RSS available
| MarketTicker Forums Read Message in Ticker |
User: Not logged on
|
| Top | Forum Top | Login | Control Panel | FAQ | Register | Logout |
| Showing Page 1 of 4 | First | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Last |
| User Info | How Freedom Dies.... to Thunderous Applause in forum [Ticker] | |||
|
Genesis Posts: 71391 Incept: 2007-06-26 
KD^2 
|
http://market-ticker.denninger.net/2008/....
---------- "The monetary base in ALL modern monetary systems is the sum of unencumbered assets against which one is both WILLING AND ABLE to borrow." - Me
2008-05-12 15:53:24
Permalink | |||
|
Jpick Posts: 1305 Incept: 2008-01-22
|
interesting points I await nothing's response.
2008-05-12 16:32:38
Permalink | |||
|
Eternalblue Posts: 4230 Incept: 2007-08-09 
sokali
|
lol, government controlled lending kind of like the IRS and guido combined ---------- my miniblog; http://economicpsychosis.blogspot.com/
2008-05-12 16:34:47
Permalink | |||
|
Themortgagedude Posts: 3930 Incept: 2007-12-17 
saint louis
|
I'm just not quite smart enough to figure all that out. And I read yesterdays ticker a few times and consider myself the smartest guy I know. Only thing I know for sure is that sooner or later if you pay back IOU's with bigger IOU's there comes a time you can't pay. My guess is that pretty soon Vito and Luigi are going to start charging us a pretty high rate of interest. Or maybe thats Achmed and Ying that will be charging us 10% on government bonds. Its happened before when we were not nearly as deep in debt. If we don't get after our congressmen we will have big problems so I would recommend one thing personally. Take the time to write your congressman and ask him for one piece of legislation that he has authored that saved America one dime. Just one ****ing dime. I don't know but I guess the response will be some sort of gobbledegook double talk about appreciating your concerns and doing there best to work for your interests. **** em - I'm going to heat up my tar.
---------- "These are interesting times. We don't trust the government, we don't trust the legal system, we don't trust the media, and we don't trust each other! We've undermined all authority, and with it, the basis for replacing it! It's like a six-year-old's dream come true!"
2008-05-12 16:36:58
Permalink | |||
|
Cawoodruff Posts: 55 Incept: 2008-04-17
|
<unlurk> Here is a thought. Congress is very efficent some 500 of them. Why does it take longer and longer each year to come up with the bills that let them spend money? They even run in to problems passing bills to authorize increased debt. Imagine how long it would take to get a bill to "increase the money supply" or to change intrest rates? Can you imagine the fight to change a intrest rate. (I want it up to help the inversors and banks. I want it down to reduce the cost to borrow. They would create a "Five Year Plan" to reduce that fight from happening again. They would regulate prices to prevent inflation and on and on and on. Sound like a program that proved not to work? Politics (and government) does not need to be involved in our pockets like that. The market is more efficent. Chris </unlurk><lurk> Last modified:
2008-05-12 16:47:24 by cawoodruff
| |||
|
Dakine2004 Posts: 5437 Incept: 2007-10-23
MD.MI.NC.SD.
|
Needed to be typed out in simple English...good... The lack of repartee on threads today has been most enjoyable...
2008-05-12 16:43:16
Permalink | |||
|
Themortgagedude Posts: 3930 Incept: 2007-12-17
saint louis
|
I was just thinking that with todays budget deficits at record levels that I would like to know a piece of legislation that you have authored or sponsored that saved America money. Republicans have always talked about smaller government and libertarian principles but I really don't see it in the actions of elected Republicans. Please let me know what you have done to save me money. Thanks Email sent to Todd Akin. Just wondering what the response will be. I'd really appreciate him more if he just said - **** you we're spending your money and your childrens money - than if he comes back with some canned response. ---------- "These are interesting times. We don't trust the government, we don't trust the legal system, we don't trust the media, and we don't trust each other! We've undermined all authority, and with it, the basis for replacing it! It's like a six-year-old's dream come true!"
2008-05-12 16:46:39
Permalink | |||
|
Themortgagedude Posts: 3930 Incept: 2007-12-17
saint louis
|
And another thing Gen. Not a big fan of the Bruce and Dory avatar. Where's my growling bear?
