Here's my Top 10 links from around the Internet at midday in association with NZ Mint.
As always, we welcome your additions in the comments below or via email tobernard.hickey@interest.co.nz.
See all previous Top 10s here.
My must reads together are #1 and #7 together, which explain why the current version of QE is not generating strong growth. Investors don't trust it.
1. It's just not working - PIMCO's Bill Gross has written in his widely read monthly column that the evidence shows the US Federal Reserve's programme of Quantitative Easing is not working to encourage investment.
Instead, investment is falling and households are still spending at the same rate.
Gross has a nice discussion about financial repression, which is where interest rates are held lower than inflation to quietly inflate away debt without having to force the wipeout of bank shareholders and haircuts for bank and other bond holders.
He says economic growth looks set to be very slow and the huge imbalance between asset prices and underlying economic growth creates the risk of massive financial disruption.
This reinforces the lack of investment by investors scared of losing it all.
Rinse and repeat.
How will this logjam be broken?
Here's Gross with an excellent column and some provocative charts.
In the past three years of quantitative easing and financial repression, can we see a noticeable effect on investment as opposed to consumption? Is the Bernanke model working or is the $9,975 being spent on consumption? At first blush, an observer might vote for the Bernanke model. After all, the stock market has doubled in three-plus years, risk spreads are at historical lows, and housing prices are moving up – 10% higher in Southern California alone. Yet the real economy itself seems no different – still in New Normal gear. Surely by now, if the Bernanke model was as advertised, we would be seeing a pickup in investment as a percentage of GDP and a willingness to start saving “seed corn” as opposed to eating “caramel corn.” As Chart 1 points out – we are not. At the same time, we continue to consume at an “Old Normal” pace as shown in Chart 1 as well.
And then he delivers another cracking chart showing America still eating into its capital stock.
Net national savings is the amount of government, household and corporate savings that is left over after our existing investment stock is depreciated. Think of a building decaying and depreciating over 30 years so that you’d need to save each and every year to build and pay for a new one three decades down the road. If you don’t save, you can’t buy one: Net national savings.
Well, Chart 2 confirms the evidence. Over the past three years, our net national savings rate has been negative, and lower than it has ever been in modern history. The last time this occurred was in the Great Depression.All of the money being created and freed up is elevating asset prices, but those prices are not causing corporations to invest in future production. Admittedly, the chart shows this downward spiral has been underway for decades, but financial repression and quantitative easing were supposed to be the extraordinary monetary policies that kick-started the real economy in the other direction. They have not. We have been using the lower interest rates, the $9,975 of free money, to consume as opposed to invest.
2, The engine's not firing - The SMH reports Australia's Reserve Bank has cut its Official Cash Rate by 1.25% to 3.25% since the end of last year, yet house prices there have fallen over the same time.
Home prices fell in October after four months of gains, dashing hopes of a quick housing market recovery aided by lower interest rates. Capital city homes prices fell 1 per cent in October, following a 1.4 per cent increase in September, according to the RP Data Rismark, after the Reserve Bank cut interest rates through 2012. Home prices fell 0.9 per cent in Sydney and 1.1 per cent in Brisbane, RP Data said.
‘‘Despite the cash rate being only 25 basis points higher than the emergency lows seen in 2009, we are yet to see a real improvement in consumer confidence or housing market transaction volumes,’’ said RP Data’s research director Tim Lawless.
Home prices fell 0.9 per cent in Brisbane but rose 0.4 per cent in Perth, RP Data said. Outside of capital cities home prices sank 0.6 per cent in the month. October’s fall occurs during the spring selling season, traditionally a time of renewed activity in the sector.
3. LNG Trucks - FedEX says it is trialling the use of LNG fueled trucks in America. This might be one of the ways America starts to use all that fracking gas it has discovered.
4. Euro-rebellion - Tory MPs in Britain helped Labour block a European Union spending bill in the British parliament earlier this week.
His defeat increases the likelihood of a referendum on Britain’s EU membership – especially when Labour is prepared to play games on such an important issue – and at the very least a renegotiation over terms of engagement. Our relationship with Europe looks set to be a feature at the next general election, however parochial this country’s concerns appear in a fast-changing world. Mr Cameron may be forced to bang on rather a lot about the subject.
