But no. In that respect Obama has been the most disappointing President ever IMHO.

Up
0

agree

Up
0

Ah yes - the 'yes we can' speech. Great speech btw, but a big con. Why do so many Americans still not get it? I mean talk about blantant. Its become some kind of sick joke.

 

400,000 is a drop in the bucket - the thing is once you are in - you get a visit from a senior congressman who will explain about insider trading (which congressmen are in effect exempt from) and how to hide the funds offshore... its too big a temptation (even for the tea party) as millions are made and hidden away from voters eyes... they tell you about a small company that will greatly benefit from a law about to be passed or a government grant about to be given... and they 'help you out'... so to speak.... and then there is the campaign donations you can keep tax free...

 

The only thing that will save America is for the nation to come together and do a complete moral about face/turn around - something that the politicians are incapable of bringing to America....

Up
0

Koch brothers campaign raising was over US$400 million, not thousand. It's a sizeable chunk of his entire campaign funds, and that's just the donations they know about.

Agree the insider trading exemption for congress is a joke.

Up
0

Crikey do dilly Stan, thats a lot of campaign contributions! The pay back has to be something sweet.

Up
0

I think there is bad, obama and worse, Romney.   Despite his poor record Obama will try and hold it all together, Romney on the other hand will just let it go. So I think there will be a noticable difference, a mutton head win guarantees a depression in short order IMHO.

The only Q is will Romney standby and allow Bernanke to try and stop the collapse or will he replace Bernankie with say Neill Fergson....then it wont be helicopter Bernankie but how deep and we dive before the hull implodes Neill F!

regards

 

Up
0

I think they will be about the same.

1. The Fed will support the banks (either way) as it always has done and like any cartel will just look out for the members of the cartel. That means more printing, Bernanke or no Bernanke. The Fed has undercover ways of printing - like currency swaps - that it can just convert to covertly. Cant see how changing the US President changes that. Mitt is firmly in the hands of the banking establishment.

 

Romney/Ryan will not let it go - he's just playing to the Republican core voter support. He has no intention or plan of closing the deficit any material amount at all.  Just like Obama promised to 'half the deficit' in his first term (which is more than Mitts promising btw) - its just 'vote appeal talk'.... he never had any intention of doing so whatsoever.

 

Any US president who materially closes the deficit this decade will put the US in a depression. Its the thing thats allowing the US to live beyond its means. The question is how long can this go on in la la land? Certainly not forever, everyone knows that. The longer it does go on the worse it will be to rebalance/correct it. Personally I believe its already gone past the point where a severe depression is avoidable. Of the two common solutions proposed - 'borrow/print and spend massively' and 'cut spending drastically' - I think both roads lead to ruin in the end.

Up
0

Yup, and the one time they attempted to address the debt problem the special panel they created couldn't agree on cuts/taxes so it fell into the default option, which is the looming fiscal cliff of December.

And that'll knock 4% off their GDP, which - let me get the math right here - knocks the US into a recessionary -3%. And since they can't let that happen there'll be more exxemptions and extensions and there goes the one not even remotely serious attempt they made to tackle the deficit (that didn't even try to tackle the US$16 trillion debt mountain).

The USA are heading down the same path they forced Russia to walk - spending so much on military expenditure that eventually it bankrupts the country. Except in this case it's the USA's own miltitary industrial complex doing it to the government, by endless lobbying and buying Presidencies.

Up
0

It just eerie the comparison with the Titanic;

  • It was the symbol of never ending opulence and invincibility.
  • It reflected the period's extravagance and arrogance
  • It reflected the belief nothing could sink the expanding British dominated world economy
  • The captain ordered full speed ahead, despite being warned of icebergs, with reckless abandon
  • Half the lifeboats left half empty as people couldn't believe the boat would sink and didn't want to leave the comfort of the ship until it was too late
  • The poor were made to pay the greatest cost
  • etc...

People in the US still believe the government will save them, that the FDIC will come to their rescue, that another great depression could never happen as the 'professionals' know what they are doing, the Federal Reserve has more power these days, so let's all go back to Paris Hilton and American Idol - move on - nothing to see here....

Up
0

Bernanke has to go! His money printing "to infinity and beyond" is causing long term damage to the global economy.

All will come home to roost the nest time the economy next takes a dive. They have added way too much debt to an economy already way too deep in debt. Not to mention the ECB........

Up
0

"push lenders to take a loss"...because savers are lenders and they will forget their losses and carry on saving...not.

How about push banks to take a loss on the thin air credit they created....oooops can't do that because banks would fail...murdering savers with deposits...or taxpayers with bank bailouts...

Conclusion:  Debt forgiveness is a BS idea. 