---------- "These are interesting times. We don't trust the government, we don't trust the legal system, we don't trust the media, and we don't trust each other! We've undermined all authority, and with it, the basis for replacing it! It's like a six-year-old's dream come true!"
2008-05-12 16:48:38
Permalink | |||
|
Patentleathershoes Posts: 7641 Incept: 2007-09-13
Looking forward to PB&J time!
|
Nothing won't answer. She never does when challenged directly.
2008-05-12 16:50:11
Permalink | |||
|
Cawoodruff Posts: 55 Incept: 2008-04-17
|
About servicing debt. You go bankrupt (or colapse) when your liquid resources do not cover the payments and you get called on it. i.e "So long as your assets plus production are not exceeded by your debt, in both principal and interest amount, you are not insolvent." should read "So long as your liquid assets plus production are not exceeded by your debt, in both principal and interest amount, you are not insolvent." With liquid assets being what you can sell out of your assets. Other wise we go into receivership to liquiddate our assets. Chris
2008-05-12 16:57:27
Permalink | |||
|
Genesis Posts: 71391 Incept: 2007-06-26
KD^2
|
You can always sell assets. You might not like the price if they are not easily liquid, but assets will find a bid, if they are really assets. ---------- "The monetary base in ALL modern monetary systems is the sum of unencumbered assets against which one is both WILLING AND ABLE to borrow." - Me
2008-05-12 17:00:12
Permalink | |||
|
Shrpblnd Posts: 1169 Incept: 2007-08-06
Los Angeles, CA
|
Facinating ticker. I must agree that "as your assets plus production are not exceeded by your debt, in both principal and interest amount, you are not insolvent." However, I must admit I have not been following the the forum regarding "non-interest-charged, non-debt-bearing currency that is controlled and issued by the United States Government directly." Would Colonial Scrip also qualify under this heading? My understanding is that it was very successful for over 50 years, until the English Parliment outlawed it in 1764.
2008-05-12 17:00:57
Permalink | |||
|
Genesis Posts: 71391 Incept: 2007-06-26
KD^2
|
No Shrpblnd, because there was no prohibition on private capital transactions on which interest was charged. ---------- "The monetary base in ALL modern monetary systems is the sum of unencumbered assets against which one is both WILLING AND ABLE to borrow." - Me
2008-05-12 17:02:39
Permalink | |||
|
Widgeon Posts: 6522 Incept: 2007-08-30
OK
|
Kudos, I'm glad that the "threat" is now properly identified as descent into Fascism and the talk about communism/socialism/welcome to the ussr, etc. is on the back-burner ... perhaps for good? Anyway, it is extremely uncomfortable for americans to face the fact that fascism is staring them in the face ... but that is what the stakes are. Perhaps with the true threat now identified progress can be made. Perhaps, at least on this forum.
2008-05-12 17:14:03
Permalink | |||
|
Hapablap21 Posts: 688 Incept: 2007-08-21
|
On one hand, I fail to understand how not paying anyone for opportunity costs results in a better system. It seems to me that it would instantly squick all investment. On the other, I don't get why Nothing's "usury-free" economy necessitates a government monopoly over lending. Or, maybe I just answered my own question. Thanks, Gen! 
2008-05-12 17:16:43
Permalink | |||
|
Adrenaline_junky Posts: 1606 Incept: 2007-09-14
Chicago
|
I spent some time today reading the threads that kicked off KD's ticker today... and I feel more stupid for having done it. Glad to see Karl is holding the moonbats at bay. ---------- Back from Peru. And yes, we bought some beach property there.
2008-05-12 17:16:52
Permalink | |||
|
Cumulina Posts: 240 Incept: 2007-08-03
Denmark/Norway
|
Quote from the "Ticker": "But what is the asset base? It is everything that is owned and of value in the United States; that is, all the houses, commercial buildings, inventory, machinery, cars, trucks, improvements to the land such as utilities, roads, etc." Let me show my ignorance here... How does one value those things mentioned? Mark-to-market? There might be a market for company X, Y and Z - but how do you value for instance: The Air Force? Mount Rushmore? A city square? And are they for sale = possible to price? I can see how you can put up business and inventory for sale, and put a price on them. But the above quote confuses me! To some, ice is valuable. But it's hard to sell it to the people in Greenland. Mark-to-market...somewhere...ehhh? I seem to remember something about Argentina selling out of their "assets" some 10-20 years ago. How did that work out? I might be demonstrating too much of my stupidity and ignorance here, but an answer would be appreciated.