Wednesday’s defeat, however, highlights more immediate issues over the prime minister’s control of his ranks. Undeniably his team is guilty of some ineptitude. But his party is close to unmanageable, such is its amazing ability to inflict wounds on itself. Increasingly, it appears to have suicidal tendencies that would make a lemming proud.
The central cause of rebellion was correct. Brussels is guilty of breathtaking waste with its inflated bureaucracy, grotesque inefficiencies, overpaid officials and spendthrift policies. This is unacceptable at a time when economic meltdown is causing misery across Europe and governments are imposing tough austerity measures. And the voices making the case loudest should be those that support membership, not those who oppose it.
5. 'Weather on steroids' - Bloomberg BusinessWeek deems the time since Sandy as long enough to say the obvious: "It's global warming stupid!"
Which raises the question of what alerts and measures to undertake. In his book The Conundrum, David Owen, a staff writer at the New Yorker, contends that as long as the West places high and unquestioning value on economic growth and consumer gratification—with China and the rest of the developing world right behind—we will continue to burn the fossil fuels whose emissions trap heat in the atmosphere. Fast trains, hybrid cars, compact fluorescent light bulbs, carbon offsets—they’re just not enough, Owen writes.
Yet even he would surely agree that the only responsible first step is to put climate change back on the table for discussion. The issue was MIA during the presidential debates and, regardless of who wins on Nov. 6, is unlikely to appear on the near-term congressional calendar. After Sandy, that seems insane.
6. Here's Chris Slane on John Key's memory lapses
7. US growth, or just more debt - Here's Cate Long with a useful chart showing debt growing faster than the US economy...
You can see in the chart above that the amount of U.S. debt issuance far exceeds the dollar amount of growth for the national economy. Part of the debt issuance is used to repay old bonds that reach maturity and must be repaid. According to the Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee, which is chaired by Matthew Zames of JPMorgan, $276 billion of third quarter 2012 debt issuance was “new money,” beyond what was needed to pay off old bonds. The real dollar growth in the GDP was $190 billion, much less than the amount of “new money” debt issuance. Treasury bond issuance seems to have financed all the growth in GDP.
8. Totally a cute animal picture especially for Amanda - Courtesy of Wired.
9. Totally the great Toy Love Bride of Frankenstein video - Yeeha! HT Russell Brown.
I love the base line at the end.
Very clever policy.
61 Comments
#1. That last chart is very telling, it lines up nicely with peak oil in the US and the slowing of world population growth in 1961. Building and growing requires energy and resources, which have been getting harder to get and more expensive for fifty years. Of course the world is living off its capital and will continue to do so, the evidence is there if you choose to look. Sticking your head in the sand and pretending it isn't happening won't help you.
Yes it is, I tried to explain yesterday how increasing use of unconventional oil decreases the net energy available to society to do useful work with. The rammifications of this are obviously less net energy available for manufacturing, transport, construction, and economic growth.
We are now in a slow energy squeeze and yet some people have no clue. My advice, get used to living with less energy, barring a technological miracle (fusion) reality is sending us some obvious signals of where we are heading!
@5 Some context is helpful
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/outreach/history/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_York_hurricanes
Found this so sharing it with you.
How is it that a Tropical storm hitting the east coast is proof of global warming, while most of Europe having it’s first snow of the season a month early isn’t proof of an incipient ice age? Same logic, right?
http://english.cntv.cn/program/newsupdate/20121028/101286.shtml
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20107130
http://www.euronews.com/2012/10/28/cold-snap-hits-france-with-first-signs-of-winter/
http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss_news/Snow_catches_Swiss_unawares.html?cid=33830010
This too Or how about from Bloomberg endorses Obama, citing Sandy and climate change
http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/01/14860173-bloomberg-endorses-obama-citing-sandy-and-climate-change?lite
Because the eastern seaboard water temperature is 5F warmer than normal (which I admit is mostly due to the Northern Arctic Oscillation) and the huge Greenland blocking high which appears to have been caused by the shift of the jet stream which appears to have been caused by the Arctic sea melt. Nothing definitive but these things are all inter-related.