Up
0

Banks always play with other people's money..Earlier they used to be risk takers while lending and got a reward by way of margins...then they became Risk Creators, with subprime loans, derivatives, swaps, etc  and have roped in the government and by extension the public to bear the losses..stuffing their pockets and stuffing up the backside of everyone else, and the governments

Up
0

Bit cynical about #1. Perhaps the IMF are being a bit less prescriptive now because the problems have reached the US and the old countries of Europe. They don't want to be subjected to the same measures they imposed on the African and Latin American nations for decades.

 

Still for those fans of Rogernomics (are there any left?) this is another nail in the coffin. New Zealand was the only nation to impose economic measures the equivalent of IMF Structural Adjustment Programmes voluntarily. National's asset sales are a remnant of this. Eventually the fact that these measures don't work will sink into even their thick skulls.

Up
0

question?

why is america always bowing down to israel ?

why do the jews control much of the american economy.

given the above why don't the american people ever put a jew in the whitehouse?

Ithink we can all answer that one

Up
0

Ngakonui, if you want to get elected in the USA you cannot ignore the Jewish lobby or the Christian Neocons who believe that the Israelis are God's chosen people. I do not think Obama likes being told what to do by Israel, but he does not want to get offside with either group. That is a lot of votes at stake.

Not only that, but a third of US aid goes to Israel so that they can then buy American weapons (with loans that get written off every few years). So there is an even more powerful lobby to worry about, the American arms suppliers, who can be useful for funding your election campaign. That is a lot of money at stake.

As always, politics is complicated.

Up
0

It is a curious one. As you point out Israel gets many billions in aid each year, mostly arms transfers without which its own economy couldn't afford either its military or much of its welfare. But this perpetuates the militarisation of the Middle East and allows the continued subjugation of the Palestinians. Ditto Pakistan and Egypt. Massive military aid which is essentially corporate welfare for the US arms manufacturers. I suspect this is the primary motivation. US taxpayers massive subsidisation of the military industrial complex. The religious stuff is a factor but its mostly money.

Up
0

Yep,

Ike was ignored it seems.

regards

Up
0

#8 Again this is a case for Keen's Jubilee. It avoids issues around loading up on debt or stopping payments; it avoids the moral hazard of just benefitting those taking on debt; it doesn't force banks to take losses on loans, just forgo future interest income; and it avoids austerity and a lost decade.

 

What's better, making a jubilee payment to everyone with compulsory debt repayment and resetting the economy or waiting for things to get so bad the banks have to be bailed out and their loans assumed by the taxpayer anyway as per Ireland. The only other option is letting everything collapse and all the debt liquidated by bankruptcy. Might be morally satisfying to some amongst us but would hurt everyone with a widespread depression.

Up
0

I go with Steve Keen idea because I dont think its only a decade and the impact could be a Greater Depression greater than the 1930s.

If that occurs the un-employment stats will make today look like nirvana....and those lucky enough to have jobs will be suffering very high taxes (like 70%) to pay for those many that do not. Not to mention riots aka Greece, UK and coming to spain I suspect..

Climbing out a hole like that is probably over 30 years....maybe 50.

The biggest issue with allowing collapse is no banks no food...you might have gold but if pak-n-saves shelves are empty you'd be better off with lead and be prepared to use it to not starve.

regards

 

 

 

Up
0

The IMF is now run by financial fools

@7/8/9 etc The simply reality is the problem is debt most of it non prodictive debt due to excess spending, Govt's, households you name it induced by central banks for decades.

They can dress it up however they like kick the can down the road as far as they like in the end if the borrowers how can't repay they go broke and default the lenders suffer the consequences the majority go broke therein all learn the lesson at least for a couple of generations.

 

Up
0

Obamacare.... Bottom line: there is no escape for employers of full-time workers.

Read more at http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.co.nz/#KtK3coKDmlTRO8ks.99

Consequences: Decline in full time employment openings...and increase in contract work...

Just a case of firing full time employees and hiring twice as many part timers or allocating contract work...

Up
0

Wolly maybe you are being taken as a patsie...

I was suspicious of Mish's politics over-riding his economics for a while, now I see him quoting the "According to the Heritage Foundation" I know he's a crock of doo doo.

Then of course throw in "The Manhattan Institute" [who]  received $19,470,416 in grants from 1985–2005, from foundations such as the Koch Family Foundations

and you can get a pcture of just how biased their and Mish's economics could be.

regards

Up
0

Everything is biased steven and everyone!...doesn't change the Obamacare madness does it!

As I understand the employment farce in France, contract work that bypasses the stupid laws is the norm for employers .....and contract workers who still have a job...private sector of course...public jobs are a handout for life.