2008-05-12 17:21:59
Permalink | |||
|
Architect Posts: 780 Incept: 2007-07-11
london UK
|
history time everybody... the American revolution was based, in part on the extreme left wing ideas that were promulgated at the time of the British republic under Cromwell(100 years earlier) These included the idea that money interest was sinful... The solid City Dealers who initially supported Cromwell brought Charles the Second back rather than run this experiment..... fast forward to the sixties of the last century when a group of Berkley radicals, for a joke , translated the US constitution into modern American English and asked a random sample of Californians what they thought of it. Almost to a man (or woman) they described it as a piece of dirty communist propaganda. The plain fact is that the US capitalist system is not necessarily underwritten by the US constitution.. That said, I totally agree with KD.. Central government funding sucks. In most , but not all ,cases it is far far worse than than the nearest we can get to a free market . The reason is simple. Most politicians are *******s most of the time.If they aren't corrupt then power will make them so. And they are painfully, criminally stupid...
2008-05-12 17:26:26
Permalink | |||
|
Genesis Posts: 71391 Incept: 2007-06-26
KD^2
|
Cumulina, in a fire sale assets always fetch less than market value and frequently less than utility value. I am not suggesting we should do such a thing - but I am stating, not suggesting, that to declare the US broke because $800 billion in currency is less than the sum of the interest payments on private and public debt is absolute horse****. ---------- "The monetary base in ALL modern monetary systems is the sum of unencumbered assets against which one is both WILLING AND ABLE to borrow." - Me
2008-05-12 17:28:18
Permalink | |||
|
Heidiland Posts: 735 Incept: 2007-10-29
Switzerland, where all sheep is white
|
Any State can service monetary turnover without the existence of the Central Bank. Soviet Union and Tsarist Russia did not have Central Banks and did not need debt origination for its everyday functioning. More debt was originated and sold in internal and external markets under periods of great economic duress - be it war or industrialization. Here I guess comes the question of freedom. Some of those debt sales was involuntary - people would receive part of their salary in bonds if the need be. Point is that the outcome of this fiat monetary system directly based on the government printing press, was strictly the same - when available liquidity ran out, productivity has fallen, asset base shrunk, one can only choose between printing or default. The Soviet Union printed, and it did not save the country even though the asset base at any given moment was far larger than all its existing debt in circulation. This is why I see an issue with the thesis that the US asset base is bigger than all outstanding debt. How is this asset base being valued? Debt for sure is valued upon the ability of debtors to pay back. Otherwise, why any creditor would lend? Why on earth would they need instead of their money back - for instance - a gas station, or a marina, or a railway - if neither can function properly. To begin with, there is the same lack of funding that made this presumed asset transfer necessary - that caused a lack of infrastructure maintenance or sufficient upkeep; lack of demand for gas was due to the price of gas and the density of gas stations. Of course creditors - as a supposition - can get airports, or water supply neworks, or electric power stations, what not, as a redemption of the existing debt. If indeed it comes to that, all those objects would be valued less than they are now, and by how much less no one really knows. All political and economic tissue of society will be altered to an extent that this asset transfer might never be completed. I guess that everyone agrees that debt service is non-productive spending. It does nothing to increase the GDP, quite the contrary. The bigger debt service, the less consumption there is. The less production there is. More unemployment. Shrinking asset base. Debt service remains healthy as soon as it does not surpass the GDP growth, or productivity growth (or similar metrics, and calculated correctly too). Once debt service grows like a snowball, and productivity and consumption shrink - as is the case now, there ought to be some dire momnent where the system goes through some sort of a reset. My country (USSR and Russia) is a prime example of that. ---------- ...women are like derivatives. It's nearly impossible to figure most of them out, and there is a good chance they are going to blow up on you, you just don't know when. -Matt
2008-05-12 17:36:37
Permalink | |||
|
Careby Posts: 1251 Incept: 2007-11-26
Eastern Kentucky
|