The Arctic ice melt (which funnily enough was the largest on record this year, http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ab6fd1e2-0286-11e2-8cf8-00144feabdc0.html ) results in huge amounts of fresh water being emptied into the Atlantic. Over twenty years ago it was predicted that this influx of fresh water would disrupt the Gulf Stream, ultimately leaving the UK with a climate comparable to a similar latitude on the opposite side of the Atlantic, think Newfoundland/Labrador. We can't say we weren't warned.
http://environment.about.com/od/globalwarmingandweather/a/gulf_stream.htm
Nope.
What is sea ice?
Sea ice is simply frozen ocean water. It forms, grows, and melts in the ocean. In contrast, icebergs, glaciers, ice sheets, and ice shelves all originate on land. Sea ice occurs in both the Arctic and Antarctic. In the Northern Hemisphere, it can currently exist as far south as Bohai Bay, China (approximately 38 degrees north latitude), which is actually about 700 kilometers (435 miles) closer to the Equator than it is to the North Pole. In the Southern Hemisphere, sea ice only develops around Antarctica, occurring as far north as 55 degress south latitude.
Sea ice grows during the winter months and melts during the summer months, but some sea ice remains all year in certain regions. About 15 percent of the world's oceans are covered by sea ice during part of the year.
That's actually an excellent link you provided, just a shame you didn't read it!
You only had to scroll down a little bit to the section titled, "Why is sea ice so important, and why do scientists study it?' which contains the following:
"Sea ice also affects the movement of ocean waters. When sea ice forms, most of the salt is pushed into the ocean water below the ice, although some salt may become trapped in small pockets between ice crystals. Water below sea ice has a higher concentration of salt and is more dense than surrounding ocean water, and so it sinks. In this way, sea ice contributes to the ocean's global "conveyor-belt" circulation. Cold, dense, polar water sinks and moves along the ocean bottom toward the equator, while warm water from mid-depth to the surface travels from the equator toward the poles. Changes in the amount of sea ice can disrupt normal ocean circulation, thereby leading to changes in global climate."
I take your point, and yes I had read it. Since this melting is an annual event and it is older multiyear sea ice which has eliminated most of its salt, the impact can't be much different from what is usually experienced, unless you can show me that the ice cover in the Arctic was less as a result of a major melting which affected cirulation to create the Little Ice Age, and that seems rather unlikely.
The Arctic ice melt this year was on the way to being near historic satellite record lows but a major storm broke up the ice and made it worse, although measurements are now going to be improved through a the use of GRASP
More interesting info on the Arctic here
Take a look at today's Arctic temp chart
I can assure you I'm not making this up.8-)
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php
And today's chart of Antarctic sea ice.
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_timeseries.png
Yep, sounds to me the above posters have an understanding of the science behind it - but I'm not a physical scientist.
I prefer to call the problem climate change, as opposed to global warming. I have never had much time for all the emphasis on rising temperatures, ice melt and sea level rise - as that is all so highly modelled/predictive. As one person recently commented to me "we are one super volcano away from an ice age" - but of course we are not madly planning for that, are we?. The much bigger issue is the intensity and frequency of weather events - and because we are so much more densely populated these days, the assets/people at risk magnifies with each passing year.
If I had to make a prediction - storm surge will get NYC well and truly before the level of the sea rises significantly.
Whether increased GHG emissions are the likely cause of these more intense/frequent events is, in my opinion, also a mute point. The more important issue is resource depletion - and not just fossil fuel but forest cover as well. So irregardless of whether the burning of fossil fuels is bad for the atmosphere or not (i.e. causing climate change) - we know they are bad for the air, we know mining is dangerous and environmentally risky, we know it's bad to deplete them where future generations are concerned, and we know it is good to grow trees, promote biodiversity and promote the development of renewable energy and energy conservation.
So, I don't think we should need to prove/believe in global warming or climate change to apply that kind of common sense to environmental management.
There's a lot I agree with there, Kate. We need to look after the environment much better than we do. There is also a problem with people building in places which are primed for disasters , earthquakes, volcanoes, tsunami, storms etc, so when these inevitably strike the natural tendency is to look for a scapegoat, when really the fault is ours for assuming a static natural world. If the great storm which struck NZ in 1936 were to strike today then there would be some serious grief.
http://hwe.niwa.co.nz/event/February_1936_North_Island_Ex-tropical_Cyclone/xml
That's interesting Kate. Actually Climate models take into account historic volcanic activity, which is necessary in order to accurately model climate. A prediction of the climactic effects of the Pinatubo erruption is one of the falsifiable results of climate research. Of course the accuracy of the prediction has improved since the original studies.
