“They can always ease. The BOJ and SNB are buying stocks, and so will the Fed and ECB. Eventually, the governments will own the market. The SNB is major shareholder in Apple and Apple backs the Swiss Franc.”
Japanese central bank assets are currently around 300% of Japan’s GDP. The ECB’s assets are approaching 100% of Europe’s.
The Fed is at a still staggering 20% or so.
I know you don’t know what the fuck that means or implies, but the information is not necessarily meant for you.
Upending the industry? The Trump administration is reaching out to the medical industry for feedback on requiring hospitals, doctors and other healthcare providers to publicly disclose the heretofore confidential prices they charge insurers for services. Needless to say, health insurers, hospitals and most doctors will most certainly push back on the proposal. The public comment period will close Friday, May 3.
That’s what fixing a problem, instead of trying to make the state go broke by hiding stupid inefficient buro-vortexes behind ideas and self-righteousness (universal healthcare) looks like.
First you pull a bit at the knot, test the looser strings. Get a feel for how tangled it is.
Why do you think the market value of all items in all transactions constitutes basis for the valuing of a currency?
And if GDP is your reference, then which GDP methodology are you referring to? It changes all the time ya know. Is it 20% by 1950 standards or some other standard or today’s standard or which arbitrary number are you freaking out about? How about we just change the numbers to something you won’t freak out about.
A currency is backed by the faith and credit of the nation issuing it. Currencies can only go up or down in relation to another currency, so if they all print at the same time, then how could any fall in value?
Commodities are valued by supply and demand; amount of money supply is not a variable in the equation.
Japan has printed more than anyone, but the yen won’t go down and prices won’t go up.
Chess is a pretty concrete game. Move X leads to certain possible chains of moves, etc.
Here’s one of his responses to a request for which move is best in a particular board position…
It’s an endemic stylistic characteristic of the Satyr spawn and those they socialize with. Not Satyr himself. Or, let’s say, he manages to be concrete and clear also. But a trait of that subculture that flitted around him.
“amount of money supply is not a variable in the equation.”
Lol, I remember a scandal once in Venezuela when a video surfaced of a Spanish economist from Podemos making this point, that money supply has nothing to do with inflation. It was a scandal because that guy was Maduro’s main economic adviser.
Socialist economist… That’s like saying serial killer human rights activist.
“A currency is backed by the faith and credit of the nation issuing it. Currencies can only go up or down in relation to another currency, so if they all print at the same time, then how could any fall in value?”
Should the crash have been allowed and millions allowed to starve?
I don’t think that’s the point. No serious person is arguing against taking action when things are threatening to get THAT bad. I’m saying… Well, first I’m saying look at what led to the crash in the first place, an ultra-regulated half-governmental body like Fannie May and Freddy Mac run amok, a body concieved for SOCIALIST purposes etc etc. But more importantly, I’m saying that within that precarious bull Heisenberg describes, the part of the G20 that is going broke is precicely the part that regulated and eased with a socialist bias. Europe, China, “emerging markets” like Brazil and India.
The US, which despite it all maintained its capitalist, free market bias, is standing on much more solid ground and still growing.
I feel like I’m missing something… how did chess and Satyr come into play? Animatron fundamentalist minions lobbing propaganda balls before beating brave retreats to safe spaces is how they roll. Disruption is the name of the game.
ladies, ladies, please, can we try to continue with at least some modicum of approbation?
i tell ya what… i’d like to try a specific technique i use with my patients during their therapy sessions with me. i do a bit of marriage counseling on the side, and what i’ll have the couple do is a role-reversal; the husband will play the wife and the wife, the husband. this gives each of them the opportunity to portray the other as they see them, which in turn allows each of them to experience each other from the other’s perspective. now what i’d like you two to do is switch roles. i want pedro to argue in favor of socialism, and i want serendipper to argue in favor of capitalism.
That’s easy! Any point the socialist makes, the retort is ad hom, so:
Socialist: Money supply is not a variable in price.
Capitalist: Socialism communism nazi stupid!
Or if the capitalist makes the first point:
Capitalist: Gold!
Socialist: Ben Franklin said gold was the basic cause of the Revolutionary War.
Capitalist: Socialism communism nazi stupid!
Admittedly, I’ve often considered adopting the capitalist persona, but only I’d be honest with my intention to enslave others for my profit to expose it for what it is.
Another plan I’ve been kicking around is enticing a seemingly levelheaded conservative to come here to genuinely argue his position, but you are probably right that only a feigning socialist could pull it off without mudslinging.
I’ll be the capitalist, but a real socialist will have to be my interlocutor. Who wants it? Who is detached enough not to drag emotion into it? (I was capitalist 90% of my life. I got this ).