Monday, July 18, 2016

Andrew Batson — When “It’s the economy, stupid” falls short


Economists see everything in economic issues. reality is more complicated, and complex, than that simple point of view.

The US Seventh Fleet is massing battle units in the vicinity of China to force a Chinese withdrawal of territorial claims and an imminent US/NATO coordinated attack on eastern Ukraine is being prepared to pressure Russia, the choice being either capitulation or fighting NATO. 

This is actually contra the economic interests of most nations and about the projection of imperial power. It is political, that is, about who controls territory. This precedes economics.

15 comments:

Andrew Anderson said...

I guess some people are just bored of living to provoke China and Russia.

But this to those who long for The END:

Alas, you who are longing for the day of the Lord,
For what purpose will the day of the Lord be to you?
It will be darkness and not light;
As when a man flees from a lion
And a bear meets him,
Or goes home, leans his hand against the wall
And a snake bites him.
Will not the day of the Lord be darkness instead of light,
Even gloom with no brightness in it?

“I hate, I reject your festivals,
Nor do I delight in your solemn assemblies.
“Even though you offer up to Me burnt offerings and your grain offerings, I will not accept them;
And I will not even look at the peace offerings of your fatlings.
“Take away from Me the noise of your songs;
I will not even listen to the sound of your harps.

“But let justice roll down like waters
And righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.
Amos 5:18-24 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Matt Franko said...

Boy good thing we don't offer grain and burnt offerings or fatlings and not many people play the harp or we might be in DEEP SHIT!

Matt Franko said...

AA,

No mention of how we regulate our fiscal agents in there someplace?

Andrew Anderson said...

No mention of how we regulate our fiscal agents in there someplace? Franko

What's being commanded there is justice and righteousness.

Now please tell me how forced loans from the poor to lower the borrowing costs of the rich are justice?

Matt Franko said...

If they are poor how can they lend anybody anything? They're poor... ?????

"hey I need some money!"

"I got it! I'll just go borrow some money from people who dont have any!"

"great idea!"

???????

Andrew Anderson said...

If they are poor how can they lend anybody anything? They're poor... ????? Franko

I did not say destitute; I said poor. Besides, forced loans from anyone is a form of theft.

Auburn Parks said...

AA-

LOL- "forced loans" when will you ever stop with this nonsense? People are not forced to use banks. They do so because its a convenient service that is very helpful and not very expensive. Futhermore, deposits arent "loans" to the bank in the conventional sense any more than TSY Cds are "debt" in the conventional use of the word. If you borrow money to buy a car from the bank and they create $20K for you in a deposit account to spend, clearly you didnt "loan" those deposits to the bank. God are you fucking clueless on banking and economics.

And poor ppl deposits in no way reduce the rate of interest that banks lend for. The Govt sets the rate structure outlines not the market. the poor have nothing to do with what interest rates are.

Andrew Anderson said...

They do so because its a convenient service that is very helpful and not very expensive. AP

So why not just let every citizen have inherently risk-free accounts at the central bank? And then we can abolish deposit insurance in a manner that provides roughly $20,000+ to every US citizen? And thereby reduce a lot of relative wealth inequality?

Besides, see this: COBOL and Legacy Code as a Systemic Risk - 07/19/2016 - Yves Smith.

If you borrow money to buy a car from the bank and they create $20K for you in a deposit account to spend, clearly you didnt "loan" those deposits to the bank. AP

I was speaking of forced loans of fiat since the citizenry is not allowed to use fiat except in the form of unsafe, inconvenient physical fiat, a.k.a. cash. And even the use of cash is being threatened.

As for bank loans, "loans create deposits" but only largely VIRTUAL liabilities wrt to the public since physical fiat is unsafe and inconvenient except for petty use.

So tell me AP, how can we have honest accounting with largely VIRTUAL liabilities? Or does honest accounting matter to you?

Andrew Anderson said...

As for interest rates, the proper way to lower them is via equal fiat distributions to all citizens into inherently risk-free, individual accounts at the central bank, not via loans to and asset buying from the banks.

As for raising interest rates, why should we in the first place? But if a rise in interest rates is deemed desirable, the proper way is to just reduce overall spending by the monetary sovereign and let interest rates rise naturally.

The current, IMPROPER way to raise interest rates is via welfare proportional to wealth - interest paying sovereign debt such as sovereign bonds and Interest On Reserves.

Andrew Anderson said...

the poor have nothing to do with what interest rates are. AP

Let's say we had an ethical banking system, i.e. 100% private banks with 100% voluntary depositors.

Now let's suppose that an employer wants to automate some jobs away with bank financing. The bank creates a new deposit of say $1 million so the employer can buy a robot or two. But the new deposit is uninsured! So why wouldn't the employer transfer his uninsured deposit to an inherently risk-free account at the central bank, dragging precious reserves, 1-for-1 with it? Because he signs an agreement with the lending bank not to? But what about when he spends that deposit? Will others want to keep their pay in uninsured banks unless well compensated for it?

So forced loans do lower the borrowing costs of banks and thus the borrowing costs of the most so-called credit worthy, the rich.

Auburn Parks said...

I donto want to only have the fed as a risk free retail bank its a dumb policy that offers no benefits. Giving everyone $20k has pitying to do with eliminating deposit insurance and i dint know why you keep repeating that garbage.

Your droning on about citizens not having access to govt currency is just plain wrong. Deposit insurance guarantees conversion to gov currency at par w bank deposits under $250k so that's all wrong too.

I dint even know where to begin with your idiot virtual liability scthick. Its just so stupid.


Please take your troll banking comments to some other site as we here at MNE know too much to be fooled by your banking nonsense.

Andrew Anderson said...

Btw, does anyone have the current figure on insured deposits in the US?

That $20,000 per citizen figure is based on rather old data and I'd like to use more current data.

Andrew Anderson said...

I dint even know where to begin with your idiot virtual liability scthick. Its just so stupid. AP

Then assume the banks get their wish and physical fiat, a.k.a. cash, is abolished and you still get paid by check.

Your check says "Pay to the order of Auburn Parks XX.XX dollars".

How are you going to get those dollars? Unless you have an account at the central bank, you can't.

In that case, the liabilities of the banks will be ENTIRELY VIRTUAL wrt to you and the rest of the population and not just LARGELY VIRTUAL due to the unsafe, inconvenient nature of physical fiat.

Andrew Anderson said...

. Deposit insurance guarantees conversion to gov currency at par w bank deposits under $250k so that's all wrong too. AP

So the banks get to create deposits ("loans create deposits") for the most so-called credit worthy, the rich, but the government insures those deposits?!

You call that a free market?!

I call it welfare for the rich.

Andrew Anderson said...

Thanks AP,

As Scripture says:

Iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another Proverbs 27:17

However, no thanks to the coward who got me banned at billy blog which I assume isn't you, AP, since you at least have the guts to stand and fight.