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_02/
This could probably tell you the scale of volcano which would be necessary to throw the world into an ice age, thought considering the size of the Pinatubo erruption and the effect was about -0.24 degrees celsius, we would have to be talking an absolutely massive erruption.
No, snow a month early is a sign of more volitile weather, which is to be expected and predicted from climate change.
In and by itself a one off event and one off record events means little until you look at how many one off events are occuring with ever increasing frequency.
So Sandy by itself is meaningless....getting 1 or 2 sandys per year is well, too late. I have not seen what sandy is in terms of 1 in so many years...if sandy is a one in say 100 and we get another inside 5 years or 2 inside a decade on the other hand.
Maybe you should study stats, Im sure the [re-]insurance companies will be....adjusting as necessary....and Im sure we will see some of that extra cost feed into our rates...
regards
My understanding is that Irene (last year) and Sandy (this year) both exceeded the present definitions of 1 in 100 year flood levels for NYC as associated with storm surge.
I haven't yet seen anyone calculate the statistical liklihood of getting 1 in 100 year events two years in a row - as that would be the probability stat that climate change deniers would need to accept/support. That said though - NYCs 1 in 100 year definition (which affects design/development rules) might be poorly considered in order to 'facilitate' new/on-going development and renewal.
I wonder how many gallons of water ended up in the WTC site - as once the building is there - all that water would have to go into the surrounding area, and from what I saw - most tunnels were flooded to the brim as it was. So that volume next time will end up in the floorspace and parking garages of surrounding buildings.
My guess - it will take another Irene or Sandy like one along that Eastern seaboard next year to turn the non-believers around. I wonder what it will be like getting re-insurance along that coast in future.
Kate,
what is your take on this?
Ryan Maue, an acknowledged storm cyclone expert and has some very interesting charts.
http://policlimate.com/tropical/
Sure a storm surge coinciding with peak tides is a real menace, especially if your infastructure like metro and garages are below sea level.
16 years was chosen as the start as it coincides the the mega-El Nino of 1998. It is regardless warmer now than it has been for hundreds if not thousands of years.
Different parts of the world are warming at different rates. The Arctic is warming far faster than other parts of the world, some of which are showing a cooling trend.
Simon P - Medieval Europe and the Bristish Isles were warmer than now. Have you read up on the Little ice age that affected these areas and the deaths that occured from the lack of food back in 1300's because it was too cold to grow their staple dietary needs.
Starting in the 13th century pack ice started advancing south from the Atlantic as did the Glaciers in Greenland. Plant life died from Glaciation.
The great Famine 1315 to around 1322 depending on what area in Northern Europe and the British Isles you read about suffered serious universal crop failure from cold conditions.
Why do maps of Antarctica exist in Europe - drawn on animal skins by cartographers and the land mass drawn matches perfectly and there is no ice? There is also a lot of evidence pointing to Antartica looking very different today.
http://www.sciencebuzz.org/blog/ancient-pollen-points-once-warmer-antar…
http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/smartnews/2012/08/ancient-climate-chang…
Greenland has been much warner prior to the Little ice age. Excavations have shown quite a lot of plant life existed from trees to grasses etc.
Northern Europe may have been as warm as now during the Medieval Warm Period but the effect was not global. Who/when drew perfect ice free maps of Antarctica on animal skins? Parts of shore-line Antarctica are ice-free in summer. Your links refer to the climate millions of years ago, when it was significantly warmer than today.
Apparently it was certainly global.
The Medieval warm period was an isolated non-global phenomenon, this result was first shown by the 'hockey stick' graph.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrKfz8NjEzU&noredirect=1
Also explains why the denial community was busy raking Michael Mann over the coals in front of the US congress in 2006, over inconsequential mistakes in his 1998 study. The medieval warm period is a very key result for the denial community, though they have yet to produce any scientific evidence that this was actually global, prefering instead to attack studies that show it wasn't to try to retain the possibility that it was global.