The Tenth Amendment of the Constitution should take care of the Federal Government's role in capitalism: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. ---------- "You don't ban electric guitars just because someone may have a lapse in logic, goodwill, and decency and spontaneously break out into country and western music." - Ted Nugent
2008-05-12 17:38:02
Permalink | |||
|
Genesis Posts: 71391 Incept: 2007-06-26
KD^2
|
Quote:I guess that everyone agrees that debt service is non-productive spending. It does nothing to increase the GDP, quite the contrary. The bigger debt service, the less consumption there is. The less production there is. More unemployment. Shrinking asset base. Debt service remains healthy as soon as it does not surpass the GDP growth, or productivity growth (or similar metrics, and calculated correctly too). Once debt service grows like a snowball, and productivity and consumption shrink - as is the case now, there ought to be some dire momnent where the system goes through some sort of a reset. My country (USSR and Russia) is a prime example of that. Over-leverage always blows your balls off. We are only speculating on when, not if. But debt itself is not always non-productive. An example should make this clear. I am a merchant and buy widgets. I get credit extended to me by my supplier. I then retail those widgets to you, the consumer. The supplier only sells in units of 100 widgets, but no consumer needs more than one widget a month, as that is how long it takes you to consume the widget. Now without credit I cannot purchase more widgets than I have instantaneous capital. This is a severe brake on the economy; even if you, as a customer, have the money to buy a widget, I may not have one to sell you, because I cannot obtain credit to get it in the building first. The manufacturer of the widgets will frequently discount my invoice for immediate payment. This is, in effect, charging me interest - whether he discounts the note or he charges an interest penalty (or both!) is not material; the effect is the same. Notice that so long as I do not attempt to "lever up" the net impact of credit is beneficial to the system. It is only when the system goes into negative amortization over a material period of time that credit is a bad thing. The reason is of course due to compounding and the fact that it eats into productive use of GDP. ---------- "The monetary base in ALL modern monetary systems is the sum of unencumbered assets against which one is both WILLING AND ABLE to borrow." - Me
2008-05-12 17:43:20
Permalink | |||
|
Dirtysouth Posts: 2766 Incept: 2007-09-20
Love Truth Honour ॐ Banned
|
Quote:But what is the asset base? It is everything that is owned and of value in the United States; that is, all the houses, commercial buildings, inventory, machinery, cars, trucks, improvements to the land such as utilities, roads, etc. Assets = Liability + Shareholders Equity Nothing wrote..I find it very interesting that even the "inflationistas" who acknowledge that money is debt, conveniently ignore the fact that, when offsetting total prodction, net debt/money supply is new debt origination minus existing debt default and redemption. From one of the best discussions on this board..http://www.tickerforum.org/cgi-ticker/ak.... ---------- Forest First...Trees Second Feb 9 ~ Mar 11 ~ Apr 09 ~ May 09 ~ Jun 07 ~ Jul 07 ~ Jul 22 ~ Aug 06 ~ Sep 04 ~ Oct 04 ~ Nov 02 ~ Dec 02 ~ Dec 31 Last modified:
2008-05-12 18:00:49 by dirtysouth
| |||
|
Spinnaker Posts: 25 Incept: 2007-10-29
|
I'm no expert in economics; however, the Economist did an article a few months ago, talking about the Rule of Law and how it relates to market systems. I believe it's becoming more evident that the "thick interpretation" that has been used under our capitalistic system is slowly and inexorably being switched over to a "thin interpretation." What happens when we no longer have foreign investment servicing our national debt? Is it possible to consider that we could actually see true "decoupling" from America? http://organizationsandmarkets.com/2008/.... http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cf.... ---------- Extreme positions are not succeeded by moderate ones, but by contrary extreme positions. -Friedrich Nietzsche
2008-05-12 18:05:27
Permalink | |||
|
Dirtysouth Posts: 2766 Incept: 2007-09-20
Love Truth Honour ॐ Banned
|
Quote:I am here to warn you - these sort of "false Gods" always - and I do mean always - appear in times of great social and financial stress. *cough* Barack Hussein Obama *cough* ---------- Forest First...Trees Second Feb 9 ~ Mar 11 ~ Apr 09 ~ May 09 ~ Jun 07 ~ Jul 07 ~ Jul 22 ~ Aug 06 ~ Sep 04 ~ Oct 04 ~ Nov 02 ~ Dec 02 ~ Dec 31 Last modified:
2008-05-12 18:28:21 by dirtysouth
| |||
| Top | Forum Top | Login | Control Panel | Logout |
| Showing Page 1 of 4 | First | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Last |