Up
0

Obamacare is healthcare for all Americans...that isnt madness IMHO.  The alternative is crippling costs for those that can afford to pay or no healthcare for those that cannot, (unless bankrupt?) hardly a great idea.

I'd be surprised if France was like that, anymore than anywhere else anyway but Elly would have to comment...I have on knowledge of french employment/laws.

regards

Up
0

IMF has always been the rich countries' lap dog, prescribing austerity and open investments for poorer countries (screw the citizens of those poor countries), but having a double standard when things turn to custard in richer western countries.....LIke the Rating Agencies, IMF lost its credibility long back.....

Up
0

Yes, except their more recent work over the last 4 years is showing a lot more rigour and justification. Its interesting that now they get flak from the far right, never used to.

regards

Up
0

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NJ10Ak02.html

 

Egypt's backbone, for millennia and today, is the arable land along the Nile.  Egypt has maintained the Nile's flow by force.  But, look into the future: the population in the headwaters of the Nile - Ethiopia, Uganda, Sudan - is skyrocketing from nil to an estimated 300 milliion in 30 years.



Remember how the Colorado no longer makes it to the Gulf of California?  There is no way in hell that Egypt is going to avoid becoming a ghost town.  Same for Syria and Iraq; the Tigris and Euphrates headwaters are in booming southern (NATO member) Turkey.  The Arabs need to learn better ways to settle their differences than "lose-lose" dynamite vests, or the Arab "Spring" is going to become a very dry Arab Summer.  And there's not a damned thing that the West can do about it.

Up
0

They want us to believe that Turkey needs Nato's  help to defend it from Syria.

 

  They must think we are all daft.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/middle-east/7797659/Nato-ready-to-defend-T…

Up
0

The Nobel prize for physics goes to Haroche of France & Wineland ( USA ) for their optical experiments in quantum physics ..... they proved that they could manipulate quantum matter ..

 

..... the day of the mega-super computer , based on quantum physics , is that little bit closer !

Up
0

GBH - your always on to it ! Now if we could just observe and measure the tiny particles that roam the beehive and a few other buildings...... wa..la....no....more.....regulation....and....compliance.

 

Up
0

notaneconomist : .... we can all benefit from  broadening the personal reading range  beyond the daily gloom , doom & despair of Chicken-Little Hickey ....

 

There are amazing breakthroughs occurring all around the globe in the sciences , communications & in medicine ....

 

.... stuff that makes you realise that the world is a better and more exciting place to live in right now , not a worse place to be ......

Up
0

Gummy - nigh impossible - since Heisenberg und Pauli (uncertainty principle) and double slit experiments (particle is intelligent enough to "know" when one slit already occupied) it is impossible to observe position and velocity of particles at the same time. So,  manipulation of quantum physics????? 

Up
0

The double-slit particle experiment is my favorite scientific phenomenon. How do the little blighters know they are being watched???

Up
0

StanGoodvibes - It's amazing - makes you realise how little we know !

Up
0

Because they are either wave or  particle, both at the same time, which traditional physics considered impossible, mutually exclusive.Yet they are endowed with intelligence and conscousness, try to grasp this, even top quantum physicists  cannot grasp it .........everything we see and can measure is an illusion..........so don't worry, be happy!

Up
0

Reminds me of my favorite Bill Hicks quote, where he is complaining about the lack of good drug stories on the evening News...

How about a positive LSD story? Wouldn't that be news-worthy, just the once? To base your decision on information rather than scare tactics and superstition and lies? I think it would be news-worthy. 'Today, a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration. That we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There is no such thing as death, life is only a dream and we're the imagination of ourselves' . . . 'Here's Tom with the weather.”

So so true LOL

Up
0

Interesting developments in the Steel wars with Arrium selling its stake in NZST to defend its position from the POSCO consortium.( south korea telecom just sold its stake in POSCO)

The recent merger with Nippon Steel and Sumitomo making the worlds second  largest steel producer with objectives of  50% production increase capability.NSS will do some stock taking with the least energy efficient plants,and moving to new technology and higher value products ( lighter steels with increased strength)

BHP is a supplier to NSS and has just raised a bond issue( paying less then the Aus Banks can) steel is assumed to be a lesser risk then financial institutions.

Up
0

#1.  Bernard is on to his old obsession again.  To be consistent  he would acknowledge the economy would be enhanced by him borrowing as much as he can, then him sending it over to me so I can spend it all rapidly.

GDP would be up.  Bernard would be indebted heavily.  And I would be encumbered with a lot of crap I don't need.  (and he will never be paid back either)

If that all sounds dumb, it certainly is.  It would enhance GDP though, it's just the same device that Bernard advocates, but with different participants.

Up
0