Yep, just like Mann's Nobel Prize
http://www.steynonline.com/5264/the-fraudulent-nobel-laureate
"The hockey stick would eventually be confirmed by more than 10 other studies."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/17/michael-mann-climate-…
Uh huh,
"As a scientist who had contributed substantially to the preparation of IPCC reports, Mann received a personalized certificate from the IPCC for "contributing to the award of the Nobel Peace Prize for 2007 to the IPCC". The certificate features a copy of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize diploma.[38] The Nobel Peace Prize was awarded jointly in 2007 to the IPCC and to Al Gore, and these certificates were issued by the IPCC to coordinating lead authors, lead authors, review editors, Bureau members, staff of the technical support units and staff of the secretariat"
So there is some justification to say he was part of that prize.
regards
Much the same as above.
Interesting (but dumb) conclusion;
So let’s be clear. Yes: global warming is real, and some of it at least has been caused by the CO2 emitted by fossil fuels. But the evidence is beginning to suggest that it may be happening much slower than the catastrophists have claimed – a conclusion with enormous policy implications.
As I said above - it isn't sea level rise that will be the big issue - it's storm surge - and they appear to be becoming more intense and more frequent of late. Inability to re-insure is more likely to force adaptation than any government derived policy. The commercial realities are likely to sort things out quicker than bureaucracies.
New Orleans is a case in point. After Katrina the bureaucrats made a decision you could rebuild in all the flood prone areas - but the worst affected neighbourhoods are still (I believe) sparsely populated.
Why are you still linking an article, which as I showed you several days ago, the UKMO says is a miss-representation of their position.
http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/10/14/met-office-in-the-media-14-october-2012/
e.g why would anybody take David Rose's word, over the UKMO's word, for what the UKMO is saying? That appears to be some pretty duplicitous commenting on your part OMG, as you were certainly aware of what the UKMO has to say on this matter.
Oh not sure I want to rely on the UKMO as having some sore of devine knowledge of the future. Their forecasts in recent years have been waaaaay off.
Just one example.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/30/met-office-april-forecast-drought…
Obviously beside the point, OMG is repeating miss-representations of the UKMO's climate research conclusions as representations of their climate research conclusions. I don't know why he is saying David Rose has some kind of divine knowledge of what the UKMO actually means, regardless of what the UKMO actually say their research means.
I have pointed this out to him before, but he keeps using the same miss-representations of what the UKMO says about their own research conclusions.
I am not sure OMG wants you answering that comment for him either, his reasons for doing this are really up to him.
Explanation and rebuttal most welcome.
Explain what? Unless you explain the conclusions to be drawn from that paper its not possible to discuss them. Are you asking me to rebut Keith R Briffas conclusions? Why?
Also why are you spruking missinformation about the UKMO climate research around the internet when you know its missinformation?
This graphic tells the real truth. Explains why Battery Park might flood every now and then.
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/nyc_manhattan_sl_animation.gif
Excellent graphic, I hadn't seen that.
Here's another link to calm down a few around here LOL
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/11/02/a-reply-to-hurricane-sandy-alarmists/#more-73621
I dont think non-believers such as OMG or the enire GOP will ever come around....for the later its simply too extreme a concept, their entire belief is just gone....
Next year? Im not aware the "season" is over?
Even 2 Sandy's isnt by itself cast iron, but the trend for ever more records being broken? with increasing frequency?
While I wouldnt wish ill on ordainary ppl, I'd much rather see the USA wacked like this than the poor developing nations.......the former uses more and is willfully ignoring the evidence....
regards
I've long thought OMG wasn't just a 'non-believer'.
Hong-Hong-based, and only comments on one subject?
Note the little one he slipped in a couple of days ago - about "Wall St returning to normal trading". I did, and laughed.
Why would you do that? Well, too soon after Sandy to do the outright denial trip, but not too soon for any move to suggest that everything is normal, move right along folks.....
There's thinking - cynical, but thinking - behind that timing. Part of a paid network, is my guess. Where does the money come from for that kind of thing?
Oil Co's and their sattelites, is where. .
Why would an unpaid individial advocate that the planet plays Russian Roulette?
Wow, I'm mentioned in dispatches.
I take that as an honour. I must be upsetting your cult views.
Now as to what I comment on, well in fact there have been a number of areas I've contributed to. Unlike you I realised posting literally hundreds, or is it thousands ( ? ) of times on the same subject has a diminishing return. I guess this is why I'm sure many people skirt your endlessly repetitive posts on energy and the need for 5 billion people to die ( you of course by your own assertion are excluded from this due to your apparent importance to those who survive )
Now I think BH is rather cunning, by posting alarmist nonsense in the Top 10 he gets more traffic to interest.co. He probably doesn't share catstrophic views - he's even selling up in Auckland, a volcanic field, to move to an earthquake primed Wellington. I wish him well.
Have a good weekend. Carpe Diem as they say, it could all go pear shaped tomorrow. Don't spend too much time on a prodigal son, trees on a landslip, or a tax return, there's more to life than that. ;-)
If my cult is science, maths and logic, yes Im signed up.
Yours is what the bible? I wonky piece written a considerable time ago....by ppl with an axe to grind and little concept of where we'd be in <2000 years.
In terms of alarmist, actually DavidC asked that I cut back as it attracted the kooks. like baz etc.
Its also bad news for selling financial products as it isnt a business as usual paradgym. Though I guess if 5billion is right the mortuary and burial businesses could be profitable, for a while, kind of ilke the rpeo business a the moment.
regards
I think maybe you read too much in.......it is interesting though that his idea of "science" on AGW is whatsupwiththat etc.............
Yet totally accepts peak oil....quoting science sites.
Yet two of the most challenge pieces of the fossil fuel era for the denial industry, usually the deniali of both go hand in hand, super-glued almost.
I think though Mayor Bllomberg is or has come around on that....an ex-republican...
I dont know that the network is paid, mor likely political. If you are part of that financial sector and voting block that deny AGW then it damages your credibility to remain off line so its just group think I think to make things appear normal as soon as......
I guess we might see events these more often the path tread by Sandy seems standard for these weather events?. Now wouldnt that be some justice, if the country most in denial of AGW and causing the most CO2 emmisions bares the brunt of that rather than the poor of 'this planet.
"Russian Roulette", LOL, apt, simple politics, Fred Singer etc is a strong anti-communist type of guy...so to have won the cold war against those damn reds but lose it to the water melons just cant happen.....
Then throw in la la land....ie I want it this way and not how it is.......its a mind psych problem for americans I think.....they have spend 2 generations thinking they can do anything they want......just use more energy to do it.....fine on the upcurve of course.
regards
"the neoliberal rulebook worked because both rules encouraged the growth of the FIRE economy (FInance and REalestate), where the engine of growth was exploding private sector debt. When that engine burst past maximum revs and seized up in 2007, the crisis we are now in erupted."
not the socialists stupid.....yes tribeless the neoliberals.
NB.
"If you picked the blue line, you’ve obviously not a politician. The blue is the ratio of private debt to GDP in Australia; the red line is the ratio of government debt to GDP (debt to the banking sector only; both series come from RBA table D02). The red line is the one that both sides of politics in Canberra are obsessed about; the blue one they both ignore."
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Australian-economy-d…
regards
Why was your remark directed at Tribeless? Libertarians aren't "neo-liberals" and are opposed to their policies around central banking which facilitated the unsustainable growth in the financial sector.
Blaming libertarians/austrians is a bait-and-switch tactic by left-leaning Keynesians who arguably have more in common with Chicago School monetarists than Austrians do.
This, and the fact Keynesians have successfully re-written the history of the Great Depression to blame Hoover's "austerity", gives them cover to advocate "solutions" that have wrecked the economy time and again.
Bill Gross has outlined why QE isn't working. It would have saved a lot of economic pain if someone from the Fed had just talked to an Austrian economist, who could have predicted all this and explained why it would happen.
Its aimed at any libertarian or indeed anyone else who claim its a socialist, or Keynesian caused problem, it isnt. The only known solution is however keynesian....and I think its gone past even that solving it.
In terms of Hoover, maybe its written like that because its the truth...but then some such as yourself will never accept such.
Steve Keen has been predicting it for years. Austrians, well they have also been predicting inflation etc...or various others things depending on the faction.......
regards
Steven - something appears to be messing with your brain functioning capabiiltes. So now your saying that Labour are neo-liberal and not Socialists. Why don't you look at the policies and implemented legislation and the redistribution of wealth, the many transfers of private entities and land to public ownership - are these not Socialist Schemes????? Just about every area of private life is micro-managaed by State and you think that is Neo-Liberalism!
You're a neo liberal if you think the best outcome for an economy and the society behind it is by aggregating all the selfish actions of individuals; if you believe the market and its participants are rational and always return to equilibrium; if you believe deregulating the national and global economy will bring prosperity to all. Labour have not repudiated the reforms of Douglas et al. They are as pro TPP, WTO and IMF as National. Redistributing a few of the crumbs doesn't make you socialist
I believe he is quoting a neo liberal rule book; and suggesting that any growth during their reign in the US, and much of the western world, was due to debt build up, and not sustainable.
Separately I was away from NZ during much of Labour's most recent time in office; but was unaware they had publicly bought many private assets. Air NZ and the Railways yes; but I understood those were bi partisan backed bailouts of distreseed entities. Were there more?
Did they really engineer significant wealth distribution?. My understanding is that NZ, like many other western countries, has seen the highest income earners increase their share of income considerably in NZ, as elsewhere, over the last 30 years. In fact I believe that is one of our larger economic issues- forgetting even the ethical issues that go with it; but also a significant opportunity if we can get our heads in a mindset similar to say the Danes- currently the happiest people on the planet.
On micro management, it does seem both sides of politics has drifted down that route; sometimes no doubt justifiably, but others in a bureaucratic and unhelpful way.
What was rogernomics? and yes Labour shows a neo-liberal streak...but then you only see things as black and white....sure they have some socialist %, as do National...etc.
Interesting thing is I seem to score -5 on the political compass ie 1/2 way towards libertarian yet you think im an out and out socialist....kind of clearly shows how extreme views you hold.
regards
Yes, right now I cant see anyone else with an idea that even comes close to working....especially when you consider the time factor....ie the longer this drags on the more likely we will have a Great Depression...a jubilee is quick in comparison to anything else
regards
Recession and its effect on service - some of the things I find while researching something else...lol....
"News reports in 2009 noted a resurgence of dial-up access in the U.S. resulting from a recessionary economy, as a more affordable way of accessing the Internet.[5][6][7] AOL added 200,000 dial-up customers in 2011. The average monthly price of dial-up Internet is $22, compared to $37 for broadband, according to the FCC."
regards
1&7
It seems to me there are two economies. One which the economists talk about ad nauseum and the one in which the average person lives. They are two different things. The economists take no notice what so ever about the latter while the latter is greatly affected by the shenanigans of the economists. If the economists really wanted the economy to flourish, and whether that is a good thing, with a flourish to PDK, is another matter, they would give money to the general public in a manner as recommended by Steve Keen and Bill Mitchell. But QE is designed to benefit the rich and while that continues nothing will improve. Capitalism is consumption. Nothing more. Nothing less. Maybe War or revolutions will be the result. Spain, Portugal and Greece are tinderboxes and have all experienced Revolutions. It is always easier to do something the second time around.
I dont know that they give money to the rich on purpose, its more like a side effect.....and I dont agree on QE being for the rich...its classic keynesian response and keeping ppl and therefore the poorer in employment....
Otherwise, yes I very much agree...however the debt jubilee would have to be accompanied with substantial and meaningful rstrictions on future debt expansion. So for residential on more than 25 year mortgage and no more than 80% LVR....a CGT....a land tax on everything. Also jinglemail...ie non-recourse loans are standard....otherwise unless you reign in the preditors it will just happen again.
Sadly the so called free market mantra has been proven as nothing more than allowing a feeding frenzy by the amoral.
regards
re: #2
Its quite interesting that the OCR cuts in Aus don't seem to be having quite the same impact on house prices that they have in NZ
It makes me think that Auckland's rebound is probaly more about miserable new housing starts and its planning system, as well as the tax cuts and migration from Christchurch, than the lowering of the OCR
But where and what is being bought? Is the boom in first time buyers? or the upper reaches? It looks to me like the latter...so sure professionals leaving chch going to auckland seems sensible.....what about the supposed large amounts of $s leaving china? They wont pat CGT so its a safe tax free gain? What about ppl thinking there will be inflation and high risk in hedge fund like endevours so piling into property instead?
I look at the comments on the US bond market and it strikes me as similar ie a flight to perceived safety..and the possibility of a "blood bath" seems omni-present.
regards
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.